09 10 2003 COW Agenda
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING AGENDA
DATE: WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2003
TIME: 9:00 a.m.
ROBINSON ROOM
************************************************************************************************
1. NOTICE OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA
~
2. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE
THEREOF: - "IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACT"
4. RECEIPT OF ACCOUNTS:
a) Statement of Accounts for the month of August, 2003.
5. DEPUTATIONS:
a) 9:10 a.m.
Keith Sherman, Co-ordinator, Severn Sound Environmental Association,
re: Renewal of the Severn Sound Environmental Association Agreement.
b) 9:20 a.m.
Diana Gerrard re: Plan 626 Promenade.
c) 9:30 a.m.
Jim Woodford, re: OPA 16.
6. CORRESPONDENCE:
a) Wayne Wilson, CAO/Secretary-Treasurer, Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority,
correspondence dated August 21, 2003 re: Request for Municipal Support of the
Watershed Based Source, Protection Advisory Committee Report (Powerpoint
Presentation Available in Clerk's Office).
."
7. FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND FIRE:
a) Report No. FD 2003-10, Paul Eenhoorn, Fire Chief, re: Monthly Report - July.
8. PUBLIC WORKS:
None.
9. ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES:
None.
10. BUILDING, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT:
None.
11.IN-CAMERA:
A
a) Jennifer Zieleniewski, CAG, re: Personnel Matter.
b) Jennifer Zieleniewski, CAG, re: Personnel Matter
12.ADJOURNMENT:
2
\:J\:J4 t"'\:J'::::
t::J~ !:::.It::..! IC.It:.I.t;.;..U:",J
I"-""
~ \
.J -
Severn Sound
..._....._"'_.._0........_.:.,....__...-.:.....,._.,""""' ......_,..._... _..........:.....
Environmental Association
w)'c Marsh Wildlife Centre P .0, Box 100 Midland, ontario
L4R 4K6 (705) 526-7809 - FAX (70S) 526.;3294
August 21,2003
Ms. Marylin Pennycook, Clerk.
Township of Oro-Medonte
Box 100
01'0, ON
LOL 2XO
Dear Ms. Penny cook,
RE: RENEW AL OF THE SEVERN SOUND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATION
AGREEMENT
The Severn Sound Environmental Association (SSEA) was founded in 1997 to support the work
of the Severn S()und Remedial ActiQn Plan (RA.P) and to provide environmental services in the
watershe.d draining to Severn Sound. The TQwnship ofOro-Medonte has been a valued signatar
and project partner to the SSEA. The Township has supported the implementation of the Severn
Sound RAP since the plan was developed and released. .
In a recent SSEA quarterly meeting the members considered the rene"W"'"dl oftbe SSEA
Agreement and approved the following motion.
"Moved by Bill Thompson" seconded by Dave Parks ro approve the concept of a 5 year
agreement starting April I, 2004 and to bring this recommendatiQn to outgoing Councils
for consideration by incoming Councils."
As Council is approaching the end of the current term, I am asking Council to pass a
resolution in-principle supporting and approving the renewal of the Severn Sound
Environmental Association Agreement for a five-year period (April!, 2004 to March 31,
2009). I am provjding a draft resolution recommending that Council renew the SSEA
Agreement for a five-year term starting April!, 2004 (see attached). .
Th~ Severn S~und community will continue to need the services of the SSEA
· to forge cooperative initiatives that will address environmental issues,
· to coordinate monitoring of enviroilmental status,
· to advise on solutions to new environmental problems and
. to p,rovide a "neutral infonned voice" on environmental issues leading to a healthy
Severn Sound ecosystem,
004 P03
00 '00 1:j1:j:I:j\::l
f\
~ cA.
We are currently working on a revised Business Plan covering the renewal period. The
muu-icipal share of the SSEA operating budget bas been recalculated using the 2001 properties
and assessment for the area as per the direction of the SSEA. The percentage of municipal share
for the Township ofOro-Medonte has changed slightly from 14.66 % to 15.66 %. The SSEA
commitment from the Township ofOro-Medonte for 2003 has been $12,050. It is expected that
the overall municipal share of the SSEA budget for 2004 will increase.
I look forward to attending the September 10m Council Meeting to make a brief presentation
and answer any qultstions Council may have.
Yours truly,
~?{ 44,t
Keith Shennan, Coordinator
Severn Sound Envirorunental Association
cc: R. Hough, Chair of SSE A
fJe-
Mayor Craig, Deputy Mayor Dickie and Oro-Medonte Councillors
September 10, 2003
OPA #16 will not protect the ecological and hydrological features of the Oro
Moraine as it is presently written.
There are two parts to this Amendment. The Oro-Medonte Aggregate Producers
have publicly stated they will challenge the Aggregate Resources Section at the Ontario
Municipal Board, because it does not confonn to provincial policies.
The crucial Section of the Planning Amendment, which deals with
Environmental Impact Statements, has policy holes so large you could drive Glen
Stewart's largest bulldozer through them.
There are several major flaws:
1 - If the purpose of Amendment 16 is to protect the ecological and hydrological
resources of the Oro Moraine, then an Environmental Impact Statement should be the
first line of defence and mandatory for any proposed development. It is not. Sec. B5.l.1
should be amended from its present ambiguous wording.
2 - In Sec.B5.1.1.2 Contents of and EIS it reads "Once agreement on the scope of
the EIS is detennined, all or some ofthe items below may need to be carried out." This
means that no floral and faunal surveys are mandatory. These are critical to evaluate the
proposed development's impact on the Moraine. This Section should be amended to
make Subsections a) to 1) mandatory.
The ecological ignorance of the consultants is demonstrated in Sec.B5.1.1.2
Subsection c). They do not understand that creatures with more than four legs live on the
Moraine. Most of you have seen bees, butterflies and spiders in your backyards. Some
species of insects are classified as "Species at Risk" - which brings special protection to
lands where they are found.
3 - There is no process to assess, evaluate and verify an Environmental Impact
Statement. This is vital if Council is to have expert advice when they vote on a proposed
development. Sec.B5 .1.1.5 should be added to Plan Amendment 16.
4 - There is no Oro Moraine Ecological Database to provide data to evaluate an
EIS. Sec. B5.1.1 6 should be added. This database should be located in the Township
Offices. The Couchiching Conservancy has offered to freely donate site-specific floral
and faunal data from 183 sites on the Oro Moraine. Local naturalists have offered several
times to provide data - they were spumed each time by Mayor Craig and Nick
MacDonald.
This is not second-guessing after-the- fact - most of the above was
contained in a Report to Oro-Medonte Council by MacDonald, dated Aug.7,2003, before
Council passed the Amendment. On page 12, across from my submission on Sec.B5.l.1.2
Nick wrote "noted" - but the recommendations were ignored. Why?
Jim Woodford
Oro-Medonte Taxpayer
~ j\SAGJt p:
~t>: ~
~ :t
~
Est. 1960
lriS Carrier, Chair
ed Nix, Vice-Chair
ayne R. Wtlson, C.A.o.
ur Member
unicipalities
jala-Tosorontio Township
1aranth Township
y of Barrie
wn of Bradford-
$t Gwillimbury
wn of Collingwood
wn of The Blue Mountains
,aryiew Township
sa Township
wn ofInnisfil
,Iancthon Township
wn of Mono
ltmur Township
wn of New Tecumseth
o-Medonte Township
micipality of Grey Highlands
wn of Shelburne
nngwater Township
,wn ofWasaga Beach
'atershed Counties
,unty of Simcoe
,unty of Dufferin
,unty of Grey
,mber Conservation Ontario
~Q-\
N ottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority
Centre for Conservation
John Hix Conservation Administration Centre
Tiffin Centre for Conservation
8195 8th Line, Utopia, Ontario LaM ITa
TEL (705) 424-1479, FAX (705) 424-2115
www.nvca.on.ca
August 21,2003
Jennifer Zieleniewski, CAO
Township of Oro-Medonte
Box 100
Oro
LOL 2XO
Dear Ms. Zieleniewski:
Re: ReQuest for Municipal Support of the Watershed Based Source
Protection Advisory Committee Report
On April 22, 2003, the Province of Ontario released a report prepared by the
Advisory Committee on Watershed-based Protection Planning entitled
"Protecting Ontario's Drinking Water: Toward a Watershed-based Source
Protection Planning framework".
This Planning framework is intended to implement the key recommendations
of Justice O'Conner's Walkerton report, regarding protecting drinking water
sources utilizing a multi-barrier including source protection.
Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities,
including the NVCA on May 26, 2003, passed a motion r€questing that our
local watershed Municipalities, "generally support the report and
recommendations of the multi-stakeholder Advisory Committee on a
Watershed-based Source Protection Planning framework..." (Resolution
attached).
Furthermore on August 8, 2003 the NVCA Full Authority Membership
passed the following resolution. Staff have been directed to forward this
request for support to our watershed Municipalities.
cont'd.. .
Building Partnerships With Our Community to Conseroe our Healtly Waters
...2
leq -:).
Resolution:
RESOLVED THAT: The NVCA Full Authority supports the position of Conservation
Ontario regarding the review of the Watershed Based Source Protection Advisory
Committee Report dated June 6,2003; and,
THAT: The NVCA Full Authority supports/endorses the Conservation Ontario,
Generic Resolution requesting Municipal support for the Source Protection Final
Advisory Report, (resolution attached); and,
THAT: NVCA staff circulate this resolution to all Authority Munic!palities for their local
support.
Also included for your information is a copy of the presentation made by the Chair of
Conservation Ontario, Peter Krause, to the A.M.O. delegates on August 19,2003, and
a copy of the Powerpoint slides from this presentation. I encourage your Municipality
to support the intent of the Conservation Ontario Generic Resolution regarding Source
Protection. I would be pleased to make a deputation to Council to provide additional
background or answer any Councilor staff questions regarding this very important
matter.
Hopefully, together with your Municipal support, not only can we support the overall
intent of Justice O'Conner's recommendations, but also make it very clear to the
Province that; "there must be substantial Funding from the Province for drinking water
source protection."
I
Again your Municipal support is greatly needed to ensure the long term protection of
our water source.
~~~
Wayne R. Wilson
CAO/Secretary- Treasurer, NVCA
WW /kw
Encl( 1 )
c. Chair, Chris Carrier, NVCA; NVCA Members
..
\o~-3
Conservation Ontario
Box 11, 120 Bayview Parkway
Newmarket, ON L3Y 4W3
Phone: (905) 895-0716
Fax: (905) 895-0751
POLICY AND ISSUES
STRATEGIC COMMITTEE
Report to
Council
From May 26, 2003
Meeting
#2/03
ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES
Response to SPP Final Advisory Report
THA T the following draft resolution be provided to all conservation authorities to use with their
member municipalities:
WHEREAS the Source Protection Advisory Committee's Report builds upon the
recommendations of the Walkerton Inquiry.
AND WHEREAS "x" municipality supports the protection of our drinking water resources;
AND WHEREAS "x" municipality supports the coordinating role in drinking water source
protection planning for Conservation Authorities;
AND WHEREAS there must be substantial funding from the Province for drinking water
source protection planning;
AND WHEREAS the implementation and funding details for drinking water source protection
is to be developed by the province in consultation with municipalities and other stakeholders;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOL VED THA T "x" municipality generally supports the report and
recommendations of the multi-stakeholder Advisory Committee on a Watershed-based Source
Protection Planning Framework
AND THA T it is recommended that the Province proceed with implementation of the Advisory
Committee's recommendations without delay.
,
,
What about
the
"beginning of
the pipe" -
the place
where water
enters the
well or the
river? What
do we do to
protect the
sources of
our drinking
water?
~~-y
CONSERVATION ONTARIO
A CONSERVATION ONTARIO PERSPECTIVE
ON SOURCE PROTECTION PLANNING
August 2003
Introduction
Any discussion about source protection planning in Ontario has to start with the
events in Walkerton, over three years ago. Since most people are aware of the
details of the Walkerton tragedy, this presentation focuses on the actions that
have taken place since then to protect Ontario's water supply and what lays ahead for
the province's municipalities and conservation authorities (CAs).
In the aftermath of the tragedy, the provincial government appointed Justice
Dennis O'Connor to conduct a public inquiry into the circumstances of the tragedy and to
develop recommendations on how to prevent another tragedy from occurring. He issued
two reports in:2002, containing a total of 121 recommendations. The provincial
government responded by promising to implement every single recommendation in both
reports.
The result has been a burst of new regulations and legislation in the last year.
Even those municipalities with a sterling record of providing safe drinking water have
found themselves working hard to meet all of their new responsibilities.
Justice O'Connor recognized that there are many things that can be done to
protect our drinking water and human health. We can upgrade our sewer and water
treatment plants, make sure our operators are fully qualified, test our water regularly,
and provide oversight to ensure that all of the regulations are followed.
These are called "end of pipe" solutions, because they are focused on improving
the quality of what comes out of the faucet.
But what about the "beginning of the pipe" - the place where the water enters the
well or the river? What do we do to protect the sources of our drinking water?
Advisory Committee on Watershed-Based Source Protection Planning
Last fall, the Provincial Government appointed a committee of people from
across Ontario to advise the government on how source protection plans should be
developed. The advisory committee was made up of 17 representatives of
municipalities, the medical profession, the aggregate industry, developers, planners,
environmental organizations and conservation authorities - in short, just about everyone
with a stake in water issues. Conservation Ontario had three representatives on this
Committee.
- 1 -
Water does
not respect
political or
other artificial
boundaries.
If you want
clean water
downstream
you have to
go upstream
to identify &
eliminate the
sources of
pollution.
,
,
\Q~ - &)
."..
The Advisory Committee prepared a report outlining a process for the
development of source protection plans that it recommended be followed across Ontario.
The report concentrated on what was best for the health of Ontarians.
Managing Water on a Watershed Basis
Water does not respect political or other artificial boundaries. If you want clean
water downstream you have to go upstream to identify and eliminate the sources of
pollution. The Advisory Committee recommends that watershed-based source
protection be implemented in all watersheds in Ontario. A watershed is an area of land
that is drained by a river and its tributaries into a particular body of water such as a lake
or ocean. Planning on a watershed basis allows for the consideration of the complex
interactions between natural as well as social, economic and political components.
Although groundwater aquifers occasionally transcend watershed boundaries,
conservation authorities can adequately address these important drinking water
resources by working with adjacent conservation authorities to ensure continuity in the
planning process Conservation authorities have already begun to address groundwater
issues while working at a watershed scale. For example, the conservation authorities
along the Oak Ridges Moraine created the Conservation Authorities Moraine Coalition to
coordinate watershed planning for this important groundwater feature.
Coordinating Role of Conservation Authorities
The Advisory Committee Report recommends that conservation authorities be
the organization to coordinate the development of watershed-based source protection
plans.
The key word here is coordinate. The conservation authority is not the owner of
the source protection plan; it will be the CA's job to guide the plan's development
through a local partnership of various stakeholders that make up the source protection
planning committees. These committees will be comprised of representatives from
municipalities, the provincial and federal governments, and ot~er important watershed
stakeholders. In other words, watershed-based source protection plans will be
developed from the ground up.
Working Together To Produce Source Protection Plans
The Advisory Committee recommends that first, and foremost, a source
protection plan must be based on solid scientific research and hard data. We must be
able to identify the sources of our surface and groundwater, and then identify the things
that threaten them.
This is what Ontario's conservation authorities bring to the table. We've been in
the business for more than 50 years. We're accustomed to taking a watershed-wide view
of issues and we already have a lot of the information needed to write a source
protection plan.
Conservation authorities currently deliver a variety of watershed management
programs to: improve water quality, reduce flood damages, provide an adequate supply
of water, protect natural areas and biodiversity, and provide environmental education to
watershed residents.
Conservation authorities have been working for years with local municipalities
providing technical advice and expertise in watershed planning. Source protection is not
a new issue for conservation authorities and the process required for developing and
implementing the plans is one with which CAs are very familiar. For conservation
authorities, source protection planning is one component of the larger watershed
planning picture.
- 2-
.'
. . .source
protection
plans will
become vital
strategic
documents
for each
watershed
guiding
residents as
well as
municipal &
provincial
officials. . .
~C\ -~
But there is a lot more to a plan that just science. A good source protection plan
has to take into account economic issues, development questions, social needs,
infrastructure needs and so on.
And that is why it is so important to the process to have municipal, industry,
farming and other public representatives on each planning area's steering committee.
Source Protection Plans Will Become Vital Strategic Documents
In general terms, once they are in place, source protection plans will become
vital strategic documents for each watershed, guiding residents as well as municipal and
provincial officials in their decision making. While source protection plans will inform the
land use planning process, these decisions will continue to rest at the municipal level.
Source protection plans will not simply identify environmental concerns. A good source
protection plan will also recognize economic and social factors. In addition to helping
municipalities in making planning decisions, source protection plans will:
. help farmers adopt practices that will protect their own water and the water of
their urban and rural neighbours;
. ensure that the amount of water extracted will be no more than can be
scientifically supported;
. show where remedial measures must be taken to minimize sources of pollution;
and
. be the basis for monitoring and reporting on the progress made in protecting
water resources.
Municipalities and Conservation Authorities Need To Continue To Work Together
The Advisory Committee report does not propose any new regulatory powers for
conservation authorities nor the transfer of any existing roles or powers. Responsibility
for coordination of source protection plan development is consistent with the current
mandate of CAs.
Conservation Ontario believes current municipal and provincial decision making ,
responsibilities are appropriate. Municipalities should continue to have control over land
use planning; conservation authorities would coordinate the preparation of the source
protection plan and provide the science and best advice in support of municipal and
provincial deCisions.
This is consistent with the relationship that exists now between municipalities and
CAs with land use planning and watershed planning. One key benefit in the development
of the source protection planning process is the already established working
relationships between municipalities and conservation authorities. A continuation of this
good working relationship will be of the utmost important when source protection
planning implementation begins.
Municipalities Continue to Play Key Role
Municipalities will have a large role in the development of the source protection
plan and significant opportunity for input into the final product. Municipalities playa role
through several avenues:
. municipalities will form 1/3 of the membership on Source Protection Planning
Committees
. the board of Directors of a conservation authority is appointed by municipal
councils to represent their community's needs and come to agreement on what is
best for the watershed. Across the province, 75% of the CA board membership
is elected officials.
- 3 -
.. .the funding
model must
include
siqnificant
provincial
'un ding for the
development
:md long-term
71plementation
of source
protection
plans.
.
.
~C\ -l ·
. sufficient municipal support must be obtained before the draft source protection
plan is submitted to the province
. an appeal process will be available through the Ministry of the Environment if
issues remain regarding the SPP once it is submitted to the Province.
Multistakeholder Groups to Determine Implementation of Source Protection Plans
The Report of the Advisory Committee on Watershed-based Source Protection
Planning did not include details on how source protection plans are to be implemented
once developed. Additional consultations with all affected parties will be needed in order
to accomplish this task. The establishment of a multi-stakeholder technical working
group, with broad stakeholder representation would be beneficial to this process.
It is important to resolve implementation issues to ensure that there is a certainty
among stakeholders about what is going to happen on the ground especially in terms of
implementation roles and tools. CAs don't see a significant shift in this regard as
municipalities will continue to be responsible for many aspects of implementation.
This will include the need for the Province to develop a sustainable funding
model for source protection planning. Conservation Ontario recognizes that
municipalities already contribute to watershed planning throU9h conservation authorities
and cannot be expected to provide the majority of funding for source protection.
Therefore the funding model must include siqnificant provincial funding for the
development and long-term implementation of source protection plans. One can quickly
get into a debate around the definition of "significant".
With this in mind, Justice O'Connor recommended that at least some component
of source protection funding will have to come from municipal water rates and other user
fees. This follows the user-pays philosophy for fair and equitable funding.
A key factor to consider in the implementation of source protection planning is
that we are not starting from scratch. In fact a number of municipalities and
conservation authorities have already had experience in taking steps to protect drinking
water sources. These include groundwater studies, identificat.ion of areas susceptible to,
contamination, and delineation of wellhead protection areas. These activities can be
used as building blocks as we begin to move forward with source protection planning.
Water Is A Shared Resource
Water is a shared resource that we all have to pay for one way or another. And
because water is a shared resource, we are all accountable for protecting it and human
health in Ontario.
And, because it is a shared resource, protecting Ontario's water resources is a
shared responsibility. Source protection will succeed or fail based on how we work
together and it will only be successful if it is developed and implemented locally.
Developing source protection plans will be a challenge for everyone. It will
challenge conservation authorities to do their best research and provide the best
scientific advice. It will challenge municipalities to look beyond their own boundaries in
partnership with conservation authorities using a watershed based approach. It will
challenge all stakeholders to work closely together to protect a resource that is integral
to our health and our success.
And, finally, it will challenge all of us - all the people of Ontario - to look far into
the future, to make decisions today that will have an impact years from now.
But it must be done - because the people of Ontario won't settle for less. And
most important, we have to think of those who come beyond us.
This paper was originally presented at the Annual Conference for the Association of Municipalities of Ontario
(AMO) on August 19,2003.
-4-
1G-\
TOWNSHIP OF ORO,MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. FD-2003-10 To: Prepared By:
Members of Council Paul Eenhoorn, Fire Chief
Subject: Department:
Council
Monthly Report (July) Fire and Emergency
C. of W. Services
Date: September 3, 2003
Motion #
R.M. File No.
Date:
DATE
ST A TION
TIME
TYPE
LOCATION
DAMAGE
Station #5 Unauthorized 1858 Horseshoe
Julv 1, 2003 Warminster 18:45:00 Bum ComDlaint Vallev Road East
Station #1 Alarm - No Fire, 490 Line 2 North
Julv 3, 2003 Shanty Bav 12:20: 10 Accidental! Workers
Station #2 Rubbish Fire 1055 Lakeshore Road
Julv 5,2003 Hawkestone 13:04:01 East
Station #1 Garbage Fire Line 2 South,
July 5, 2003 Shanty Bay 21:20:31 Behind the Esso
Station #2 Rubbish Fire 1055 Lakeshore
Julv 6, 2003 Hawkestone 08:00:26 Road East
Station #5 Single Motor Vehicle Highway 12 @
July 8,2003 Warminster 12:06:20 Roll Over Moonstone Road
Station #6 Medical Assist 6213 Line 8 North
Julv 9, 2003 Moonstone 18:38:09 Call
Station #4 Medical Assist 53 Cameron Drive
Julv 9, 2003 Rugby 03:55:09 Call
Station #2 Tree on Fire Hawkestone Park,
July 10, 2003 Hawkestone 16:21:28 352 Line 11 South
Station #2 Rubbish Fire 171 Forest View
Julv 10, 2003 Hawkestone 00:56:48 Road
Station #5 Hydro Wires Down Line 13, South of
Julv 10, 2003 Warminster 08:23:47 Horseshoe Valley Rd.
lq -d-
FD Report 2003 -10 Con't ...2
DATE
5T A TION
TIME
TYPE
LOCATION
DAMAGE
Station #1 Medical Assist 587 Line 6 North
Julv 10, 2003 Shanty Bay 23:04:53 Call
Station #2 Motor Vehicle Highway 11 NIB,
July 11, 2003 Hawkestone 10: 18: 54 Accident @ Line 11
Station #4 Tree On Wires 83 Line 15 North
Julv 11, 2003 Rugby 10:47:40
Station #1 Portable Out- 1973 Ridge Road $ 1,000.00 L
July 13, 2003 Shanty Bay 01:45:03 House Fire W, in Park $ .00 S
Station #1 Multi Motor Highway 11 SIB, @
July 13,2003 Shanty Bay 16:46:42 Vehicle Accident Line 2
Station #5 Motor Vehicle Moonstone Road @
Julv 13, 2003 Warminster 21:27:04 Roll Over Line 10 North
Station #2 Child Hit by 5367 Highway 11
July 15, 2003 Hawkestone 00:37: 11 Vehicle North
Station #6 Motor Vehicle Highway 400 SIB, @
July 15, 2003 Moonstone 14: 19: 10 Roll Over Mt. St. Louis Road
Station #6 Tree on Hydro 10 Ingram Road
Julv 16, 2003 Moonstone 17:31:59 Wires
Station #2 Unauthorized 5266 Highway 11 SIB
Julv 16,2003 Hawkestone 14:09:53 Burn Complaint
Station #2 Unauthorized 65 Moon Point Drive
July 16,2003 Hawkestone 14:05: 14 Bum ComDlaint
Station #2 Call Cancelled, 1260 Highway 11,
July 17, 2003 Hawkestone 21:24:43 Nothina Found Heidi's Campground
Station #2 Medical Assist 1260 Highway 11,
Julv 17,2003 Hawkestone 13:30:56 Call Campsite #19
Station #2 Single Motor 151 Line 8 North
Julv 17, 2003 Hawkestone 05:24:40 Vehicle Accident
Station #2 Alarm - No Fire, 73 - 8 Mile Point Road
July 18,2003 Hawkestone 10:43:29 Faultv Detector
Station #3 Medical Assist 4342 Line 6 North
Julv 18, 2003 Horseshoe 22:02:23 Call
Station #3 Medical Assist 2106 Horseshoe
July 18, 2003 Horseshoe 11:07:20 Call Valley Road West
Station #3 Overheat, 986 Line 3 North
July 18, 2003 Horseshoe 12:45:20 Pot on Stove
Station #5 Unauthorized Georgian Drive and
Julv 18, 2003 Warminster 19:59: 10 Burn Complaint Champlain
Station #2 Motor Vehicle Highway 11 NIB, @
July 19, 2003 Hawkestone 10:50: 15 Extrication Line 9
Station #1 Gas Line Cut 11 Somerset Bvld.
Julv 19, 2003 Shanty Bay 09:43: 11
Station #3 Medical Assist 20 Cherry Trail
July 19, 2003 Horseshoe 17:54:06 Call
Station #2 Multi Vehicle Line 7 South @
July 20, 2003 Hawkestone 15:49: 14 Accident Over Pass
Station #2 Single Motor Highway 11 NIB, @
Julv 20, 2003 Hawkestone 16:38:56 Vehicle Accident Line 15 Ramp
Station #4 Alarm - No Fire, 98 Line 15 North
Julv 21, 2003 Rugby 15:28:48 Accident I Workers
..
FD Report 2003 - 10 Con't ...3
lq-3
DATE
STATION
TIME
TYPE
LOCATION
DAMAGE
~
Station #1 Medical Assist 29 Forester Road
Julv 22, 2003 Shanty Bay 03:22:21 Call
Station #1 Single Motor Vehicle Highway 11 SIB,
Julv 23, 2003 Shanty Bav 20:53:58 Accident lW Line 4
Station #1 Medical Assist 1101 Range Road
Julv 23, 2003 Shanty Bay 09:52: 15 Call
Station #3 Overheat, BBQ 4047 Line 6 North
Julv 23, 2003 Horseshoe 07:22:41 Connection Fire
Station #6 Single Motor Highway 400 SIB,
Julv 24, 2003 Moonstone 16:55:03 Vehicle Accident Mt. S1. Louis Road
Station #1 Report of Fire, Highway 11 SIB,
Julv 24, 2003 Shanty Bay 21:06:32 NothinQ Found Between Line 4 & 5
Station #6 Medical Assist 6323 Line 6 North
Julv 24, 2003 Moonstone 12:58:01 Call
Station #1 Medical Assist Shanty Bay Golf
Julv 24, 2003 Shanty Bay 10:47:44 Call Course, Line 1 N.
Station #5 Grass Fire 4114 Line 9 North,
July 25, 2003 Warminster 16:43:56 @ Train Tracks
Station #1 Medical Assist 871
Julv 27,2003 Shanty Bav 22:42:05 Call PenetanQuishene Rd.
Station #1 & 3 Mutual Aid for 1131 Snow Valley
July 28, 2003 Shanty Bay, 15: 10:43 Springwater Factory Road
Horseshoe Fire
Station #3 Motor Vehicle 174 Old Barrie Road
Julv 28, 2003 Horseshoe 13:22:43 Accident I Fuel Leak West
Station #4 Medical Assist 11 Tamarack Drive
July 29, 2003 RUQbv 12: 14:44 Call
Station #2 Medical Assist 1072 Lakeshore Road
Julv 29, 2003 Hawkestone 14:53:25 Call East
Station #2 Burn Complaint Bon-Fire at
Julv 31,2003 Hawkestone 19:57:43 Hawkestone Park
Structure and Vehicle Fire
Dollar Value Lost
Dollar Value Saved
$ 1,000.00
$ .00
)
Medical Calls
2003
14
2002
13
Monthly Fire Report for July, 2003
l~-~
Training Sessions
Station #1
Station #2
Station #5
Shanty Bay
Hawkestone
Warminster
2
2
2
Station #3
Station #4
Station #6
Horseshoe
Rugby
Moonstone
2
2
2
Inspection Record for the Month (including Fire Prevention / Public Education),
Commercial 4 Residential I Bed & Breakfast 1 '"
Industrial 2 Schools I Assembly I Church 1
Wood stove 2 Daycare I Camps I Hall Tours 2
Comments or Recommendations by Fire Chief and/or Deputy Fire Chief
Extra training / Seminars and Events Attended
Chiefs Meeting
District Chiefs' Meeting
Meeting with Pallets North Lawyer
RespeC~~IYgSUbmitted'
~ //~
Paul Eenhoorn, Fire Chief
C.A.O. COMMENTS:
DATeJpc51~
~
C.A.O.
DEPT. HEAD
ADDENDUM
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING
Wednesday, September 10,2003
6. CORRESPONDENCE:
b) Eileen and Albert Schwartz, correspondence dated August 28, 2003 re: Response
to Letter of August 8, 2003, Official Plan Amendment, Item 3.12 Shoreline
Development (Item #17 of OPA).
c) Roy Bridge, Chair, Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority, correspondence
dated August 27, 2003 re: Ministry of the Environment Services.
d) City of Orillia, Notice of Public Meeting dated September 5, 2003 re: Comprehensive
Zoning By-law.
e) G. Baldock, correspondence received September 9,2003 re: Plan 626 Promenade.
f) Dr. Ron Golden, Chairman, Oro Ratepayer's Association, correspondence dated
September 3,2003 re: P-115/01, UCCI Consolidated Companies Inc. Application.
7. FINANCE, ADMINISTRATION AND FIRE:
b) Report No. ADM 2003-39, Marilyn Pennycook, Clerk, re: Remembrance Day
Ceremony - Old Town Hall.
11.IN-CAMERA:
c) Jennifer Zieleniewski, CAO, re: Legal Matter.
-
Mayor and Members of Council
Township of Oro-Medonte
P. O. Box 100
Oro, Ontario
LOL 2XO
RECElv~r~
'IE' 0 8 20ID
ORo-MEDONTE ('
TOWNSHIP
~.. ..
August 28, 2003
~b-)
Re: Response to our letter of August 8, 2003
Dear Mayor and Members of Council,
We are writing in reference to our letter to you on August 8,2003. We have not received
confirmation of receipt of our letter and we were hoping to have an opportunity to speak
with the Members of Council regarding the amendments to the Official Plan Review that
have since been passed by you on August 21,2003.
We believe that the amendments have been so sufficiently changed that the residents of
Oro-Medonte should have been apprised ofthese changes. As far as we can tell, the
residents have nothing in writing explaining that the Official Plan Review is not the same
as the one they were invited to reply to on June 24, 2003.
The following two issues are the changes that we believe are different enough that they
should have been brought to the attention of the residents.
1. Item 3.12 of the original Official Plan Amendment #17 which was available to the
residents on June 6, 2003, states that, "landowners in these areas believe that such
development will not result in an increase in municipal services, since the road is
already there. It's the township's opinion that some limited large lot development
could occur on existing public roads across from existing shoreline development
under certain and very strict conditions and subject to the approval of a site-specific
OPA". The new statement in Item #19 for Section DI0.3.8 changes the tone of the
former statements by deleting this statement and including "amendments to this Plan
that have the effect of permitting additional residential development adjacent to the
Shoreline designation will be discoura2ed.
..
We believe that the word discoura2ed should be deleted as it may be interpreted
negatively by any future Councilor Advisory Planning Committee and no matter what
proposals are made, they will be rejected. Either the Council refuses to look at any future
development along the shoreline or the word discouraged is counter-productive to the
other strict conditions that have been laid out.
2. "If a major development is proposed, a detailed review of the entire shoreline area
shall be carried out to determine if the proposed location is suitable and appropriate
from a growth management perspective". What is a major development? Are 20
houses a major development? Or 50? Or 400? Who is going to carry out this review?
..
~b-~
..
This statement should be clarified so that people who would like to have low density
developments on land for large country residential lots with all the strict conditions
adhered to, will have a better idea of what is expected. We believe that the wording as
it stands now "encoura2.es" only major development such as those in Shanty Bay and
Oro line 5. As well, it does not state by whom and when this detailed review of the
"entire" shoreline area" will happen. What is "entire"? And does the developer or the
Township pay for this review? Every time a major developer wants to develop land,
will the Township be making a detailed review ofthe entire shoreline area?
We suggest that the municipality prepares a secondary plan of the Lake Simcoe shoreline,
in order to discover why the municipality has discouraged development in shoreline
areas. We are still looking forward to an official reply to our request on August 8. On
August 21, I asked if our letter had been received and we were verbally told that our letter
was received by Council and tabled on August 13. We attended the Planning Advisory
Committee meeting on August 18 and the special Council meeting on August 21 and
were told that we could not speak at those meetings. We would like to know when these
issues will be discussed before these amendments are sent to the County of Simcoe for
approval. The public needs another opportunity to reflect and discuss the dramatic
changes that have been made. To our knowledge there have been no letters or comments
from the public to negate the original 3.12 amendment.
We would like to be informed of any meetings regarding shoreline development in the
future, both at the Township and County level. Please contact us within the next week so
that we can be informed and make decisions whether these questions need to be answered
by an impartial body.
Thank you very much for you attention to this matter.
Yours sincerely,
,1. ~. a ' ~JMM~
/
Eileen and Albert Schwartz
35 Fleming Drive
Toronto, Ontario
M2K 2N8
416-226-3529
705.325-3372
Fax # 416-226-2137
Cc. Planning Advisory Committee
County of Simcoe Planning Department
Marilyn Pennycook, Clerk
Nick McDonald, Meridien Planning Consultants, Inc.
Paul Kitchen
August 8, 2003
r--'!i~i!D ..
Mayor Neil Craig and Members of Council
Township of Oro-Medonte
P. O. Box 100
Oro, Ontario
LOL 2XO
AU6 1 2 2003
f ..' ,'.""--;; " "If
v'iV-,li;iEDONt
~.
~b-3
Re: Official Plan Amendment, General Update to Official Plan - June 6,2003; Item 3.12
Shoreline Development (Item #19 ofOPA)
~
Dear Mayor Craig and Members of Council,
We object to the removal of the shoreline development policy (item 3.12) from the
Official Plan Amendment document of June 6, 2003. Policy says that development
should be encouraged in settlement areas. The shoreline area is the largest settlement area
in the township. In our opinion, the Planning Advisory Committee is remiss in removing
this item (3.12) from the Official Plan Amendment.
Development in the shoreline areas has been completely ignored in the discussions thus
far. The June 6, 2003 document says that "some limited large lot development could
occur on existi~g public roads across from existing shoreline development under certain
and very strict;conditions and subject to the approval of a site-specific OP A." Removal of
this item from the Official Plan Amendment has taken place without discussion and many
residents are unaware of this change. We would like this matter to be taken to the OMB
and we would like to come before the Planning Advisory Committee to discuss it.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Respectfully,
L/t~k-t'/~v .A-/~A/(
~'
Eileen and Albert Schwartz
2669 Lakeshore Road East
R. R. 1, Hawkestone, Ontario
LOL 1 TO
416-226-3529; 705-325-3372
,~
Please confirm receipt of this letter to:
Eileen and Albert Schwartz
35 Fleming Drive
Toronto, Ontario
M2K 2N8.
Cc Planning Advisory Committee
Nick McDonald, Meridian Planning consultants Inc.
1: 905-895-1281
1-800-465-0437
x: 905-853-5881
V.fail: info@lsrca.on.ca
eb: www.lsrca.on.ca
~o Bayview Parkway
>::t 282
~et, Ontario
,Y4X1
Leaders In
Watershed
Health
lo~
August 27t\ 2003
r.u.:'.'-.
nrt, ~'(.
SEP '0 2 -rom
.,;;q
ORO..ivit.tJONlE ~
TOWM~'
- -
The Honourable Ernie Eves
Premier of Ontario
Office of the Premier
Legislative Building
Queen's Park
Toronto, ON M7A lAl
Dear Premier Eves:
The Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority appreciates the work being done by the
Provincial Government in response to the power outage recently experienced in Ontario. Ho'wever,
as a result of the power shortage a sewage spill occurred which impacted the Lake Simcoe
watershed. The Conservation Authority could most certainly have utilized the assistance of the
Ministry ofthe Environment staffwith both water sampling and analysis in order to detemline the
extent of the impact of this spill.
Again, the Authority understands and appreciates the Provincial Government's position, however
is of the opinion that the services of the Ministry of the Environment should be considered an
essential service" in an emergency situation such as this.
Your consideration of the above would be appreciated.
Yours truly,
~
, //-r'
Roy Bridge,
Chair
c:
The Honourable Jim Wilson, Minister of the Environment
Garfield Dunlop, MPP, Simcoe North
The Honourable Janet Ecker, MPP, Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge
Chris Hodgson, MPP, Haliburton-Victoria-Borck
The Honourable Frank Klees, MPP, Oak Ridges
Julia Munro, MFP, York North
John O'Toole, MPP, Durham
Greg Sorbara, MPP, Vaughan-King-Aurora
Joseph Tascona, MPP, Barrie Simcoe Bradford
Chainnan Bill Fisch, Regional Municipality of York
....Watershed CAO's & Clerks, Municipal & Regional
LSRCA Board of Directors
Conservation Ontario
Lake Simcoe Environmental Management Strategy - Steering Committee
H:\GCFiles\MPP and MP General\Premier Ernie Eves_Aug 2003,wpd
SEP-05-03 FRI 01:06 PM
. .
FAX NO,
~')~~("/\
-'
p, 02/02
bd
CITY OF ORILLlA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
RE: COMPREHENSIVE ZONING BY-LAW
TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to the provisions of the Planning Act, the Council of the Corporation of the City
of Orillia will hold a Public Meeting on Mondav, September 22nd, 2003. at 7:30 p.m. in the Council
Chamber, Orillia City Centre, 50 Andrew Street South, to consider adoption of a new comprehensive zoning
by-law to repeal and replace zoning by-laws 1973-100 and 4136 of the City of Orillia and By-law 79-5 of
the former Township of OrlUia.
Description of the Land Affected by the Proposed New Zoning By-law:
The proposed Comprehensive Zoning By-law will have application to all lands within the corporate limits
of the City of Orillia.
Purpose and Effect of the Proposed New Zoning By-law
The proposed Zoning By-law will replace all existing Zoning By-laws and implement the Official Plan.
In addition to establishing the City's zoning provisions the New Zoning By-law will also reflect changes in
Provincial Planning policies and have regard to those policies in the delineation of land use zones, zone
provisions and the general provisions affecting all zones.
Invitations for Public Input/Public Open House
In April of 2001, the City extended its first public invitation for input to the new zoning by-law. In January
2003, a second invitation for public input was advertised and the draft zoning by-law made available for public
review. As a result, of that review, the public Input received, and the comments of affected departments or
agencies a final draft of the by-law has been prepared. The by-law has been posted on the web site arid
copies may be purchased at City Hall.
In addition, staff of the Planning and Development Department on Wednesday June 25, 2003 at 5:00 p.m.
in the Council Chamber, Orillia City Centre, hosted a public open house. Planning staff will be on hand to
answer questions about the latest draft of the new zoning by-law. Following the open house, the
Planning Advisory Committee considered new submissions before making its recommendation to City
Council on the by-law.
It should be noted that preparation of a New Zoning By-law is not intended to change the zoning of specific
properties in order to permit deve10pment to proceed. However, if an application for rezoning is in process at
the time of preparing the final version of the by-law it may be included for procedural reasons, Similarly,
where other development approvals have already been granted these approvals may be reflected in the New
Zoning By-law,
Information Available:
Information relating to the proposed zoning by-law is available for review during business hours, in the
Planning Office, Orillia City Centre, 50 Andrew Street South, Orillia, Ontario. A copy of the By-law is also
posted on the City's Web page at www.city.orillia.ar\.ca
Oral and Written Submissions - Appeal:
If a person or public body that files an appeal of a decision of the Council of the Corporation of the City of
Orillia in respect of the proposed by-law does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or does not
make a written submission to the Council of the Corporation of the City of Orillia before the proposed by-law
is adopted, the Ontario Municipal Board may dismiss all or part of the appeal.
Any person may attend the Public Meeting and/or make written or verbal representations either in support of
or in opposition to the proposed zoning by-law.
For further information, please contact Terry Edwards at (705) 329-7241 duriog normal business
hours or visit the Planning Department in the Orillia City Centre, 50 Andrew Street South. 3rd
Floor.
DATED AT THE CITY OF ORILLlA THIS 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2003
T. T. Edwards, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning and Development
Fax: (705)-329-2760
E-Mail: tedwards@city.orillia.on.ca
H:\D14 Zonlng\New Zoning Bylaw\omft Final'J'i,OT,08,:i9,03Ie,dcc
f' " ,h,
i "," -r0J C~ !
.'} , J.{)I-'j P-- ·
.~J tIP-J jft~ II I ,~ ~-f v/ tlflu'Fd['
,.-1 '. 1'~ -{J .R
1J1!-fl/)~1 ,~ ~. . ) '.,/, '> .(~~ ipaJ'.')../L/
, ' jr- ,'~ c),c'U/-rJ. fv-r' Jf= " ~~
(aJ' ~ Yf'r~~ c ~ ~ -tr1~ ,p.?~rr.o,
, ,~.~ ~~ Yo ,-f71~
/)/"j1fv~- , - L,J~l~.
A.- y.v-_ . ~ <I ~Jnc-
bu ffij ~,~ !" pIo.J" 1"<-/ ~
.J ,,' ~,,;,u 1.J)-'- ~ pf~ ~ (
~ ~CJ/~' .
Jj ~ 0 ~
ftL~" ,) -~~ ?1'~ !
(~~tf-/v~ "J } ,'~ -W~~r ,
J ;? U', "..Iv ~ ~ ' t.U~~/L/
.A b ,c' Ii o'fU-J 6~ 0 . J ff-;yt {/
/"L.I;Io.."-'-" Yj ~ ~ J~.f-P'- -
,iJV t ' ' u.<--./ y;, ~
jf JJ'} ~ - {f'iV tV j..J i J/~
}" ()} . I j }' -'~', fA)/y,,? 1JdN~ ~ ~ /c..<V-J/ ~
luV fj II J-U ' ) h ~~ ~ /'
AI "J {)A'v~ oU I ,,' ~ (V1. ,"'/
JJ ~ ..w-' . ,y....!~ (p. }'
I (" e (J/J'-" ~l' .J'-' r; / ~ - r
~ ,,/, !cvr-'I ,L- . ,.r1-J /)JU~ y:JtP' ' /)
;' JJ' '! J j . · ~ "or! j
{f .... .' ..' .' J W ...uJ ~ Lf-" I. . , ! .' i/'/ (Vi:-1:;)---- ;;VGJ/r
V /fJ ,; Jt/jJfr/ J~. ." .... U ' 1/f' IfJ PI // I '
V ~y 0 . ,'~ f..;--i-' '4 l !
v /1 . JVi ,,)f ,.v I / I' '
! J _ ,.' IJJZJ' (Ii U,' . -ij~vf ~,,'p
rllV'- r' .' J.~-'V...&'-'
; ;. tJ"-' IY
J! . JJP! ,iJfl'JJ' . r
Pv /~-b{/u./j// '7 w ' ({; f V '111 uc4A
,-LU~
\.... .~ \t' \\ \ ~
,~
0/
)'\1\ \
~~~\
I'
,")
!
p~tuv5 '
v/\Y)/) (i;Li /;;J--
/ I l '
f
:; ()~
'-..../1
{tu/fl v
:/0 '(IF
- '
, ," ~~-1
,LV p~ ~/ r ~ ~1 J7':*2~1
f{WdJ ~ ~ ~ /)LL~ 7i'~ ~ L
{IV 1~ fn! 'i~ ' ~d-~ II~ ~.
10-&~ l {2dJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ffJ'~
/~J~
,# ;j tV-tJ..L; eb
/1
~)~JJ ~ ~p ~ ~n,{,rp "/'7'/
(J '
Ii
0rJ j;-,
I .
i
/
t. rUf
o-rr;/;'C /j/7 r
}'
b
,- ~~" ;~(/j
~/'""'-i 7J II ,,> ,)'-
Dear Mayor Craig and Members of Council:
. -Rtt;EIVED
IE'03_
OAO-M~
TOWNSHIP
~
I am writing on behalf of the newly formed Oro Ratepayers Association with regard to
the DCCI application # P115/01.
Our concerns are that your consultant's report does not accurately reflect the
environmental downsides of this proposed subdivision. We want the time to do a
thorough independent planning report prior to your taking any further action on this
application. We see several inconsistencies and omissions in the Meridian report that you
relied upon. Accordingly, we have retained a planner and lawyer who are experienced
with these kind of developments to review all reports submitted to you to date, including,
Mr. MacDonald's. This should take approximately 8 weeks. In the meantime, we ask
you not to proceed with the DCCl application.
Furthermore, we want to ensure that ratepayers who request information and notice of
meetings are provided with such in a complete and unfettered manner. I had requested
such notice and was informed by Mr. Doug Irwin with inadequate notice, on August 18,
of your August 21 council meeting. However, he failed to tell me about the Strategic
Planning Advisory Committee meeting on the evening of the 18th. This is unacceptable.
I understand that the developer was well represented at that meeting. Myself and the
others were denied our basic democratic rights to be kept informed and be allowed to
speak to issues that will profoundly affect us. I would like an explanation as to why I
was not informed of the Planning Advisory Committee meeting?
You will be receiving written requests for notice of all Councilor committee meetings
pertaining to the DCCI application. I expect Council and staff to respect our right to be
given ample notification and opportunity to make deputations to Council and committee
meetings.
I trust that you will find these requests fair and reasonable.
Sincerely,
Dr. Ron Golden
Chairman, Oro Ratepayers Association
\'b-\
TOWNSHIP OF ORO-MEDONTE
REPORT
Dept. Report No. To: Council Prepared By: M. Pennycook
ADM 2003-39 Marilvn Pennvcook, Clerk
Subject: Department:
Council Remembrance Day Ceremony- Administration
Old Town Hall
C.ofW.
Date: September 8, 2003
Motion #
R.M. File No.
Date: September 10/03
I'
II BACKGROUND:
Correspondence was received from the Craighurst Women's Institute after the 2002 Remembrance
Day Ceremony at the Old Town Hall suggesting changes to the current practice. As a result, staff was
asked to review the procedure for the arrangement of the ceremony. The Oro-Medonte Women's
Institutes were sent a copy of the current procedure (Attachment #1) to solicit comments and
suggestions for improvement.
It has been the practice for several years that the Women's Institutes of the Township take
responsibility for the arrangements for the Remembrance Day Ceremony held at the Old Town Hall.
A more recent addition has been that the Oro-Medonte Horticultural Society arranges the
refreshments after the ceremony. It is anticipated that this kind donation is to be continued.
The financial arrangement in the past has been that a collection was taken. Any expenditure
(musician, bugler, etc.) was paid from the collection. In addition, the Township provided a cheque in
the amount of $75.00 for the minister's services. The Royal Canadian Legion Poppy Fund received
any surplus money once expenditures were met. Shortfalls were paid by the Township. The
amount collected varies from year to year depending on participants in the service and the number of
attendees.
The Township provides the printed programs of the service and also lays a wreath at the ceremony,
purchased from the Barrie Legion.
..
'\ b -d
. .
.
ANAL Y515:
All but one Women's Institute responded to the Township's request for comments (Attachment #2).
Generally, the procedure has been well received apart from the issue of the collection. As two of the
Women's Institutes are of the view that no collection should be taken, it is staff's recommendation
that persons attending the ceremony be given the opportunity to make a donation to the Royal
Canadian Legion Poppy Fund if they wish. This donation should be forwarded to the Royal Canadian
Legion. As the Women's Institutes are currently giving of their time and resources to arrange the
. ceremony, any expenses incurred should be reimbursed by the Township. The minister's fee would
be included in this amount.
ECOMMENDATION (5):
1. That this report be received and adopted.
2. That Council approve a policy of providing an amount of $300.00 annually to the Women's
Institute responsible for the Remembrance Day Ceremony at the Old Town Hall; and once
expenses have been met, that the Women's Institute donate any surplus funds to the Royal
Canadian Legion Poppy Fund.
3. That the Women's Institutes of the Township be notified of Council's decision and thanked for
their continued support.
:es ectfully submitted, J
Marilyn pennycook
Clerk
C.A.O. Comments:
~c)~~
Date. ' (/ \ v.....-.'
J . (
C.A.O.
~v~
J
Dept. Head
2
/J -#.
fl-r~I1U1rne0( I
\ '0-)
Roles and Responsibilities of Women's Institutes
re: Remembrance Day Service
lOld Town Halll
a) Each year, the Township approaches a different Women's Institute to arrange
the Remembrance Day Service at the Old Town Hall. The Service is always
held on the Sunday before or after November 11th, depending on the
Warminster Service (always held on the same day). The Old Town Hall
Service always begins at 3:00 p.m.
b) The Women's Institute is requested to: prepare the program, arrange the food
for the gathering following the Service, arrange for the Minister, the music and
the Choir, the pianist and the Chairperson/Master of Ceremonies.
c) In the past, the Chairperson/Master of Ceremonies has been Mr. Morris
Shelswell, who can be reached at 487-2215. In the event that Mr. Shelswell
is not available to offer his experience, the Women's Group should approach
someone else to do the job and should advise the Township as soon as
possible.
d) It has been the practice that the Women's Institute arrange the food for the
gathering after the Service. For the last several years, it has been done
through Mr. Alastair Crawford, Oro-Medonte Horticultural Society, who can be
reached at 487-3289.
e) Although the Women's Institute is requested to invite the Minister, the
Township will prepare a cheque in the amount of $75.00 to pay the Minister
for his/her services.
f) A collection is taken at the Service. The collection received at the Service is
to be used by the Women's Institute for the food, pianist, etc. Should
expenses exceed the amount of money collected, the Township will issue a
cheque for the difference.
g) When the program has been written by the Women's Institute, it should be
brought in to the Administration Department at the Township to be typed and
100 copies made upon approval by the CAO of the Township. These will be
sent to the Service with the Chairperson on the Friday before the Service.
F:\Clerk\MP Folder\Remembrance Day\Roles & Responsibilities Women's Institutes.doc
February 2003
..
1/--7 -rlk.#rrJe:N {' -tf=- 0<.
lb
Remembrance Dav Women's Institutes Comments
Crown Hill Women's Group
Comments: Bernice Hickman
~ Have churches in township take turns instead of WI
~ Notify group earlier so they are prepared
Craighurst Women's Group
Comments: Ms. Patricia Toal
~ Send notification early June to remind
~ Reminder sent again early fall
~ Township pay for minister & musician
~ No collection
~ Horticultural society usually donates refreshments
Dalston Women's Group
Comments: Joan Coward
~ Does not wish to participate in rotation
Guthrie Women's Institute
Comments: Carolyn Campbell
~ Horticultural Society usually donates refreshments
~ No collection
Hawkestone Women's Group
Comments: Dianne Mawdsley
~ No changes
Mitchell Square Women's Group
Comments: Eleanor Heatherington
~ No changes
Clowes Women's Group
Comments: Pat Shellswell
~ Be made aware of any changes to program
~ List of who presents wreathes
Rugby Women's Group
Comments: Margret Langmen
~ No response