METRO VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT FINANCE AND … … · 16/03/2018 · Mayor Derek Corrigan,...

March 9, 2018

METRO VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT

FINANCE AND INTERGOVERNMENT COMMITTEE

REGULAR MEETING

Friday, March 16, 2018 9:00 a.m.

28th Floor Committee Room, 4730 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia

A G E N D A1 1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

1.1 March 16, 2018 Meeting Agenda That the Finance and Intergovernment Committee adopt the agenda for its meeting scheduled for March 16, 2018 as circulated.

2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

2.1 February 14, 2018 Regular Meeting Minutes That the Finance and Intergovernment Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held February 14, 2018 as circulated.

3. DELEGATIONS 4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS 5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF

5.1 TransLink Application for Scope Change to Approved October 2017 Application for

Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund Designated Speaker: Heather McNell, Director of Regional Planning and Electoral Area Services, Parks, Planning and Environment and Raymond Kan, Senior Regional Planner, Parks, Planning and Environment That the MVRD Board approve a scope change to TransLink’s 2017 application for Federal Gas Tax funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund, replacing seven 40-foot hybrid buses to be purchased in 2019 with five 60-foot hybrid buses, as described in the report dated March 5, 2018, titled “TransLink Application for Scope Change to Approved October 2017 Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund”.

1 Note: Recommendation is shown under each item, where applicable.

Finance and Intergovernment Committee

Finance and Intergovernment Committee Regular Agenda March 16, 2018

Agenda of 2

5.2 Public Engagement Policy Designated Speaker: Vanessa Anthony, Program Manager, Public Involvement, Water Services; Megan Gerryts, Corporate Projects Coordinator, Legal and Legislative Services; and Andrea Winkler, Program Manager, Public Involvement, Liquid Waste Services That the MVRD/GVS&DD/GVWD/MVHC Board approve the Public Engagement Policy as presented in the report dated March 7, 2018, titled “Public Engagement Policy.”

6. INFORMATION ITEMS

6.1 2018 Finance and Intergovernment Committee Work Plan

7. OTHER BUSINESS 8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM DELEGATIONS 9. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING

That the Finance and Intergovernment Committee close its regular meeting scheduled for March 16, 2018 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (c), (e), (g) and (k) as follows: “90 (1) A part of the meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being

considered relates to or is one or more of the following: (c) labour relations or other employee relations;

(e) the acquisition, disposition or expropriation of land or improvements, if the board or committee considers that disclosure could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district;

(g) litigation or potential litigation affecting the regional district; and (k) negotiations and related discussions respecting the proposed provision of a

regional district service that are at their preliminary stages and that, in the view of the board or committee, could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district if they were held in public.”

10. ADJOURNMENT/CONCLUSION

That the Finance and Intergovernment Committee adjourn/conclude its meeting of March 16, 2018.

Membership: Louie, Raymond (C) – Vancouver Moore, Greg (VC) – Port Coquitlam Brodie, Malcolm – Richmond Clay, Mike – Port Moody

Corrigan, Derek – Burnaby Deal, Heather – Vancouver Mussatto, Darrell – North Vancouver City Steele, Barbara - Surrey

Stewart, Richard – Coquitlam Walton, Richard – North Vancouver District


Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the MVRD Finance and Intergovernment Committee held on Wednesday, February 14, 2018 Page 1 of 8

METRO VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT FINANCE AND INTERGOVERNMENT COMMITTEE

Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Metro Vancouver Regional District (MVRD) Finance and Intergovernment Committee held at 1:09 p.m. on Wednesday, February 14, 2018 in the 28th Floor Committee Room, 4730 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia.

MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Councillor Raymond Louie, Vancouver Vice Chair, Mayor Greg Moore, Port Coquitlam (arrived at 1:11 p.m.) Mayor Malcolm Brodie, Richmond Mayor Mike Clay, Port Moody Mayor Derek Corrigan, Burnaby Councillor Heather Deal, Vancouver Mayor Darrell Mussatto, North Vancouver City Councillor Barbara Steele, Surrey Mayor Richard Stewart, Coquitlam Mayor Richard Walton, North Vancouver District

MEMBERS ABSENT: None.

STAFF PRESENT: Carol Mason, Chief Administrative Officer Janis Knaupp, Legislative Services Coordinator, Board and Information Services

1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

1.1 February 14, 2018 Regular Meeting Agenda

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Finance and Intergovernment Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for February 14, 2018 as circulated.

CARRIED

2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

2.1 November 8, 2017 Regular Meeting Minutes

It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Finance and Intergovernment Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held November 8, 2017 as circulated.

CARRIED

2.1



3. DELEGATIONS No items presented.

1:11 p.m. Vice Chair Moore arrived at the meeting. 4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS

4.1 Municipal Taxation and Revenue Sources

Patrice Impey, Chief Financial Officer/General Manager of Finance, Risk, and Supply Chain Management and Grace Cheng, Long-Term Financial Sustainability and Resilience, Capital Planning, Debt Strategy, Property Tax, Strategic Support, City of Vancouver, provided members with a presentation on options the City of Vancouver is considering to support small business through provincial tax reform highlighting challenges with property assessment related to site redevelopment, tax apportionment between landlord and tenants, taxes levied by other taxing authorities, policy options being considered, and next steps.

In response to questions, members were informed about: • tax averaging not mitigating significant increases in property tax assessments • feedback from the development community, owners, and tenants • property redevelopment and sales opportunities impacting tenants • Regional Administrators Advisory Committee and Regional Finance Advisory

Committee consideration of broad taxation issues and plans to develop local government communications to address these concerns with the Province

Presentation material titled “Supporting Small Business Through Provincial Tax Reform” is retained with the February 14, 2018 Finance and Intergovernment Committee agenda.

5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF

5.1 School Tax Implementations for Small Businesses Report dated February 7, 2018 from Dean Rear, Deputy Corporate Financial Officer/Director, Financial Planning and Operations, Financial Services, providing the analysis of the impact of provincial school tax on small business in the region, and requesting that the MVRD Board write a letter to the Province seeking a change in school tax rates setting variable non-residential rates by school district, with lower rates in areas with higher assessed values to achieve an equitable alignment of non-residential school tax revenue and school expenditures across school districts. John Merkley, Partner, Cascadia Partners, and Dean Rear, Deputy Corporate Financial Officer/Director, Financial Planning and Operations, Financial Services, provided members with a presentation on school tax implementations for small business highlighting objectives, an overview of small business in Metro



Vancouver, single school tax rate for all non-residential properties in BC, business tax ratios by region, summary of small business scenarios, and recommendations. Presentation material titled “School Tax Implications for Small Business in Metro Vancouver” is retained with the February 14, 2018 Finance and Intergovernment Committee agenda. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the MVRD Board: a) Receive for information the report dated February 7, 2018, titled “Provincial

School Tax implications for Small Business”; and b) Write a letter to the Province of British Columbia requesting that it set variable

non-residential school tax rates by school district, with lower rates in areas with higher assessed values, as is done currently for residential school tax rates, to achieve an equitable alignment of non-residential school tax revenue and school expenditures across school districts.

CARRIED Agenda Varied The order of the agenda was varied to consider a resolution to close meeting at this point. 9. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING It was MOVED and SECONDED

That the Finance and Intergovernment Committee close its regular meeting scheduled for February 14, 2018 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (e) and (g) as follows: “90 (1) A part of the meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being

considered relates to or is one or more of the following: (e) the acquisition, disposition or expropriation of land or improvements,

if the board or committee considers that disclosure could reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the regional district; and

(g) litigation or potential litigation affecting the regional district.” CARRIED

Adjournment The Finance and Intergovernment Committee adjourned its regular meeting of February 14, 2018 at 1:56 p.m. to convene a closed meeting. Reconvene The Finance and Intergovernment Committee reconvened its regular meeting of February 14, 2018 at 2:53 p.m. with the same members being in attendance. Agenda Order Resumed The order of the agenda resumed with Item 5.2 being before the Committee at this point.



5.2 2018 Finance and Intergovernment Committee Priorities and Work Plan Report dated February 6, 2018 from Carol Mason, Commissioner/Chief Administrative Officer, providing the Finance and Intergovernment Committee with the priorities and work plan for the year 2018. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Finance and Intergovernment Committee endorse the work plan as presented in the report dated February 6, 2018 titled “2018 Finance and Intergovernment Committee Priorities and Work Plan”.

CARRIED

5.3 Authorization to Attend 2018 Standing Committee Events Report dated February 2, 2018 from Chris Plagnol, Corporate Officer, seeking the Committee’s approval of the 2018 events and conferences, that were identified as part of the board approved budget, authorizing remuneration for those members approved to attend each event. Main Motion It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Finance and Intergovernment Committee approve attendance at the following events within the 2018 Leadership and Engagement program budget: • Aboriginal Relations Seminar 2018 • American Planning Association National Planning Conference 2018 • American Water Works Association Annual 2018 Conference and Exposition • BioCycle West Coast Conference 2018 • Canadian Housing and Renewal Association Congress 2018 • City Age 2018: Build the Future • Electric Vehicle Roadmap Conference 2018 • Globe Forum 2018 • Housing Central Conference 2018 • ICLEI World Congress 2018 • International Economic Development Council 2018 Annual Conference • Quality Urban Energy Systems of Tomorrow QUEST 2018 Conference • Rail-Volution 2018 • Recycling Council of British Columbia 2018 Conference and Trade Show • Solid Waste Association of North America Wastecon Conference 2018 • Special Park Districts Forum 2018 • Water Environment Federation Technical Exhibition and Conference 2018

Members considered a request to add the National Recreation and Parks Association 2018 Annual Conference in Indianapolis to the list of approved events.



Amendment to the Main Motion It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Finance and Intergovernment amend the Main Motion by adding to the bulleted list, in alphabetical order, “National Recreation and Parks Association 2018 Annual Conference”.

CARRIED Members considered a request to send an additional representative to Globe Forum 2018 who is not a member of the Climate Action Committee.

Amendment to the Main Motion It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Finance and Intergovernment amend the Main Motion, after “Globe Forum 2018”, by adding the Phrase “(including 1 additional attendee for a total of 3)”.

CARRIED Question on the Main Motion as Amended Question was then called on the Main Motion as amended and it was

CARRIED The Main Motion as amended now reads as follows: “That the Finance and Intergovernment Committee approve attendance at the following events within the 2018 Leadership and Engagement program budget: • Aboriginal Relations Seminar 2018 • American Planning Association National Planning Conference 2018 • American Water Works Association Annual 2018 Conference and Exposition • BioCycle West Coast Conference 2018 • Canadian Housing and Renewal Association Congress 2018 • City Age 2018: Build the Future • Electric Vehicle Roadmap Conference 2018 • Globe Forum 2018 (including 1 additional attendee for a total of 3) • Housing Central Conference 2018 • ICLEI World Congress 2018 • International Economic Development Council 2018 Annual Conference • Quality Urban Energy Systems of Tomorrow QUEST 2018 Conference • National Recreation and Parks Association 2018 Annual Conference • Rail-Volution 2018 • Recycling Council of British Columbia 2018 Conference and Trade Show • Solid Waste Association of North America Wastecon Conference 2018 • Special Park Districts Forum 2018 • Water Environment Federation Technical Exhibition and Conference 2018”



5.4 Authorization to Attend 2018 International Events Report dated February 6, 2018 from Heather Schoemaker, General Manager, External Relations, seeking Committee approval for attendance and remuneration of board members to attend events that are within the mandate of Metro Vancouver’s international engagement objectives and to make recommendations to the Board Chair. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Finance and Intergovernment Committee approves attendance at the following international events within the 2018 Leadership and Engagement program budget: • United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG) - World Council 2018 • ICLEI Resilient Cities 2018 • ICLEI World Congress 2018 • 2018 Study Tour - Knowledge sharing and collaboration - Council of Mayors,

South East Queensland, Australia • Additional international conferences identified by the Chair that align with

the priorities of the Leadership and Engagement Program CARRIED

5.5 Regional Prosperity Initiative (RPI) Update

Report dated February 6, 2018 from Heather Schoemaker, General Manager and Ann Rowan, Collaboration Initiatives Manager, External Relations, providing an update on the progress of the Regional Prosperity Initiative. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the MVRD Board receive for information the report dated February 6, 2018 titled “Regional Prosperity Initiative Update”.

CARRIED

5.6 Fraser Basin Council - Contribution Agreement Report dated February 6, 2018 from Neal Carley, General Manager, Parks, Planning and Environment, seeking MVRD Board approval of a three-year contribution agreement with the Fraser Basin Council, in the amount of $300,000 annually, for the term commencing January 1, 2018 and ending December 31, 2020. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the MVRD Board approve a three-year Contribution Agreement with the Fraser Basin Council for an annual amount of $300,000 for the term January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2020, as presented in the report dated February 6, 2018, titled “Fraser Basin Council – Contribution Agreement”.

CARRIED



5.7 Metro Vancouver’s 2017 Zero Waste Conference Report dated February 2, 2018 from Heather Schoemaker, General Manager, External Relations, providing an overview of Metro Vancouver’s Seventh Annual Zero Waste Conference - “A Future without Waste: A Circular Economy within Reach” held on Wednesday, November 1, 2017 at the Vancouver Convention Centre. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Finance and Intergovernment Committee receive for information the report dated February 2, 2018 and titled “Metro Vancouver’s 2017 Zero Waste Conference”.

CARRIED

5.8 National Zero Waste Council 2017 Update Report dated February 1, 2018 from Heather Schoemaker, General Manager and Ann Rowan, Manager, Collaboration Initiatives, External Relations, providing an update on the 2017 activities and initiatives of the National Zero Waste Council. It was MOVED and SECONDED That the MVRD Board receive for information the report dated February 1, 2018 titled “National Zero Waste Council 2017 Update”.

CARRIED

6. INFORMATION ITEMS No items presented.

7. OTHER BUSINESS

No items presented. 8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM DELEGATIONS

No items presented. 9. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING

This item was previously considered.



10. ADJOURNMENT/CONCLUSION That the Finance and Intergovernment Committee conclude its regular meeting of February 14, 2018.

CARRIED (Time: 3:10 p.m.)

____________________________ ____________________________ Janis Knaupp, Raymond Louie, Chair Legislative Services Coordinator 24558404 FINAL


24559846

To: Finance and Intergovernment Committee From: Raymond Kan, Senior Regional Planner, Parks, Planning and Environment Date: March 5, 2018 Meeting Date: March 16, 2018 Subject: TransLink Application for Scope Change to Approved October 2017 Application for

Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund RECOMMENDATION That the MVRD Board approve a scope change to TransLink’s 2017 application for Federal Gas Tax funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund, replacing seven 40-foot hybrid buses to be purchased in 2019 with five 60-foot hybrid buses, as described in the report dated March 5, 2018, titled “TransLink Application for Scope Change to Approved October 2017 Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund”. PURPOSE To present for MVRD Board consideration TransLink’s request for a scope change to the 2019 conventional 40-foot hybrid bus expansion under Metro Vancouver’s Federal Gas Tax Fund Expenditures Policy (GVRF Policy). BACKGROUND At its meeting on October 27, 2017, the MVRD Board approved seven TransLink projects for federal gas tax funding from the GVRF. Project #2 comprised seven 40-foot hybrid buses as part of the transit vehicle expansion commitment set out in the 2017 Phase one Investment Plan (please refer to Attachment 1). TransLink has requested approval from the MVRD Board to obtain a scope change to the bus purchase (Attachment 2). This report is being brought forward to consider TransLink’s scope change request. REQUEST FOR SCOPE CHANGE TO APPROVED 2017 TRANSLINK APPLICATION TransLink is seeking approval for a scope change to one project previously approved as part of the October 2017 application. The Board approved $7.29 million in GVRF funding towards the purchase of seven 40-foot hybrid buses for 2019 expansion. The proposed scope change is to procure five 60-foot hybrid buses in lieu of the seven 40-foot hybrid buses for the same amount of GVRF funding of $7.29 million – there is no financial implication to the proposed scope change. As part of the Phase One Investment Plan, TransLink is implementing four B-Line routes starting in 2019 (Marine Drive (North Shore), 41st Avenue (Vancouver), Lougheed Highway (Pitt Meadows, Maple Ridge, Port Coquitlam, Coquitlam), and Fraser Highway (Langley City, Surrey). The service planning for these four B-Line routes have evolved since the 2017 GVRF Application. TransLink now wants to deploy 86 60-foot buses on these routes. A shortfall of five 60-foot buses remains. The scope change would fill the fleet gap.

5.1


TransLink Application for Scope Change to Approved October 2017 Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund

Finance and Intergovernment Committee Regular Meeting Date: March 16, 2018 Page 2 of 6

METRO VANCOUVER STAFF ANALYSIS A summary of staff’s analysis is presented below. Application Completeness and Screening Criteria. TransLink’s application meets the application information requirements and screening criteria. Integrated Criteria Evaluation. According to TransLink, each 60-foot hybrid bus emits about 20% less greenhouse gases, nitrogen oxides, and particulates than an equivalent 40-foot diesel bus on a seated passenger-km basis. TransLink is encouraged to improve their emissions methodologies so as to provide more detailed apples-to-apples comparisons (e.g. 60-foot hybrid compared to 40-foot hybrid). In the aggregate, the application is consistent and supportive of the MVRD Board’s policies on regional growth management, air quality, and climate protection, as well as the Board’s interest in economic prosperity. It should be noted that TransLink will be completing a Low Carbon Fleet Strategy in March 2018 that will guide future transit vehicle procurement decisions (TransLink will consult with key stakeholders, including Metro Vancouver, at that time). Summary of Evaluation The application was evaluated in against a list of integrated criteria as per the GVRF Policy.

Criterion Description MV Staff Assessment Screening Criteria

Eligible Project Category

Local roads and bridges, including active transportation, OR public transit

Meets criterion

Eligible Expenses As set out in the 2014 Administrative Agreement.

Meets criterion

Plan Consistency Projects must be consistent with TransLink’s existing Capital Plan and future 10-Year Investment Plan, as well as the Mayors’ Council Transportation and Transit Plan, Metro 2040: Shaping our Future, and the Regional Transportation Strategy.

Meets criterion

Corporate Policies Projects must be consistent with applicable TransLink policies such as sustainability, environmental responsibility, emissions, and infrastructure.

Meets criterion

Integrated Criteria: Regional Growth Strategy Supports the Regional Growth Strategy

The degree to which the project assists in achieving the five goals in Metro 2040.

Excellent.

Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas

Where applicable, the project is located in, or demonstrates tangible benefits to, the overall performance of Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas.

Good: subject to performance monitoring as buses are deployed

Integrated Criteria: Transportation Performance




Criterion Description MV Staff Assessment Headline Targets Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle

kilometres travelled and/or walk/cycle/transit mode share.


Other Transportation Outcomes

Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership, and/or transportation safety for the duration of the project.


Project Type Demonstrated value of the project type. Good: subject to performance monitoring as buses are deployed

Integrated Criteria: Regional Environmental Objectives Supports the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan

Contributes to the achievement of one or more goals in the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan.

Good

Measurable Beneficial Effects

Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on greenhouse gas and common air contaminant emissions from on-road transportation sources for the duration of the project.


Integrated Criteria: Economic Development Supports Regional Prosperity

Contributes to a regional transportation system that moves people and goods and aligns with regional prosperity.

Good


Tangible beneficial effects on the movement of people and/or goods for the duration of the project.


PREVIOUS GVRF APPLICATIONS Below is a summary of previous gas tax fund approvals by the MVRD Board. September 23, 2016 – the MVRD Board approved $127.182 million in GVRF funds to TransLink for nine projects comprising replacement transit fleet vehicles only (84 community shuttles, 75 HandyDART vehicles, and 238 conventional buses). These projects were consistent with TransLink’s 2014 Base Plan and Mayors’ Council Transportation and Transit Plan. November 23, 2016 – the TransLink Board and Mayors’ Council on Regional Transportation approved the 2017-2026 Investment Plan – Phase One of the 10-year Vision (Phase One Investment Plan), which includes service expansion.




April 28, 2017 – the MVRD Board approved $121.280 million in GVRF funds to TransLink for six projects comprising expansion transit fleet vehicles, four electric battery buses for a pilot program, and equipment for deferred retirement of transit vehicles. July 28, 2017 – the MVRD Board approved scope changes and $24.210 million in additional GVRF funds to TransLink for three projects approved in 2016. The scope changes involved the purchase of conventional CNG and hybrid buses, rather than conventional diesel buses. October 27, 2017 – the MVRD Board approved $121.150 million in GVRF funds to TransLink for seven projects comprising expansion and replacement transit vehicles. As of December 31, 2017, the balance in the GVRF was $168.491 million. FEDERAL GAS TAX ADMINISTRATIVE AGREEMENT The renewed Administrative Agreement on Federal Gas Tax Fund in British Columbia came into effect in April 2014. The Agreement sets out the roles and responsibilities of the federal government, provincial government, and UBCM for the administration of the Federal Gas Tax Fund. The Agreement also sets out the following:

• The GVRF pools 95% of the MVRD and its member municipalities’ per-capital allocation of federal gas tax funds to support regional transportation projects proposed for funding by TransLink.

• The MVRD Board must approve all eligible projects proposed by TransLink for funding. • The MVRD must notify UBCM of the eligible projects that it has approved for funding, after

which the UBCM may provide funding to TransLink. • In order to receive GVRF funding, TransLink must sign a Funding Agreement with UBCM. • The remaining 5% of federal gas tax funds is allocated among local governments in Metro

Vancouver through the Community Works Fund. • Requests for new projects, amendments to the scope of prior approved projects, and use of

approved but unspent funds for other projects must receive approval from the MVRD Board. On May 27, 2016, the MVRD Board adopted the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund Policy, which establishes the process and criteria for approving expenditures from the GVRF for regional transportation projects proposed by TransLink. The Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM) holds the GVRF monies in trust, and transfers the requested amount of funds to TransLink only upon notification by the MVRD Board of its approval. The GVRF Policy sets out the application process, information requirements, and evaluation criteria to respond to TransLink’s request for GVRF funding. Under the Policy, the MVRD Board will issue a call for proposals on an annual basis by April 1. The deadline for TransLink to submit final proposals is September 1. The MVRD Board makes its decisions by November 30.




ALTERNATIVES 1. That the MVRD Board approve a scope change to TransLink’s 2017 application for Federal Gas

Tax funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund, replacing seven 40-foot hybrid buses to be purchased in 2019 with five 60-foot hybrid buses, as described in the report dated March 5, 2018, titled “TransLink Application for Scope Change to Approved October 2017 Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund”.

2. That the MVRD Board endorse in principle the report dated March 5, 2018, titled “TransLink Application for Scope Change to Approved October 2017 Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding from the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund” and refer it to the Mayors’ Council on Regional Transportation for comment prior to final consideration by the MVRD Board.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS If the MVRD Board approves alternative one, the UBCM will be notified within 7 business days of the Board’s decision. There is no net financial impact of the proposed scope change as the amount requested from the GVRF remains the same at $7.29 million, and the expenditure was already approved by the Board. The UBCM currently holds in a special account $168.491, as of December 31, 2017, available for eligible regional transportation projects. If the MVRD Board approves alternative two, the Metro Vancouver report and recommendations, along with the TransLink application, would be forwarded to the Mayors’ council for comment prior to final consideration by the Board. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION TransLink is seeking approval for a scope change to one project previously approved as part of the October 2017 GVRF application. The Board approved $7.29 million in GVRF funding towards the purchase of seven 40-foot hybrid buses for 2019 expansion. The proposed scope change is to procure five 60-foot hybrid buses in lieu of the seven 40-foot hybrid buses for the same amount of GVRF funding of $7.29 million – there is no financial implication to the proposed scope change. The 60-foot hybrid buses will be part of a fleet of 60-foot buses serving four new B-Line routes as part of the Phase One Investment Plan implementation. TransLink’s application is consistent and supportive of the MVRD Board’s established policies on regional growth management, air quality management, and climate protection. Each 60-foot hybrid bus emits about 20% less greenhouse gases, nitrogen oxides, and particulates than an equivalent 40-foot diesel bus on a seated passenger-km basis. The four new B-Line routes serve high demand and rapidly developing corridors in the region that connect Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas (Marine Drive in the North Shore; 41st Avenue in Vancouver; Lougheed Highway connecting Pitt Meadows, Maple Ridge, Port Coquitlam, and Coquitlam, and Fraser Highway connecting Langley City and Surrey. With these considerations, staff recommend support for the scope change as proposed and presented under alternative one.




Attachments (Doc #24639163) 1. Projects in Approved October 2017 Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding 2. Amendment to 2019 Fleet Expansion and Modernization for Federal Gas Tax Funding – Scope

Change for 2019 Conventional 40-foot Bus Expansion, dated February 21, 2018 24559846


Projects in Approved October 2017 Application for Federal Gas Tax Funding

Project Details Total Cost

($ millions) Prior

Approved GVRF Funding

($ millions)

GVRF Funding Request

($ millions) 1. 2019 Conventional Bus Purchases

(double decker) 5 diesel buses for expansion

6.300 0 5.670

2. 2019 Conventional Bus Purchases (40’)

7 hybrid buses for expansion

8.100 0 7.290

3. 2019 Conventional Bus Purchases (60’)

42 hybrid buses for expansion

67.600 0 60.840

4. 2019 HandyDART Vehicle Purchases 10 vehicles for expansion

1.500 0 1.350

5. 2019 Conventional Bus Purchases (double decker)

27 diesel buses for modernization

33.300 0 30.000

6. 2019 HandyDART Vehicle Purchases 40 gasoline vehicles for modernization

5.750 0 5.200

7. 2019 Community Shuttles Purchases 49 stepless gasoline vehicles for modernization

12.000 0 10.800

Total 180 vehicles 134.550 0 121.150

ATTACHMENT 1


1

To: Carol Mason, Chief Administrative Officer, Metro Vancouver

From: Rob Malli, Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President, Finance and Corporate Services, TransLink Geoff Cross, Vice President, Transportation Planning and Policy, TransLink

Date: February 21, 2018

Subject: Amendment to 2019 Fleet Expansion and Modernization for Federal Gas Tax Funding – Scope Change for 2019 Conventional 40-foot Bus Expansion

PURPOSE

TransLink is requesting the Metro Vancouver Regional District (Metro Vancouver) approve a scope change for a project previously approved for Federal Gas Tax Funds (FGTF) from Greater Vancouver Regional Fund (GVRF) by the Metro Vancouver Board on October 27, 2017. TransLink requests that Metro Vancouver approve the purchase of five 60-foot hybrid buses in lieu of seven 40-foot hybrid buses. Beyond the change in the number and size of the vehicles, there are no changes to propulsion type and the completion timeline. In addition, this amendment does not have any funding implications.

BACKGROUND

In the past, B-Lines were operated with a mix of 40-foot and 60-foot buses depending on the route. Revised B-Line planning recommends using a fleet of 60-foot buses to support a uniform fleet, increase vehicle capacity, reduce GHG emissions per passenger, and improve overall customer experience. For these reasons, TransLink is requesting a scope change to the 2019 Conventional 40-foot Bus Expansion project to expand the 60-foot bus fleet. This amendment will enable procurement to stay on schedule in 2018, and for these buses to be in service as early as 2019 to deliver the new B-Lines identified in the 2017-2026 Investment Plan approved in July 2017 (2017 Investment Plan).

Information about GVRF usage and active projects is included in Appendix A.

PROPOSED SCOPE CHANGE

Reason for Scope Change Since the approval of GVRF application in October 2017 TransLink has refined the service planning for four new B-Lines to be implemented in Phase One of the 10-Year Vision. TransLink is planning on operating all B-Lines with 60-foot buses to allow for branding of B-Lines and operational considerations with a consistent fleet. A total of 86 60-foot buses are needed to operate the new B-Lines, but only 70 buses are available, leaving a short fall of 16 buses (see Table 1).

ATTACHMENT 2


2

Table 1: Shortfall of 60-foot Buses for B-Line services

B-Line # of 60-foot Buses Required Fleet # of 60-foot

Buses Available

New B-Lines (Main-Marine, Lougheed, Fraser Hwy, 41st Ave)

86

Existing Route 43 Fleet (Route 43 to be replaced by B-Line) 17

Phase One Expansion (funded by previous GVRF applications)

53

TOTAL REQUIRED 86 TOTAL AVAILABLE 70

By redeploying buses to different routes, TransLink is able to recoup 11 of the 16 additional 60-foot buses needed. Proposed Scope Change To fill the remaining five 60-footer buses needed to have uniform 60-footer B-Line fleet, TransLink is requesting converting procurement of seven 40-foot buses to five 60-foot buses via amendment to the 2017 GVRF application approved in October 2017. Detailed service planning has determined these seven 40-foot hybrid buses are no longer required. There is no additional request in GVRF funding. This change will bring the total request for 60-foot hybrid buses planned for expansion service in 2019 to 58 buses. Table 2: Summary of Projects, Total Costs, and Gas Tax Funding Request

Projects Scope

($millions)

Total Project Budget

Requested Gas Tax Funding

Oct 2017 Application

2019 Conventional 40-ft Bus Purchase – Expansion 7 40-foot hybrid bus $8.100 $7.290

Proposed Scope Change

2019 Conventional 60-foot Bus Purchase – Additional Expansion 5 60-foot hybrid bus $8.100 $7.290

Propulsion This proposed scope change does not change the propulsion as hybrid buses are currently the best option for reducing emissions for the 40-foot and 60-foot fleet. Service Expansion and Deployment of Proposed Projects The additional 60-foot buses will be deployed along the new B-Lines slated to begin service in 2019.


3

Table 3. Phase One Investment Plan expansion vehicles and proposed service expansion

Project Type

# of Expansion Vehicles Service Expansion Service Areas

for 2019 Vehicles Funded

to Date Current

Application New

Expansion Total

Expansion with 2019 Vehicles

Expansion Total

Conventional 60-ft Bus Purchase –Expansion

53 5 58 148,000

annual service hours

148,000 annual service hours

New B-Lines (Fraser Hwy; Marine Dr;

Lougheed; 41st Ave)

BENEFITS Increasing Capacity 60-foot buses have more capacity than 40-foot buses, which will help alleviate overcrowding and improve customer experience, especially for customers traveling longer distances. Additionally, the larger capacity, additional set of doors, and all-door boarding will allow for faster boarding and alighting on the B-Lines, thereby decreasing dwell time and improving B-Line service reliability. Emissions Reduction Increasing the hybrid bus fleet supports the 10-Year Vision’s goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions1 and Metro Vancouver’s Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan (IAQGGMP) and Metro 2040 air quality goals. 2 Table 4a: GHG Emission Reductions per Seated Passenger

GHG Emissions

(g/km) Seated Capacity

(passengers) GHG Emissions per passenger

(g/km) Reduction

40' Diesel 1,633 36 45.4 60' Hybrid 1,665 46 36.2 20%

Table 4b: NOx Emission Reductions per Seated Passenger

NOx Emissions (g/km)

Seated Capacity (passengers)

NOx Emissions per passenger

(g/km) Reduction

40' Diesel 0.361 36 0.01004 60' Hybrid 0.369 46 0.00801 20%

1 To achieve this goal, TransLink has also embarked on a Low Carbon Fleet Strategy, which will be completed in March 2018. 2 IAQGGMP has the goals of protecting public health and the environment, improving air quality and reducing the contribution of global climate change. Metro 2040 goals include reducing energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions while improving air quality.


4

Table 4c: Particulate Matter Reductions per Seated Passenger

PM Emissions (g/km) Vehicle Passenger

PM Emissions per passenger

(g/km ) Reduction

40' Diesel 0.001 36 0.00003 60' Hybrid 0.001 46 0.00002 22%

RISKS If a scope change is not approved in time, TransLink would determine where in the transit system operating 40-foot conventional buses in lieu of 60-foot articulated buses would have the least negative impact. Impacts include: (1) increased crowding and pass-ups from providing lower capacity; (2) potential to incur increased operating costs if increased capacity must be provided with additional frequency; (3) customer confusion when different vehicle types are serving the same route; (4) erosion of the B-line brand and customer confusion if some buses operating on B-Line routes are not consistent with the livery of the B-Line service brand; (5) operational inefficiencies when different types of fleet are deployed on the same route. CONCLUSION Approving this application amendment will allow TransLink to procure the vehicles necessary to expand transit service, which in turn supports Metro Vancouver’s Metro 2040 and IAQGGMP environmental and land use goals.


5

Appendix A GVRF Usage The table below displays the total funding TransLink has received since the FGTF program began in 2005. TransLink has received $1,164.728 million in funding to expand and modernize the transit network. The last application made by TransLink for GVRF funding was approved in October 2017 for an additional $121.150 million for fleet expansion and replacement. Interest earned on funds received, which must be used for approved FGTF projects, totalled $33.8 million at December 31, 2017. Currently, there is $168.491 million in funds available to TransLink. Metro Vancouver has specified that their portion of GVRF funding go to public transportation, with a small amount going to the Community Works Fund, in the renewed program. A summary of the funds and usage is provided below:

Greater Vancouver Regional Fund (as of December 31, 2017) In millions

Approved GVRF Funds $1,164.728 Interest earned on funds received 33.760 Unapproved GVRF Funds 149.219

Total Gas Tax Funds $1,347.707 Less

Funds applied to completed projects $(349.053) 1Approved funds for active projects (815.675) Interest allocated to completed projects (14.488)

Funds Available for use $168.491

1. See table of active projects with GVRF funding below. Excludes interest allocated to active projects

The original application approved in October 2017 is based on projects approved as part of TransLink’s 2017 Investment Plan, specifically to procure fleet to introduce new B-Lines to the region indicated in the Mayors’ Council 10-Year Vision (10-Year Vision). Appendix B includes a summary of TransLink’s strategic plan, the 2017 Investment Plan, including the projects funded or anticipated to be funded by the GVRF, as well as other revenue sources being used to fund the plan. Appendix C provides a short description of each line item in Appendix B. Active Projects Table 5 below shows the status of active projects with GVRF funding. The total forecasted project cost for active projects is $955.261 million, with $815.686 million in FGTF funds approved for these projects. At December 31, 2017, project costs totalled $431.392 million, with $335.770 million in FGTF funds spent.


6

Table 5: Active projects as at December 31, 2017

Note: Approved funding includes interests allocated to active project

Active Projects With GVRF Funding (Dollar amounts in millions) # Vehicles

Forecast Final Cost

Approved Funding

Costs to Date

Funds Spent

Unspent Funds

Expo Line Propulsion Power System Upgrade N/A 57.120 42.000 57.120 42.000 0.000 2nd SeaBus Replacement 1 20.045 19.697 20.045 19.234 0.463 SkyTrain Mark I Vehicle Refurbishment N/A 32.320 24.360 17.866 10.958 13.402 2014 Community Shuttles 49 7.405 7.310 7.405 7.310 (0.000) 2014 Conventional Bus 45 24.889 24.391 24.889 24.391 (0.000) Hamilton Transit Centre N/A 134.870 84.978 134.870 84.978 - 2013 HandyDART Vehicles 31 3.600 3.535 3.600 3.535 0.000 2014 HandyDART Vehicles 65 7.582 7.523 7.582 7.523 0.000 2015 HandyDART Vehicles 55 6.758 5.370 6.758 5.370 - Defective Community Shuttle Vehicles Replacement 62 9.460 9.350 9.460 9.350 - 2015 Conventional Bus Replacement 72 55.517 54.800 55.477 53.761 1.039 2016 Conventional Bus Replacement - 40' 45 25.309 24.964 25.346 24.964 0.000 2016 Conventional Bus Replacement - 60' 26 33.207 25.360 31.702 25.360 0.000 2017 Conventional Bus 94 102.990 94.285 - - 94.285 Metrotown - Trolley Overhead Rectifier Replacement N/A 5.773 4.725 0.365 0.350 4.375 Automated Train Control Equipment Replacement N/A 4.742 4.500 3.184 3.095 1.405 Surrey Transit Centre - CNG Facility Retrofit N/A 16.211 4.000 12.664 4.000 - 2016 Additional Conventional Bus Replacements - 40' 40 36.118 32.300 0.911 - 32.300 2017 Conventional Bus - Additional funding 12 12.780 11.700 - - 11.700 2015 Community Shuttle Vehicle Replacement 24 3.852 4.674 3.799 3.516 1.158 2016 Community Shuttle Vehicle Replacement 20 3.529 3.560 3.108 2.926 0.634 2017 Community Shuttle Vehicle Replacement 20 3.897 3.500 3.344 3.137 0.363 2018 Community Shuttle Vehicle Replacement 20 4.100 3.830 - - 3.830 2017 HandyDART Vehicle Replacement 35 4.840 5.013 1.662 - 5.013 2018 HandyDART vehicle Replacement 40 5.514 5.605 - - 5.605 2018 Conventional Bus Replacement 92 69.700 61.925 - - 61.925 Conventional Bus Purchases - 40' 94 94.500 85.584 0.008 - 85.584 Conventional Bus Purchases - 60' 11 17.000 17.316 - - 17.316 Community Shuttle Vehicle Purchases 12 2.240 3.175 - - 3.175 HandyDART vehicle Purcahses 13 1.900 2.193 - - 2.193 Electric Bus Pilot 4 9.793 6.892 0.013 0.010 6.882 Equipment for Deferred Retirement Program N/A 3.150 6.120 0.213 - 6.120 2019 Conventional Bus Expansion - double decker 5 6.300 5.670 - - 5.670 2019 Conventional Bus Expansion - 40' hybrid 7 8.100 7.290 - - 7.290 2019 Conventional Bus Expansion - 60' hybrid 42 67.600 60.840 - - 60.840 2019 HandyDART Vehicle Purchase – Expansion 10 1.500 1.350 - - 1.350 2019 Double Decker Bus Purchase – Replacement 27 33.300 30.000 - - 30.000 2019 HandyDART Vehicle Purchase – Replacement 40 5.750 5.200 - - 5.200 2019 Community Shuttle Purchase – Replacement 49 12.000 10.800 - - 10.800 Total 1,162 955.261 815.686 431.392 335.770 479.916


7

Appendix B

TransLink 2017 Investment Plan Capital Program and Funding Sources


8

Appendix C

Descriptions of items in the Capital Program

TransLink 2017-2026 Investment Plan Project Summary Project Descriptions Bus Equipment A wide variety of equipment required to maintain and manage TransLink’s

systems related to the bus network. Examples include fuel delivery system, scheduling, warehouse and yard management systems.

Facilities Includes improvement projects such as garage roof replacements, hoist replacements; and other projects related to mechanical and civil retrofits to facilities. Also includes PowerSmart upgrades partially funded by BC Hydro.

Infrastructure Depots Includes the “Hamilton Transit Centre” and the “Surrey Transit Centre CNG

Retrofit”. Exchanges/Bus loops Various repairs and replacements to keep the exchanges/bus loops in a state of

good repair. For example, replacement of lighting and security equipment, shelters and crew washroom facilities. Also includes projects related to priority B-Line corridors.

Other Includes general projects related to bus infrastructure such as maintenance and rehabilitation of SeaBus Infrastructure and other facilities and paving replacement.

Trolley Overhead (TOH) Includes projects related to maintenance of infrastructure related to the trolley buses such as cables, poles and rectifier buildings and equipment.

Technology Includes the “Trapeze DOMS Product Migration Program” as well as other projects related to software modernization and replacement.

Non-Revenue Vehicles Includes modernization of non-revenue generating vehicles used by Transit supervisors, security and maintenance staff.

Revenue Vehicles Conventional Buses Fleet expansion and modernization of conventional buses to support

maintenance of the transit system and realize benefits such as reduced congestion and emissions.

Community Shuttle Fleet expansion and modernization of community shuttle vehicles to support maintenance of the transit system and realize benefits such as reduced congestion and emissions.

HandyDART Fleet expansion and modernization of HandyDART vehicles to support maintenance of the transit system and provide mobility to those with accessibility issues.

SeaBus Procurement of one additional SeaBus vessel, retrofit of an older SeaBus vessel and projects related to ensuring TransLink continues to meet Transport Canada safety standards and also to reduce maintenance and repair costs associated with ageing assets.

Corporate Equipment A wide variety of equipment such as Ad Panels and radios for Transit Police. Facilities Includes renovation and upgrades to offices and related facilities.


9

TransLink 2017-2026 Investment Plan Project Summary Project Descriptions Infrastructure

Bridges Includes Pattullo Bridge Rehabilitation Construction Depots Infrastructure being built at the UBC Bus Terminal Other Includes various general projects related to corporate infrastructure such as

wayfinding system integration and efficiency improvement.

Major Construction Projects Includes large scale projects related to the Evergreen Line as they affect TransLink as a whole.

Technology Includes projects related to upgrades of various IT applications and systems, security programs, data warehousing etc.

Vehicles Non-Revenue Includes projects related to non-revenue generating vehicles such as TransLink Police cars and administration vehicles.

Rail Equipment A wide variety of equipment required to maintain and manage the SkyTrain

lines. Examples include power supply installations, automatic train control equipment, station equipment, passenger address systems etc.

Facilities Includes projects related to maintaining and upgrading the operations maintenance and control centre such as space modernization, safety upgrades, yard track reconditioning and seismic upgrades.

Infrastructure Other Includes other rail infrastructure projects related to station escalator

replacements, upgrades of guideway and running rail infrastructure, seismic upgrades, smart card/faregates installation and South of Fraser Rapid Transit project readiness.

Stations Includes projects related to upgrading SkyTrain stations consisting of station upgrades such as the Burrard, Commercial Broadway, Metrotown and Joyce Collingwood stations as well as minor equipment upgrades such as roof replacements to ensure assets are maintained in a state of good repair.

Wayside Power Propulsion Includes projects related to the propulsion power system for SkyTrain. Technology Includes projects related to the upgrade of various software and systems

related to the smooth running of the train system. Non-Revenue Vehicles Includes projects related to non-revenue generating vehicles used by SkyTrain

staff to respond to emergency and routine maintenance. Revenue Vehicles

Canada Line Includes projects related to fleet expansion of the Canada Line cars. SkyTrain Includes acquisition of additional SkyTrain cars for Expo and Millennium Line

fleet expansion, the refurbishment, mid-life overhaul or replacement of older SkyTrain cars.

WCE Includes fleet expansion of the West Coast Express cars and mid-life overhaul of five older cars.

Roads and Bridges Infrastructure

Bikes Includes projects related to the TransLink owned bicycle infrastructure. Bridges Includes replacement and rehabilitation of the Pattullo Bridge, rehabilitation of


10

TransLink 2017-2026 Investment Plan Project Summary Project Descriptions

the Knight Street Bridge as well as other projects related to the Golden Ears Bridge and the Westham Island Bridge.

Roads Network Infrastructure

Bike Infrastructure Includes TransLink’s contribution to bicycle infrastructure programs for municipal owned pathways.

MRN Consists of TransLink’s contributions to municipalities for rehabilitation of the Major Road Network (MRN).

MRNB pavement rehab and Bicycle Infrastructure Capital Cost Sharing Program

Consists of projects in three major categories: 1) TransLink’s contribution to the MRN Pavement rehabilitation, 2) Minor capital funding to complete and improve as well as encourage construction of more bicycle routes and remove existing barriers to cyclists, and 3) Funding for bicycle infrastructure improvements across the region

Transit Priority Implementation Program

Includes projects related to the Transit Priority Implementation Program.


11

Appendix D

Project Applications for the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund


12

APPLICATION FOR FUNDING FROM THE GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL FUND

FOR FEDERAL GAS TAX FUNDS

Project 2 2019 Conventional 60-ft Bus Purchase – Additional Expansion (Ref# 182132)


13

B. MAYORS’ COUNCIL TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT PLAN Please describe how the project fits within, and provides support to, the Mayors’ Council Transportation and Transit Plan.

☐ Maintain what is needed in a state of good repair

☐ Invest in the road network to improve safety, local access and goods movement

☒ Expand our transit system to increase ridership in high demand areas and provide basic coverage in low-demand neighbourhoods

☐ Develop safe and convenient walking connections to transit and pursue early investments to complete the bikeway network, making it possible for more people to travel by these healthy, low cost, and emission-free modes

☐ Manage our transportation system more effectively with safety and passenger comfort improvements, new personalized incentive programs, advanced technology and infrastructure management solutions, efficient and fair mobility pricing, and better parking management

☐ Partner to make it happen with explicit implementation agreements and processes that support concurrent decisions on land-use and transportation investments, stable and sufficient long-term funding solutions, and better monitoring of progress

The Mayors’ Council 10‐Year Vision (10‐Year Vision) on regional transportation outlines a long‐term, region‐wide, integrated, multi‐modal transportation vision to fight congestion, reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to keep a fast‐growing gateway economy, of almost 2.5 million residents, moving. The 10‐Year Vision is built on 3 key strategies to achieve necessary improvements: invest in the most urgent and effective investments, manage the system more effectively and partner to ensure that supportive conditions are in place for these investments to succeed. Following adoption by the Mayors’ Council, in June 2014, the 10‐Year Vision was subsequently endorsed by the TransLink Board, as the implementation blueprint for the Regional Transportation Strategy (RTS). The 10‐Year Vision includes a package of investments aimed at addressing the most basic needs for enhancements to the regional transportation network, allowing the network to keep up with growth in population and employment. It outlines the following transportation priorities related to bus service in the region:

25% increase in bus service across the region

200 more kilometres of B‐Line or Better routes

More frequent all‐day service

More frequent peak hour service

Service to new and growing lower density neighbourhoods

80% more NightBus service In November 2016, the TransLink Board and Mayors’ Council approved the 2017‐2026 Investment Plan

(2017 Investment Plan). The 2017 Investment Plan delivers the first three years of the 10‐Year Vision,


14

specifying new services and infrastructure, as well as strategies to make the transportation system more

efficient, innovative and sustainable. The 2017 Investment Plan expands transit service across the region

to increase system capacity, reduce overcrowding and introduce new bus service to new areas. The

2017 Investment Plan outlines actions and policies to advance the goals identified in TransLink’s long‐

term Regional Transportation Strategy and to support the goals identified in Metro Vancouver’s

Regional Growth Strategy, Metro Vancouver 2040: Shaping Our Future (Metro 2040). Some of the

highlights for bus service included in the 2017 Investment Plan are:

10% increase in bus service and 15% increase in HandyDART service;

More frequent service on 50 different bus routes; and

5 new B‐Line routes (Hastings B‐Line implemented in 2016)

This project supports the 10‐Year Vision through its strategy to invest in urgent and effective

investments. Through expansion of its fleet, TransLink will be able to increase bus service, and provide

more frequent and new service and in the process meet a number of 10‐Year Vision priorities. This

project will also support desired outcomes from the 10‐Year Vision, such as reducing transit

overcrowding as well as supporting Metro Vancouver’s Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas

Management Plan (IAQGGMP).


15

C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Please complete the following for each project proposed for expenditure from the GVRF.

1. Executive Summary (not to exceed two pages) Project Overview Previously approved by Metro Vancouver Board on October 27, 2017, this project originally would add seven (7) hybrid 40‐foot buses to expand service. The 40‐foot buses would have a person and seat capacity of 73 and 36 respectively. They would have been operated out of the Vancouver Transit Centre and Burnaby Transit Centre. Seven (7) 40‐foot hybrid buses were anticipated to be procured in 2019. This along with the expansion application for five (5) double decker buses and forty two (42) 60‐foot conventional buses would have brought the total bus fleet to 1,505 vehicles. Since the last 2017 GVRF application approved in October 2017, TransLink has refined the service planning for the new B‐Lines to be implemented in Phase One of the 10‐Year Vision. Service planning for implementing the new B‐Lines in 2019 indicates there will be a shortfall of 16 60‐foot buses. To partly address this 16 bus deficit TransLink requests that this project converts procurement of seven 40‐foot buses to five 60‐foot buses. The new vehicles acquired will have a person and seat capacity of 110 and 47 respectively. This action was approved at TransLink Executives’ Bus Fleet and Facilities Steering Committee. Beyond the change in the number and size of the vehicles, there are no changes to propulsion type and completion timeline. In addition, this amendment does not have any funding implications. TransLink strives to optimize resources by matching service to passenger demand, including allocating vehicles of an appropriate size to serve the demand on a route. This allocation is optimized through continuous review and planning to distribute resources where they are most needed. This process is determined by ridership data, which has been substantially enhanced with the deployment of Compass Card. TransLink has also undertaken recent work to determine optimal fleet propulsion technology on each route, which is interdependent with vehicle size. The bus fleet propulsion technologies available to TransLink include diesel, CNG, trolley, hybrid and electric‐battery for 60‐foot buses. Hybrid buses are currently the best option for reducing emissions for the 60‐foot bus fleet due to lack of infrastructure for electric‐battery buses. In addition to being well‐matched to low speed urban routes due to their fuel efficiency characteristics, hybrids are also suitable for these routes due to the ability of the hybrid drive train to smooth out emission peaks. Because urban routes are the most highly populated, emissions reduction on these routes has the largest positive benefit in terms of population exposures to GHG, NOx and PM. TransLink is developing a Low Carbon Fleet Strategy (anticipated to be completed in March 2018) with the goal of further reducing GHG emissions (which is evaluating electric‐battery buses).

Tangible Benefits and Outcomes

The new 60‐foot hybrid buses will allow TransLink to fulfill the refined service planning requirement of using 60‐foot buses for the new B‐Line service on the Marine Drive, 41st Avenue, Lougheed Highway and Fraser Highway B‐Line corridors in 2019, as per the approved 2017 Investment Plan. These five hybrid buses along with fifty three hybrid 60‐foot buses approved in previous GVRF applications will provide 148,000 annual service hours on these four corridors.


16

60‐foot buses have more capacity than 40‐foot buses, which will help alleviate overcrowding and improve customer experience, especially for customers traveling longer distances. Additionally, the larger capacity, additional set of doors, and all‐door boarding will allow for faster boarding and alighting on the B‐Lines, thereby decreasing dwell time and improving B‐Line service reliability. TransLink’s B‐Line routes provide frequent and reliable service throughout the day and across the week. Because they are limited‐stop services, they have the added bonus of being fast. Ultimately 200 kilometres of B‐Line services are planned to be implemented over the span of the Mayors’ Council 10‐Year Vision, creating a grid network of fast, frequent and reliable B‐Lines connecting regional centres across Metro Vancouver. These four B‐Line services are key additions to the development of the ultimate B‐Line network operating across our region.

The choice of hybrid buses supports the Metro Vancouver Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan and TransLink’s efforts to reduce emissions under the forthcoming Low Carbon Fleet Strategy. Hybrid buses have less GHG emissions than the diesel and CNG alternative. The Hybrids also have less PM than diesel and CNG alternative.

Project Budget, Expenses, and GVRF Funding Request

The project budget will remain at $8,100,000 with a Greater Vancouver Regional Fund (GVRF) request of $7,290,000. Expenses covered by this budget primarily include vehicle procurement, ancillary on‐board equipment and labour and other miscellaneous project costs. The funding requested in this application will be applied towards expenses considered eligible per the terms of the Administrative Agreement dated April 2014.

2. Project Name

2019 Conventional 60‐ft Bus Purchase – Additional Expansion (Ref# 182132)

3. Project Need

The objectives are to expand transit service across Metro Vancouver to increase system capacity, maintain high quality customer service; and minimize maintenance and operating costs through the continued provision of reliable, fully‐accessible transit vehicles, which are appropriate to routes on which they operate. Hybrid buses will reduce GHG emissions and other emission reductions will occur through the reduction of private vehicle trips.

4. Project Eligibility (check one): ☐ Local Roads and Bridges, including active transportation ☒ Public Transit


17

5. Project Purpose (check one): ☒ Expansion: Expands the carrying capacity of people and/or goods movement.

☐ State of Good Repair: Replaces or modernizes assets to keep the regional transportation system in a state of good repair.

☐ Operational Efficiency/Effectiveness: Improves the efficiency or effectiveness of the regional transportation system.

☐ Refurbishment ☐ New

☐ Other (please specify :_______________)

6. Project Type (check one): ☒ Growth ☐ Upgrade ☐ Risk (Resilience) ☐ Maintenance ☐ Opportunity

7. Project Staging: Year(s) of Acquisition or Start of Construction

Year of Completion of Construction

Year of Service Initialization

Year(s) of Renewal

Year(s) of End of Service

2019 2019 2019 N/A 2036

8. Has the project previously received funding through GVRF? Please explain.

Yes. Funding of $7.29 million has been received under the recently approved GVRF funding application in October 2017. There is no request for additional GVRF funding for this scope amendment.

9. Was GVRF funding previously declined for the project? Please explain.

No.

10. Is the project anticipated to require additional future GVRF funding? If so, please explain.

No. TransLink is planning to complete this project within budget.


18

11. Project Cost + Funding

11.a Budget & Expenditures Budget Expenditures

to Date Forecast to Complete

Final Forecasted Cost

Variance (budget – final forecasted cost)

$8,100,000 $0 $8,100,000 $8,100,000 $0

11.b Project Funding Prior Approved GVRF Funding

Current Year GVRF Funding Request

Other Funding – Specify source and whether confirmed/pending

$0 $7,290,000 N/A

11.c Project Budget Schedule Item 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 GVRF-funded Project Budget

$4,410,000 $2,880,000

Total Project Budget

$4,900,000 $3,200,000

12. Project Budget Rationale

Describe the types of proposed project expenses to be funded by the Greater Vancouver Regional Fund

a. Explain how the project reflects the intent of the GVRF

This project expands the regional public transportation system, and ensures efficient and effective transit service. In addition, it is expected to reduce GHG, NOx and PM emissions through the reduction of private vehicle trips and utilization of hybrid buses.

b. In the absence of GVRF funding, can the project proceed with other funding

sources? What risks do the other funding sources present to the project?

No. TransLink relies on GVRF funding for expansion of its revenue vehicle fleets and plans its annual budgets accordingly.

The other sources of funding available to TransLink are – Building Canada Fund and the Public Transit Infrastructure Fund. The projects chosen by TransLink for GVRF funding are better suited to GVRF funding compared to the other sources of funding, as summarized below:

Building Canada Fund (BCF) ‐ the funding available is intended for “major infrastructure” and focuses on larger, strategic infrastructure projects that are of national or regional significance. Additionally, all funds in the current allocation have already been allocated to specific projects.


19

Public Transit Infrastructure Fund (PTIF) – this fund is focused on early works for expansion of the Rapid Transit network such as ‐ the Expo, Millennium and Canada Line networks, along with the Surrey Light Rail Transit projects. Also, under this fund the maximum federal funding towards a project is limited to 50% of the total eligible expenditures; no such limits are identified in the GVRF. Lastly, projects to be funded under this program have already been submitted to the federal government.

In addition, BCF and PTIF funding is only available for a specified period of time: BCF is valid until March 31, 2017 (with some station upgrades extended to March 31, 2019) and PTIF is valid until March 31, 2020.

As such, there are no other viable funding sources available for fleet expansion.

c. Identify potential risks – corporate and regional – of this project that could result in

this project not being completed or being unsuccessful. Describe possible mitigation strategies to address these risks.

If a scope change is not approved in time, TransLink would determine where in the transit system operating 40‐foot conventional buses in lieu of 60‐foot articulated buses would have the least negative impact. Impacts include: (1) increased crowding and pass‐ups from providing lower capacity; (2) potential to incur increased operating costs if increased capacity must be provided with additional frequency; (3) customer confusion when different vehicle types are serving the same route; (4) erosion of the B‐line brand and customer confusion if some buses operating on B‐Line routes are not consistent with the livery of the B‐Line service brand; (5) operational inefficiencies when different types of fleet are deployed on the same route.

d. How may the project cost vary as a result of changing external factors, such as

interest rates and currency exchange rates?

Project costs may vary due to foreign exchange fluctuations (as parts are procured from the US) and vendor pricing. These uncertainties are mitigated with sufficient contingency allowance to fund price and foreign exchange fluctuations.

e. How may foreseeable changes in investment, regulation, or policies from other

orders of government affect the project?

Due to recent increases in senior government funding for public transit projects, many suppliers are experiencing larger demands to order vehicles. This may create a backlog with vendors, and if procurement is not initiated soon, could result in further delay in ordering and receiving vehicles.

f. How may foreseeable changes in technology affect the project?

This application is based on the new vehicles being hybrid powered. TransLink has taken into account its existing infrastructure, as well as the opportunity to transition to lower emissions vehicles, in arriving at a decision on hybrid technology. Also, many routes identified for improvement are in urban areas where hybrid buses are well suited and provide the best fuel economy due to low average speeds.


20

g. What other corporate or external factors could alter the project need, scope, budget, or timeline for project delivery?

There are no foreseeable corporate or external factors that could alter the project need or scope of this project. Project timeline may be affected by manufacturer’s capacity and schedules, availability of parts and/or time for vehicle delivery from the manufacturer. Budget may fluctuate due to parts pricing and/or foreign exchange.

In order to ensure that the vehicles received are up to the standards expected and delivered on time TransLink conducts regular factory audits and inspections of the manufacturers’ facilities.

D. EVALUATION CRITERIA Please describe how project achieves or works towards each criterion by identifying and reporting on relevant performance measures. Where appropriate, present quantitative information. Please do not exceed 10 pages per project.

Two types of evaluation criteria are identified: Screening Criteria, which represent requirements that are mandatory for any project for which GVRF funding is requested; and Integrated Criteria, which allow for a qualitative assessment of proposed projects based on high priority objectives that reflect the intent of the Federal Gas Tax Fund, of Metro Vancouver goals, and of the Mayors’ Council Vision.

Criterion Description Assessment SCREENING CRITERIA

Eligible Project Category

☐ Local roads and bridges, including active transportation

☒ Public transit

Required

Eligible Expenses

As set out in the 2014 Administrative Agreement (Schedule C) Eligible Item Expenditure1 Hybrid Buses (5) 7,120,000 On‐board equipment 170,000 Total $7,290,000 1 Per Schedule C, Section 1.1, Part a)

Required

Plan Consistency

Projects must be consistent with TransLink’s existing Capital Plan and future 10‐Year Investment Plan, as well as the Mayors’ Council Transportation and Transit Plan, Metro 2040: Shaping our Future, and the Regional Transportation Strategy.

☒ 10‐Year Investment Plan ☒ Mayors’ Council Transportation and Transit Plan

☒ Metro 2040: Shaping our Future

Required


21

Criterion Description Assessment ☒ Regional Transportation Strategy

Corporate Policies

Projects must be consistent with applicable TransLink policies such as sustainability, environmental responsibility, emissions and infrastructure

☒ Sustainability policy

☒ Environmental policy

☒ Emissions policy

☐ Infrastructure policy – n/a

Required

INTEGRATED CRITERIA

Regional Growth Strategy Supports the Regional Growth Strategy

The degree to which the project assists in achieving the five goals in Metro 2040.

☐ Create a Compact Urban Area

☒ Support a Sustainable Economy

☒ Protect Environment and Respond to Climate Change Impacts

☒ Develop Complete Communities

☒ Support Sustainable Transportation Choices

Poor/Good/ Excellent

Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas

Where applicable, the project is located in, or demonstrates tangible benefits to the overall performance of Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas.

These buses will provide B‐Line services to Metro Vancouver communities within TransLink’s transportation service region and offer an environmentally responsible and sustainable transportation alternative to single occupant vehicle travel. They will link communities with business, institutional and social hubs and destinations, and facilitate the creation and expansion of Transit Oriented Developments (TODs). They will also provide collector and distribution services to Expo, Millennium, Evergreen and Canada Lines, West Coast Express and SeaBus.


Transportation Performance Headline Targets

Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle kilometres travelled and/or walk/cycle/transit mode share.

The project will increase the 60‐foot bus fleet size thus increasing passenger capacity. The entire 10‐Year Vision is forecast to decrease annual private vehicle kilometers travelled per person to 5,422 kilometers by 2030 – a 15% decrease compared to 2011. The 2017 Investment Plan delivers the first phase of walking, cycling and transit infrastructure in the 10‐Year Vision, and in doing so,



22

Criterion Description Assessment makes it possible for more people in the region to choose alternatives to driving. This expansion of the bus fleet is an important step in delivering this investment with new B‐Line service. Additionally, the 2017 Investment Plan is forecast to increase ridership from 233 million annual transit journeys in 2016 to 272 million annual transit journeys by 2026. This fleet expansion is a critical step in providing the transit service necessary to reach this increase in transit trips.

Other Transportation Outcomes

Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on vehicle congestion, transit passenger congestion, transit ridership, and/or transportation safety for the duration of the project.

Corridors identified for new B‐Lines have been selected due to current crowding or overcrowding conditions, or need to connect major destinations with rapid and frequent service. B‐Line service will provide more capacity through larger capacity vehicles and more frequent service resulting in fewer pass‐ups and overcrowded vehicles. The full 10‐Year Vision is forecast to increase walking, cycling, and transit mode share to 31% by 2030, supporting the RTS target of 50% mode share by 2045. This fleet expansion allows TransLink to expand transit services and continue to make progress toward these targets.


Project Type Demonstrated value of the project type (refer to section 6).

By growing the reach and capacity of public transport with rapid and frequent service, we will provide more options for mobility and be able to reduce congestion on the roads, increase passenger comfort and reliability and pollutant emissions will be reduced


Regional Environmental Objectives Supports the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan

Contributes to the achievement of one or more goals in the Integrated Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Management Plan(IAQGGMP).

The project is expected to reduce GHG and PM emissions through increasing the hybrid bus fleet and the reduction of private vehicle trips.

As such, this project supports IAQGGMP strategies 1.1 “Reduce emissions of and public exposure to diesel particulate matter”, 1.4 “Reduce air contaminant emissions from cars, trucks, and buses”, 3.3 “Reduce the carbon footprint of the region’s transportation system.”


Measurable Demonstrates tangible beneficial effects on greenhouse gas and Poor/Good/ Excellent


23

Criterion Description Assessment Beneficial Effects

common air contaminant emissions from on‐road transportation sources for the duration of the project.

By growing the reach and capacity of public transport with rapid and frequent service, we will provide more options for mobility and be able to reduce congestion on the roads while increasing passenger comfort and reliability. Over time the project is expected to reduce GHG emissions through the reduction of private vehicle trips.

Economic Development Supports regional prosperity

Contributes to a regional transportation system that moves people and goods and aligns with regional prosperity.

These buses will provide rapid and frequent service to institutional, economic and other transit mode hubs. Passengers will have better access to work and/or leisure activities, reducing the use of single occupant vehicle travel.



Tangible beneficial effects on the movement of people and/or goods for the duration of the project.

These buses will provide rapid and frequent service and make transit a more reliable option, and ultimately improving economic competitiveness within Metro Vancouver. More rapid and reliable transit provides better access to jobs, workers, goods, and markets, while reducing congestion. The proposed B‐Line service will address overcrowding and will reduce congestion for passengers.



24569931

To: Finance and Intergovernment Committee From: Vanessa Anthony, Program Manager, Public Involvement, Water Services;

Megan Gerryts, Corporate Projects Coordinator, Legal and Legislative Services; and Andrea Winkler, Program Manager, Public Involvement, Liquid Waste Services

Date: March 7, 2018 Meeting Date: March 16, 2018 Subject: Public Engagement Policy RECOMMENDATION That the MVRD/GVS&DD/GVWD/MVHC Board approve the Public Engagement Policy as presented in the report dated March 7, 2018, titled “Public Engagement Policy.” PURPOSE To present the Public Engagement Policy for consideration and approval. BACKGROUND Public engagement across Metro Vancouver can take on a wide variety of forms depending on the potential impact and complexity of a project or initiative. In order to improve engagement processes and create consistency across all Metro Vancouver functions, staff have developed a Public Engagement Policy that outlines Metro Vancouver’s approach for the planning and implementation of engagement processes. The proposed policy is aligned with the Metro Vancouver Board Strategic Plan which emphasizes the importance of being accountable, transparent and responsive in order to maintain an effective federation. Metro Vancouver regularly engages with the public and key stakeholders to gather information to influence decision-making. This report presents for Committee and Board consideration a proposed Public Engagement Policy to ensure that Metro Vancouver is consistent and effective in its public engagement activities (Attachment 1). An accompanying Public Engagement Flow Chart and Public Engagement Guide are also included with this report which are intended to assist staff in the administration and application of the proposed Policy (Attachments 2 & 3). PROPOSED PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT POLICY The Public Engagement Policy as drafted outlines Metro Vancouver’s approach to public engagement by describing the organization’s guiding principles, the levels in which engagement is undertaken, and the roles and responsibilities of the Board and staff. The Public Engagement Flow Chart and Guide describe the process for undertaking responsible public engagement in accordance with the guiding principles. Increasingly, municipalities are defining their engagement practices in policy and including an accompanying Guide for staff. There are many benefits to having engagement practices defined in

5.2


Public Engagement Policy Finance and Intergovernment Committee Regular Meeting Date: March 16, 2018

Page 2 of 4

policy, including ensuring that engagement initiatives are reflective of organizational values and that the principles that guide engagement are properly articulated and are agreed upon at the Board level. Guiding Principles The proposed Policy articulates five guiding principles that direct Metro Vancouver’s engagement processes. These guiding principles are based on industry best practices and seek to set a standard of excellence in carrying out engagement processes. 1. Accountability – Metro Vancouver upholds the commitments it makes to the public and

demonstrates that the results and outcomes of the engagement processes are consistent with the approved plans for engagement.

2. Inclusiveness – Metro Vancouver makes its best efforts to reach, involve and hear from those who are impacted. Plain language will be used in all engagement materials.

3. Transparency – Metro Vancouver provides clear and timely information, and endeavours to ensure decision processes, procedures, and constraints are understood.

4. Commitment – Metro Vancouver, within its ability and work plans, allocates sufficient resources for effective engagement.

5. Responsiveness – Metro Vancouver seeks to understand and be receptive to the public’s input. Spectrum of Engagement The International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) spectrum of engagement is a widely used tool amongst municipalities. Metro Vancouver has been using the spectrum for many years to help identify the public’s role in the decision-making process. The adapted spectrum described in the policy outlines three engagement levels: Consult, Involve and Collaborate. Each of these levels corresponds to the level of influence the public has in the decision-making process. The Policy directs staff to use the “Engage Assessment” in the Public Engagement Guide (Attachment 3, p. 12) to determine if their project or initiative requires engagement. If engagement is required, the assessment will help staff determine which level of engagement is the most appropriate based on the potential impact and complexity of the project or initiative. Roles and Responsibilities The Policy outlines the roles and responsibilities of the Board of Directors in making decisions informed by public input. Three criteria are articulated in the Policy and Guide to determine if reporting to Standing Committees and the Board is required. In general, engagement reports will be sent to Committee when a project or initiative fulfills all of the following three criteria:

• The Board will be making the ultimate decision/providing the final approval regarding the project or initiative;

• The project or initiative has the potential to impact the public and/or stakeholders; and, • There are decisions within the project or initiative that will be open to input from the public.

These criteria have been developed in order to ensure that the Board has the opportunity to review the scope of the engagement process before engagement is initiated on projects where they provide



Page 3 of 4

final approval. Additionally, these criteria ensure that engagement is meaningful, since engagement is only initiated if decisions within the project or initiative are open to input from the public. Staff are responsible for following the process described in the Public Engagement Guide. The Public Engagement Flow Chart (Attachment 2) articulates when Board reporting should take place, if required. PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT GUIDE The Public Engagement Guide is intended to support the proposed Public Engagement Policy by directing staff in scoping engagement processes and preparing engagement strategies for the public. The engagement process established in the Public Engagement Flow Chart and detailed in the Guide is supported by tools and worksheets. The Guide is intended for use by Metro Vancouver staff and can be used by any member of staff regardless of their engagement expertise. OTHER PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESSES As noted in the Public Engagement Guide, the Policy and Guide are not intended to apply to First Nation engagement which is prescribed in separate processes and primarily relevant to construction projects. In addition, Metro Vancouver’s Environmental Regulation and Enforcement Division has separate notification processes that are connected to the issuance of permits and licenses. To assist in ensuring that the public is fully informed on various Metro Vancouver initiatives, a variety of online tools and information is available to support public engagement. Specific initiatives are frequently featured on the website and the Performance Monitoring Dashboard has been developed and is maintained to provide up-to-date information across all functions within Metro Vancouver. ALTERNATIVES 1. That the MVRD/GVS&DD/GVWD/MVHC Board approve the Public Engagement Policy as

presented in the report dated March 7, 2018, titled “Public Engagement Policy.”

2. That the Finance and Intergovernment Committee receive for information the report dated March 7, 2018, titled “Public Engagement Policy” and provide alternate direction to staff.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS If the Board approves alternative one, the Public Engagement Policy will provide direction to staff in undertaking public engagement processes. The Policy is expected to improve processes and is not anticipated to result in increased costs for engagement. Any budgetary impacts resulting from this Policy will be included in the budget approval process under the corresponding function and division. SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The Board Strategic Plan emphasizes the importance of being accountable, transparent and responsive in order to maintain an effective federation. The proposed Public Engagement Policy aims to improve public engagement processes and create consistency across all Metro Vancouver functions by outlining Metro Vancouver’s approach for the planning and implementation of engagement processes. The Policy and accompanying Flow Chart and Guide provide direction on carrying out engagement processes consistently and responsibly. Staff recommend approving alternative one.



Page 4 of 4

Attachments 1. Public Engagement Policy (Doc #21634159) 2. Public Engagement Flow Chart (Doc #24713815) 3. Public Engagement Guide (Doc #23559349) 24569931


21634159 Public Engagement Policy Page 1 of 3

PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT Effective Date: Approved By: MVRD/GVS&DD/GVWD/MVHC Boards PURPOSE

To outline Metro Vancouver’s approach for the development and implementation of engagement processes to achieve the following:

• Effective engagement processes that are clear, consistent, and carried out responsibly; • Opportunities for public input to influence decision-making; • Strong relationships with the communities that Metro Vancouver serves; and, • Board decisions that are informed by input from the public.

This Policy applies to all public engagement initiatives with the exception of First Nation engagement, which is prescribed in separate processes. This Policy does not apply to the Statutory Notification Process. DEFINITIONS

“Engagement” means purposeful dialogue between Metro Vancouver, member jurisdictions, residents, businesses and special interest groups to gather information to influence decision-making. “Engagement Spectrum” means a spectrum that helps to provide -clarity on terminology, process, level of promise and expectation for engagement. “Engagement Support” means the group responsible for assisting the project manager in scoping the engagement process, and preparing and executing the engagement strategy. The group may consist of staff from External Relations, Public Involvement or external consultants depending on the department structure. “International Association of Public Participation (IAP2)” means an international association that promotes the practice of public participation. IAP2 has set out core values and a spectrum of participation to create a common understanding of the engagement practice. “Plain Language” means clear, concise communication designed so the audience can easily understand the message. “Public” means a broad grouping of residents and/or businesses and/or special interest groups. “Stakeholder” means any member of the public interested in or potentially impacted by a project or initiative.

BOARD POLICY

ATTACHMENT 1


BOARD POLICY


POLICY

As articulated in the Board Strategic Plan, Metro Vancouver is committed to informing, educating, and engaging the public in decision-making and providing the public with opportunities to influence decisions that impact their lives. This Policy sets out the guiding principles and procedures for ensuring that all engagement initiatives are carried out consistently and responsibly. GUIDING PRINCIPLES

Accountability – Metro Vancouver upholds the commitments it makes to the public and demonstrates that the results and outcomes of the engagement processes are consistent with the approved plans for engagement. Inclusiveness – Metro Vancouver makes its best efforts to reach, involve and hear from those who are impacted. Plain language will be used in all engagement materials. Transparency – Metro Vancouver provides clear and timely information, and endeavours to ensure decision processes, procedures, and constraints are understood. Commitment – Metro Vancouver, within its ability and work plans, allocates sufficient resources for effective engagement. Responsiveness – Metro Vancouver seeks to understand and be receptive to the public’s input. SPECTRUM OF ENGAGEMENT

Metro Vancouver applies an adapted International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) Engagement Spectrum to help identify the public’s role in the decision-making process, and to clearly lay out the corresponding level of engagement with examples of appropriate techniques. Metro Vancouver will use the “Engage Assessment” as found in the Public Engagement Guide to determine the appropriate level of engagement required for each initiative. The different levels of engagement correspond to the level of influence the public has in the decision making process and the level of ownership Metro Vancouver has over the decision-making process and end decision. Consult The consult level of engagement consists of raising awareness, sharing information about projects, and providing opportunities for feedback. The commitment to the public is to keep them informed, listen to and acknowledge concerns and aspirations, and provide feedback on how public input influenced the decision. Decisions are made by the authorized decision-maker with input from the public or relevant stakeholders.


BOARD POLICY


Involve The involve level of engagement consists of involving the public to make sure that concerns and aspirations are considered and understood. The commitment to the public is to work with them to ensure concerns and aspirations are directly reflected in the alternatives developed and provide feedback on how public input influenced the decision. Decisions are made by the authorized decision-maker after involving the public to explore possible alternatives to an issue or opportunity at hand. Collaborate The collaborate level of engagement consists of collaborating with the public in each aspect of decision-making. The commitment to the public is to look to them for advice and innovation in formulating solutions and incorporate their advice and decisions to the maximum extent possible. Decisions are made by authorized decision-makers after Metro Vancouver and the public have worked together to explore possible alternatives to an issue or decision and prioritize the preferred solution(s). ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The Metro Vancouver Board of Directors is responsible for authorizing engagement processes and hearing public input reported to them through Standing Committee and Board reports, and making decisions informed by public input. Not all engagement processes will require reports to Standing Committees and the Board. In general, engagement reports will be sent to Committee when a project or initiative fulfills all of the following three criteria:

• The Board will be making the ultimate decision/providing the final approval regarding the project or initiative;

• The project or initiative has the potential to impact the public and/or stakeholders; and,

• There are decisions within the project or initiative that will be open to input from the public. Metro Vancouver staff are responsible for adhering to the Public Engagement Guide and for carrying out engagement initiatives in accordance with the guiding principles. Staff will prepare reports to Standing Committees and the Boards that are informed by research, data, and analytical tools in addition to input from the public that is representative of the breadth of input received. The Public Engagement Flow Chart shows the engagement process including the role of the Board.


Public Engagement Flow Chart Engagement support will carry out the following steps in coordination with the project team:

24713815

Engage Assessment Determine whether or not engagement is needed

Project Planning Develop engagement plan with scope, participants, budget, timelines, roles and responsibilities

Engagement Implement engagement plan

Communicate Results Report back to participants and decision makers on what was asked, what was heard, and how feedback was used

Evaluate Engagement Process Evaluate the engagement process based on the engagement objectives

Engagement authorization report to the Board, as required

Engagement results report to the Board, as required

ATTACHMENT 2


PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT GUIDE A Guide for Metro Vancouver Staff

March 2018

ATTACHMENT 3

23559349


Public Engagement Guide: A Guide for Metro Vancouver Staff

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 3

1.1 WHAT IS ENGAGEMENT? .................................................................................................... 3

1.2 ENGAGEMENT GUIDING PRINCIPLES .................................................................................. 6

1.3 WORKING WITH STANDING COMMITEES AND THE BOARD ............................................... 6

2. IS ENGAGEMENT NEEDED? ................................................................................................................. 7

2.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE ASSESSMENT TOOL ...................................................................... 7

2.2 OVERVIEW OF THE ENGAGEMENT PROCESS ...................................................................... 8

3. ENGAGEMENT TOOLS AND WORKSHEETS ...................................................................................... 11

A. ASSESS – ENGAGE ASSESSMENT TOOL ............................................................................. 12

B. PLAN – SCOPING PROJECTS & STAKEHOLDERS ................................................................ 18

C. CONNECT – ENGAGEMENT METHODS ............................................................................. 22

D. REPORT BACK .................................................................................................................... 24

E. EVALUATE – PROCESS EVALUATION ................................................................................. 26

APPENDIX A REPORTS SEEKING AUTHORIZATION ................................................................ 28

APPENDIX B REPORTS DESCRIBING RESULTS ........................................................................ 32



3

The Metro Vancouver Public Engagement Guide supports Metro Vancouver’s Public Engagement Policy and provides more detail on the process described in the Public Engagement Flow Chart. The Guide is intended to direct staff in scoping engagement processes and preparing engagement strategies for the public. This Guide does not apply to First Nation engagement, which is prescribed in separate processes. The process described in the Public Engagement Policy and Guide does not apply to Metro Vancouver’s Statutory Notification Process.

1. INTRODUCTION

Metro Vancouver is committed to informing, educating, and engaging the public about decisions that impact their lives and livelihoods. Meaningful engagement allows us to make better quality decisions and improve our relationships with residents, businesses, special interest groups, and municipalities. The purpose of this Public Engagement Guide is to help Metro Vancouver employees across all departments deepen their understanding of engagement and ensure the consistent delivery of and reporting out on engagement processes at Metro Vancouver. It is designed to help you determine when to seek public input, what methods to use, and how to know if the process was a success. This Guide will help clarify key terms and best practices in engagement, as well as introduce you to the guiding principles that direct Metro Vancouver’s engagement efforts. It will take you through the steps of designing, implementing, and evaluating your engagement efforts and offers practical tools and resources to incorporate into your projects. The Guide also includes an interactive assessment tool. This tool will help you decide whether engagement is needed for your project and what level of engagement is required. It is designed to support you in scoping projects, selecting engagement methods, and navigating approval steps. The Guide is not meant to be a substitute for working with an engagement support team. Your engagement support will work with you to develop and implement the engagement process.

1.1 WHAT IS ENGAGEMENT? Engagement is based on the premise that people have the right to participate in decision-making processes that affect them on the individual or community level. The Metro Vancouver Public Engagement Policy defines engagement as:

“Purposeful dialogue between Metro Vancouver, member jurisdictions, residents, businesses, and special interest groups to gather information to influence decision-making.”

For efficiency, throughout this Guide and in the Policy these groups are collectively referred to as ‘the public.’



4

Engagement presents participants with opportunities to learn about Metro Vancouver projects, contribute feedback, inform decision-making, and be informed of the outcomes. The purpose of engagement is not to make everyone happy with the outcome. Instead, a successful process means that participants can live with an outcome, because they understand that the engagement process was defensible, with an appropriate level of engagement delivered in a timely and logical way. When engagement is done well, benefits can include:

• Reducing risk by understanding impacts and issues ahead of time by engaging early, potentially negative impacts on the community can be addressed early, which can save money, time and relationships in the long run.

• Create better projects and plans with local knowledge: Communities and interest groups have

local knowledge and possibly different ways of viewing issues. Metro Vancouver benefits from the diverse viewpoints and new ideas raised through engagement to make better quality and responsive decisions.

• Develop champions in the community who can end up becoming ambassadors for the project if

they feel community issues have been listened and responded to. These champions help establish credibility and trust within the community.

• Help elected officials make good decisions by engaging with the right people and groups, asking

clear questions and reporting back on what we heard, elected officials are able to make informed decisions with a better understanding of the community’s perspectives on an issue.

Metro Vancouver offers an array of engagement activities, ranging from information sessions to collaborating on solutions. Metro Vancouver has adapted the International Association of Public Participation’s (IAP2) Spectrum of Public Participation1 to provide a clear framework on the public’s role in the decision-making process and the most suitable engagement techniques and tools to match the level. This spectrum is internationally recognized and used by municipalities across North American and internationally. It provides a common framework and language for assessing and determining the appropriate level of engagement.

1 IAP2 is an international member association which seeks to promote and improve the practice of public participation or community engagement, incorporating individuals, governments, institutions and other entities that affect the public interest throughout the world.



5

IAP2 Spectrum

Pu

blic

Pa

rtic

ipat

ion

Goal

To obtain public feedback on analysis, issues, alternatives and decision.

To work with the public to make sure that concerns and aspirations are considered and understood.

To partner with the public in each aspect of the decision-making.

Prom

ise to

th

e Pu

blic

We will keep you informed, listen to and acknowledge concerns and aspirations, and provide feedback on how public input influenced the decision.

We will work with you to ensure that your concerns and aspirations are directly reflected in the alternatives developed and provide feedback on how public input influenced the decision.

We will look to you for advice and innovation in formulating solutions and incorporate your advice and recommendations into the decisions to the maximum extent possible.

Exam

ple

tech

niqu

es • Public Comments

• Focus Groups • Surveys • Public Meetings

• Workshops • Deliberative Polling

• Citizen Advocacy Committees

• Consensus-Building • Participatory Decision

Making A more detailed description of the Consult through Collaborate levels, and appropriate tools to use at each level is included in “C. CONNECT - Engagement Methods” (p 22).



6

1.2 ENGAGEMENT GUIDING PRINCIPLES Metro Vancouver’s engagement processes are guided by the following five principles:

• Accountability – Metro Vancouver upholds the commitments it makes to the public and demonstrates that the results and outcomes of the engagement processes are consistent with the approved plans for engagement.

• Inclusiveness – Metro Vancouver makes its best efforts to reach, involve, and hear from those

who are impacted. Plain language will be used in all engagement materials. • Transparency – Metro Vancouver provides clear and timely information, and endeavours to

ensure decision processes, procedures, and constraints are understood. • Commitment – Metro Vancouver, within its ability and work plans, allocates sufficient resources

for effective engagement. • Responsiveness – Metro Vancouver seeks to understand and be receptive to the public’s input.

Keeping the public and the Board of Directors informed about Metro Vancouver’s engagement processes is essential for ensuring that engagement processes are carried out responsibly and in accordance with these guiding principles.

1.3 WORKING WITH STANDING COMMITEES AND THE BOARD For the Board of Directors to make effective decisions, they need to be supplied with well written reports that are informed by research, data, and analytical tools in addition to input from the public. For further information on the practices for Board and Standing Committee processes and agenda management refer to the Standing Committee Agenda Management Policy. For specific direction on writing engagement reports, please refer to Appendices A and B.



7

2. IS ENGAGEMENT NEEDED?

2.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE ASSESSMENT TOOL Not every Metro Vancouver project or decision is going to require engagement. Generally, the more complex and/or impactful the issue or project, the greater the need for public engagement. The required level of engagement will vary for each project, depending on the scale of impact and complexity. The Metro Vancouver Engage Assessment (see p 12) was created to help Metro Vancouver staff determine:

• If the initiative requires engagement; • What an appropriate level of engagement is based on how input from the public will be used; • What an appropriate scope of engagement is based on the impact and complexity of the initiative; • Whether Board authorization and reporting is required prior to proceeding with the engagement

process; and, • The appropriate internal and external resources to use throughout the engagement process.

Some examples of Metro Vancouver projects that typically have an impact on the public:

• Plans, Policies, Programs, and Regulations, such as the Regional Growth Strategy, air quality and climate change plans, the Grease Interceptor Bylaw, Emissions Regulations, or Pollution Prevention Plans Regulation.

• Service Provision, such as drinking water, wastewater treatment, and solid waste management; regional parks and affordable housing services.

This guide refers to your engagement process as “your project,” understanding that it could be a program, project, regulation, plan, service, or something else.



8

2.2 OVERVIEW OF THE ENGAGEMENT PROCESS The following process establishes a clear and consistent approach for Metro Vancouver staff to follow. The engagement process helps us to define a process, avoid role confusion, set out achievable and logical steps, and deliver on our commitment to the Guiding Principles. This overview describes the five steps of an engagement process, cross-referencing to worksheets to support you at each step. The next section of this guide contains the worksheets. Please note that the process will be iterative – you will design a process, identify participants, and brainstorm engagement activities before engagement begins, but ongoing reporting and evaluation may require you to update these materials throughout the process.

The Engage Assessment (p 12) is intended to help you determine whether your project will benefit from engagement. This tool will clarify: If engagement is required and why, the level of engagement required, roles and responsibilities and engagement steps.

Once the Engage Assessment is completed, the engagement support can develop an engagement plan. The engagement plan is a critical tool to create a shared understanding with your team and consultant(s) on engagement scope, stakeholders, budget, timelines, roles and responsibilities. This is also the step where you prepare the materials that are needed to share information with your audience. Tool: PLAN - Scoping Projects and Stakeholders Worksheet (p 18).

You are now ready to implement your engagement plan. Successful engagement events depend on providing sufficient notice about when and where engagement is taking place to ensure good turn-out at the event. The events are an opportunity to connect with our audience(s) in an honest, open, and meaningful manner. Tool: CONNECT - Engagement Methods (p 22).

Metro Vancouver’s commitment to accountability and transparency is demonstrated when you communicate the results of our engagement efforts back to participants and decision makers in a timely and accessible manner and explain how feedback was used. Tool: REPORT BACK - Engagement Summary Worksheet (p 24).

After connecting with participants and reporting back on their input, the next step is to evaluate whether the engagement process is still working. Building an evaluation into the engagement process helps ensure that Metro Vancouver resources are being used efficiently and effectively. Tool: EVALUATE – Process Evaluation Worksheet (p 26).



9

This diagram shows an example Metro Vancouver engagement process against these five steps. This example project is to develop a new bylaw.

Project Engagement Lead: Jane Chan Overall Engagement Level: Consult Engagement Objectives: • To explain the issues that Metro Vancouver is trying to address through a new bylaw • To learn about how the proposed bylaw would impact stakeholders • To ensure the bylaw can be implemented effectively Stakeholders: Special interest groups, industry associations, enforcement officers, municipal representatives, general public Timeline: accounts for scoping, Board authorization, engagement on proposed requirements (Phase 1), bylaw development, engagement on finalizing requirements (Phase 2), Board approval Materials: Webpage, Key Messages, FAQs, Notification Letters, Interview, site visit and workshop guides

Engagement Activities: • Key Informant Interviews • Site Visits • Stakeholder workshops • Newsletter update

Engagement report summarizing the engagement activities and findings delivered to the technical leads of the project for first review, and if deemed appropriate, added as an attachment to Committee and Board report.

Engagement evaluation takes place through debrief with the project teams on an ongoing basis.



10

2.3 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILTIES The following diagram shows typical roles and responsibilities for projects.

* Engagement Support may consist of staff from External Relations, Public Involvement, or external consultants, depending on the department structure.

General Manager / DirectorResponsible for strategic decisions

Project ManagerResponsible for on-time, on-budget delivery

of the project that integrates an engagement process.

Engagement Support *Responsible for assisting the Project Manager in scoping the engagement

process and preparing and executing the engagement strategy.



11

3. ENGAGEMENT TOOLS AND WORKSHEETS

This section of the guide contains the Engage Assessment Tool and a series of worksheets and tip sheets designed to help you make strategic decisions throughout the five-step engagement process. Please print out and use these worksheets. Going through the strategic thinking steps in the worksheets will prepare you for writing an engagement plan for your project. Please seek the advice of your engagement support if you cannot answer a question. The tools and worksheets include:

A. ASSESS – Engage Assessment Tool: An interactive worksheet to determine whether engagement is needed and what level of engagement is appropriate for your project. It has three parts: Do you need engagement? Do you need Board approval? What level of engagement is appropriate?

B. PLAN – Scoping Projects and Stakeholders Worksheet: This worksheet has two parts. The first

will help you clarify what decision is being made, how engagement will influence the decision, and what contextual issues may affect the decision and people’s perceptions of it. The second will help you understand the participants who need to be involved in your process.

C. CONNECT – Engagement Methods: This resource offers examples of tools and techniques that

you may want to use in your engagement processes.

D. REPORT BACK – Engagement Summary Worksheet: This resource outlines how to approach the Engagement Summary.

E. EVALUATE – Process Evaluation Worksheet: This resource provides strategic questions to

consider when designing an engagement process, so that you have the tools to evaluate the process at key points.



12

A. ASSESS – ENGAGE ASSESSMENT TOOL

Part 1 IS ENGAGEMENT NEEDED?

Please use this tool to test whether your project needs engagement, and if engagement is required, what level of engagement is appropriate.

Section 1. Project Definition

What is the project? Please describe:

What is the desired outcome of the project? (e.g. a new policy or regulation, new infrastructure, changes to an existing service; etc.) Please describe:

What decisions have already been made? Please describe:

If you answered “yes” to one or more of the above questions (in green), engagement is required for your

project. Please fill out Section 3 then continue to Part 2.

If engagement is not required, you may still be required to inform the public about your project. Please coordinate with your engagement support to develop a communications and outreach strategy.

Section 2. Engagement Requirement

Are there decisions within the project or initiative that will be open to input from the public?

Yes – if yes, what do you want public input on?

No – If decisions are not open to input, engagement is not appropriate for your project. To be genuine and meaningful, engagement projects must ask questions where input can influence the outcome.

Is there a legislative, regulatory, Ministry, and/or Statutory requirement for engagement for this project?

Yes No

Does the project or initiative have the potential to impact the public?

Yes No



13

Section 3. Board authorization and reporting

Are there decisions within the project or initiative that will be open to input from the public?

Yes No

Does the project or initiative have the potential to impact the public and/or key stakeholders?

Yes No

Is the Board the ultimate decision maker/providing the final approval regarding the specific project or initiative?

Yes No

If you answered “yes” to ALL of the questions above (in green), Board reporting is required for your

project and you must seek Board authorization for initiation of an engagement process. Please refer to Appendices A and B for more specific guidance on report writing.

Sign off on this Engage Assessment Tool varies department by department. Please confirm your specific requirements with your manager.



14

A. ASSESS – ENGAGE ASSESSMENT TOOL

Part 2 WHAT LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT IS NEEDED?

Each project has factors that affect what level of engagement is required. The appropriate level depends on a careful analysis of your project’s impact and complexity.

Level of Impact

Assessing the level of impact means looking at who will be affected by the decisions made and how deeply the impact will be felt. For example, is the impact limited to a select few stakeholders or is it region wide? Will the resulting decision impact people’s quality of life or their business operations? Answer the following questions to help determine likely “level of impact” of your project. You may have to take your “best guess” at this time.

IMPACT (real or perceived)

ASSIGN 0 POINTS For each checked box

ASSIGN 1 POINT For each checked box



Is the project controversial or unpopular?

Not Applicable The public are not likely to be concerned.

Some issues are anticipated.

Many issues. At least one significant group that is opposed.

Will the decision have financial impacts?

Not Applicable Somewhat likely, with a negligible or indirect impact.

More likely, with a potentially moderate direct impact.

Very likely, with potentially high direct impact.

Will the project or decision significantly affect health and safety?

Not Applicable Somewhat likely, with a negligible or indirect impact.

More likely, with a potentially moderate direct impact.

Very likely, with potentially high direct impact.

Will the project or decision affect the environment?

Not Applicable Low, temporary, and/or local effect.

High, temporary local or regional effect.

High, long-term local or regional effect.

Will the project or decision affect quality of life? (e.g. noise, odour, views, congestion, access, change in land use)

Not Applicable Low, temporary, and/or local effect.

High, temporary local or regional effect.

High, long-term, local or regional effect.

SUM CHECKED BOXES Multiply the results

X 0 points X 1 points X 2 points X 3 points



15

If your total points are between: 0 to 5 points: Your Impact Number is 1 6 to 9 points: Your Impact Number is 2 10 to 15 points: Your Impact Number is 3

Total points: __________ Impact Number: __________



16

Level of Complexity

Assessing the level of complexity looks at how unique or challenging the initiative is. For example, does the project have a variety of phases or components? Are there likely to be opposing public opinions about the issue or project? Answer the following questions to help determine likely “level of complexity” of your project. You may have to take your “best guess” at this time.

COMPLEXITY


ASSIGN 1 POINT For each checked box



How divergent is public opinion on your project?

Not Applicable Little disagreement or positions can be easily managed.

There will be a few competing positions, but they can be managed with some effort.

Competing positions by multiple groups or more than a few different strongly held positions.

What is the likely level of public understanding of the issue or project?

Not Applicable Relatively simple issue and / or strong level of public understanding.

Moderately complex issue and / or limited level of public understanding.

Highly complex issue and / or low public understanding.

Have we done something like this before?

Not Applicable Standard / routine.

Unique or pilot project.

Precedent-setting or brand new.

How long will this project take?

Not Applicable Less than a year.

One to three years.

Three years or more, or on-going.

SUM CHECKED BOXES Multiply the results

X 0 points X 1 points X 2 points X 3 points

If your total points are between: 0 to 4 points: Your Complexity Letter is A 5 to 8 points: Your Complexity Letter is B 8 to 12 points: Your Complexity Letter is C

Total points: __________ Complexity Letter: __________

Combine your Impact Number with your Complexity Letter and find the corresponding box on the next page.



17

LEVE

L O

F C

OM

PLEX

ITY

Use your Impact Number and Complexity Letter in the table below to locate where on the Engagement Spectrum your project falls.

1C: Low impact, high complexity

2C: Medium impact, high complexity

3C: High impact, high complexity

Spectrum: Consult to Involve

Spectrum: Consult to Involve

Spectrum: Collaborate

1B: Low impact, medium complexity

2B: Medium impact, medium complexity

3B: High impact, medium complexity

Spectrum: Consult

Spectrum: Consult

Spectrum: Involve to Collaborate

1A: Low impact, low complexity

2A: Medium impact, low complexity

3A: High impact, low complexity

Spectrum: Consult

Spectrum: Consult

Spectrum: Involve

LEVEL OF IMPACT



18

B. PLAN – SCOPING PROJECTS & STAKEHOLDERS

Part 1 SCOPING PROJECTS WORKSHEET

Please use this worksheet to clarify what you will be engaging on. In most Board authorized engagement processes, issues will be explored and researched, people will be asked input on options and ideas, and then a staff recommendation to the Board for a decision (Appendix B) will be made.

B1. What decision is being made? Please be as specific as possible. Examples include: “Choosing the location of a new park or facility”, “introducing a new bylaw or regulation,” or “construction of new pipes and a pump station.”

B2. What is the context for this decision? Describe the history of this project or issue. What are the main opportunities? What areas will be most contentious? What past or planned future activities/policies are relevant and could affect this project? What legislative direction is there for this project? What technical constraints exist? Why is this engagement process happening now?

B3. What is the role of engagement? Please describe how engagement will impact the final decision being made. Over the course of your engagement project, your “ask” will vary depending on the project needs. Do you want to: Raise awareness? Identify potential issues, conflicts, or project benefits? Change attitudes or beliefs? Build support for a project? Build trust? Gain local insight and ideas? Evaluate options? Evaluate a program, policy, or service? Build support for implementation? Something else? How do those “asks” change by stakeholder or change over time?



19

B4. What is “off the table” for engagement? Please describe topics, issues, or decisions that are not open to engagement. This is important in order to manage the expectations of participants and explain where their feedback will have the most effect. Are there any other non-negotiables or constraints?

B5. What factors are driving your engagement timeline? Please describe any requirements, commitments, or realities that are driving the timeline for your engagement project. How have you considered engagement needs around school holidays, elections, or other times of year that are not appropriate for engagement?

B6. What does success look like? If the engagement process is successful, what will result from your process? For example, success may be: homeowners affected by the construction of a new reservoir will understand why the project is needed and will accept the construction impacts, even though they are directly affected. Or, a new policy or regulation is adopted that has strong support for implementation.



20

B. PLAN – SCOPING PROJECTS & STAKEHOLDERS

Part 2 UNDERSTANDING STAKEHOLDERS WORKSHEET

This worksheet will help you understand who to involve in your process. The various participants will have different information, logistical, and other engagement needs.

B7. Who is most affected by and interested in your project? Identify individuals and groups who are most interested in and most affected by the process. Who is not likely to participate, but would add value if they did? Please describe specific geographic, age, gender, economic, businesses, or other groups who need to be represented.



21

The Public Engagement Policy defines ‘Public’ as “a broad grouping of residents and/or businesses and/or special interest groups”. Any member of the public interested in or potentially impacted by the project is considered a stakeholder. Possible stakeholders could include:

• individuals; • public interest groups (ethnic community associations, stewardship societies); • specific demographic groups (youth, seniors); • marginalized and hard-to-reach populations and/or their representative groups; • industry associations and individual industries; • scientific, professional, educational, and voluntary associations; • school boards; and • other jurisdictions, levels of governments and their agencies, such as public health agencies.

The following table shows an example plan for stakeholder engagement.

Name Sector How to reach Potential Barrier(s)? Local Homeowners

Individuals One-on-one meetings, phone calls, mail-drop flyers, neighbourhood signs, Community Liaison Officer contacts

Working around their availability, explaining “what’s in it for them” to participate.

Assisted Living Facility

Seniors Make a presentation during lunch at the facility

Account for people with vision or hearing impairment in presentation.

Trucking Representative

Industry Associations

Breakfast stakeholder meeting; present at existing Board meeting; phone calls; webinar

May require plenty of advance time to schedule a meeting.

Immigrant Services Organization

Public Interest Group

Set up introductory meeting to explain project and organization’s role; keep organization updated and request they share materials with member groups.

May require translated materials and translation facilitators at events.



22

C. CONNECT – ENGAGEMENT METHODS

Part 1 ENGAGEMENT PLANNING TIPS & CONSIDERATIONS

This resource offers examples of tools and techniques that you may want to use in your engagement process. They are sorted into the IAP2 Public Participation Spectrum levels to show which tools support informing stakeholders versus which tools better support a dialogue with stakeholders. Consult

At this level, communication becomes a two-way exchange. When you consult, you raise awareness, share information about your project, and provide opportunities for feedback. Your goal is to gather feedback to inform your decisions, and you are not necessarily committing to using all the feedback. Your commitment to the public is to keep them informed, listen to and acknowledge their ideas, and “close the loop” on how input influenced the decision being made. This level of engagement is appropriate when technical solutions are clear and routine. Example “consult” tools include:

• Open Houses: display boards, exhibits, unstructured discussions or conversations. • Town Hall / Public Meetings: Information sessions, Question and Answer sessions. • Survey: telephone/online/intercept survey or research poll that is demographically

representative. • Questionnaire: Hard copy paper or online questionnaire that participants opt-in to take (not

necessarily demographically representative). • Email or Mail: Input link on website to receive letters. • Small Sessions: Interviews, One-on-One meetings, moderated small discussions or focus groups. • Experts: Panel presentations, Moderated discussion after a presentation.

Involve

The involve level adds iteration to the engagement process; at this level you are committing to demonstrating that you understand public concerns and have considered them. Over multiple stages, you need to show what you heard in the process, how that input was used and was not used (and why), and what the next step is. At each step, there is an opportunity to go deeper with participants to explore past their positions on issues and better understand the personal values that drive their decision-making. At this level you do commit to developing and gathering input on options/alternatives that reflect public input from a previous engagement step. This level of engagement is appropriate when there is no clear solution to an issue.



23

Example “involve” tools include:

• Workshops: Interactive working sessions, small group brainstorming, World Café, and other small group, dialog-based engagement methods.

• Charrettes: An intensive structured design-first workshops that bring in designers, engineers, planners, and other cross-disciplinary experts to design options and alternatives with stakeholders over the course of one to five days.

Collaborate

When you collaborate, you commit to partnering with the public on each aspect of decision-making. This can include designing the engagement process with the public to ensure that it will be effective. At the collaboration level, you commit to incorporating advice and recommendations to the maximum extent possible. This level of engagement is appropriate when the scope and definition of the issue is unclear, meaning that there is also no clear solution.

• Consensus Building and Participatory Decision Making: inclusion of consensus-building facilitation techniques into groups, meetings, panels, and workshops.

• Advisory Committee or Task Force: Ongoing engagement of stakeholders through an advisory committee that has some authority over the design of the engagement process, definition of deliverables, and oversight of deliverables and the process.



24

D. REPORT BACK TO STAKEHOLDERS

Part 1 WORKSHEET

This resource outlines how to approach the engagement summary and report back. Information about reporting to Boards and Committees is included in Appendices A and B. Closing the loop with participants is a fundamental part of any engagement process. This lets people know you are listening, that their time was well-spent, and their input is being used to influence decisions. While specific reporting requirements will vary depending on the type of project, an engagement summary report should:

• Describe the activities before, during, and after the engagement process; • Identify how the process contributed to the project; • Provide a summary of key ideas and priorities that emerged including, themes, and trends in the

data; and • Explain how feedback was incorporated.

If you are reporting out to a Metro Vancouver Board through a Committee, once the Committee agenda package is posted online, advise stakeholders of the meeting date, location, time, provide a link to the agenda package, and information on how to sign-up as a speaker. For issues that have a high degree of stakeholder interest, you may also consider advising stakeholders when the Board agenda package is published including the same information plus the time by which speakers must submit delegation requests. D1. How has the feedback from participants been incorporated into the project?

D2. Who needs to know the outcome and decisions of this engagement process?



25

D3. How will the findings from the engagement process be shared and in what format? (e.g. online, electronic or printed report, detailed or summary document).

D4. What findings will be presented? Are there any findings that are potentially controversial or newsworthy? How well is the decision being made aligning with public input? What hasn’t been addressed and why? Are there any ways to simplify the report-back so that key findings stand out?



26

E. EVALUATE – PROCESS EVALUATION

WORKSHEET

This resource provides strategic questions to consider when designing an engagement process, so that you have the tools to evaluate the process at key points. Evaluation helps ensure that our projects are efficient and effective. It also provides us the opportunity to try new things, learn from mistakes, and improve our engagement practices as individuals and as an organization. At the beginning of your process, you should discuss with your team what success looks like. Then, develop some evaluation metrics so that you can check in during and after the process to see if you are on track. Evaluation typically happens at four key points:

• At process design: ensure that the results you wish to achieve can be observed and measured. • At each event and input opportunity: include a feedback form for attendees and make time for

a quick debrief with staff at the end of the event. • At the end of each engagement phase: Conduct a formal evaluation across the team (including

Project Managers, event and support staff, communications and decision makers). Take note of challenges and update your plan accordingly for the next phase of engagement.

• At the end of the project: Conduct a formal evaluation across the team (including Project Managers, event and support staff, communications and decision makers). Save helpful resources and processes in a central location, so that you have templates, checklists, and other materials ready for your next engagement project.

The list of questions below can be used to evaluate your process: E1. How did public input affect the decision being made?

What feedback was incorporated and why? What feedback was not incorporated and why? How did you communicate this to participants?



27

E2. What were the original goals for the engagement? Did the team achieve what it set out to do? This is easy to answer when you take a moment early on to ensure that the results you wish to achieve can be observed and measured.

E3. Were all affected staff, stakeholders, and members of the public reached? If not, why? Did participants receive a report back on how their input was used?

E4. Were the engagement tools and approaches effective? How does your data demonstrate this?

E5. Were participants satisfied with the process?

How does your data demonstrate this?

E6. Were the key issues addressed?

What issues or challenges emerged and how could they have been prevented?

E7. Were the Metro Vancouver Engagement Principles demonstrated in each step of the process?



28

Appendix A Reports Seeking Authorization

This section is intended to give direction on producing reports for Committee and Board consideration that seek authorization to proceed with an engagement process.

A.1 PURPOSE OF REPORT The aim of these types of reports is to inform elected officials of relevant information related to the project or initiative and receive approval to proceed with the engagement process in the way described in the report. Generally, reports seeking authorization to proceed with an engagement process will outline the key issues surrounding the project or initiative, explain why engagement is necessary, describe how input from the public will be used, and define the proposed scope (e.g., timeframe) and methods of the engagement process. The tools and worksheets contained in this guide will assist you in developing this information. This type of report does not necessarily need to be a standalone report, but could be part of a larger overall report. For example, a report seeking authorization to proceed with engagement on amendments to an existing bylaw would also describe the history of the bylaw, why amendments are necessary, and describe possible amendment options. This report can also be used in communications to those being engaged.



29

A.2 REPORT SEEKING AUTHORIZATION GUIDE For more direction on putting together a committee report, refer to the Guidelines on Report Writing Format. Include the following information in your committee report seeking authorization to proceed with an engagement process. Insert these sections into the Report Template. RECOMMENDATION That the MVRD/MVHC/GVWD/GVS&DD Board approve the scope of the proposed <Name of Project or Initiative> and authorize staff to proceed with the engagement process as presented in the report dated Month Day, Year, titled “<Name of Project or Initiative> – Public Engagement Process”. PURPOSE To seek approval of the scope of the <Name of Project or Initiative> and to receive authorization to begin engagement on the project/initiative. BACKGROUND • Outline why this project or initiative is being brought forward now (e.g. board motion, committee

work plan, Board Strategic Plan), some examples are included below • Briefly summarize relevant background information on the project or initiative, such as how the

project or initiative arose, when a plan/Bylaw or strategy first came into effect, the changes being proposed and why they are needed etc.

• End this section: “This report presents the scope of the <Name of Project or Initiative> for approval, along with a proposed engagement process that allows stakeholders to provide input on the <project or initiative>.

At the November 25, 2016 meeting of the GVS&DD Board, the following motion was passed:

That the GVS&DD Board direct staff to proceed with public and stakeholder consultation on the proposed changes to the Development Cost Charge Program following the adoption of the 5-year financial plan in March 2017, and direct staff to report back, prior to the consultation, on phasing of and potential strategies to mitigate the impact of the rate increases.

Initiating consultation on potential regulatory mechanisms to reduce emissions from indoor residential wood burning was identified as a priority action in the Climate Action Committee’s 2017 work plan. The Metro Vancouver Board Strategic Plan directs staff to “identify the key threats to the region’s air quality and their sources, and pursue appropriate means for reducing or eliminating identified threats.”



30

<NAME OF PROJECT OR INITIATIVE> • Describe the project or initiative in as much detail as is necessary • Give relevant background information e.g. describe current practices, the changes that are being

proposed and why they are needed • Subheadings may be required if certain issue areas need to be explained further ENGAGEMENT PROCESS Metro Vancouver is committed to engaging with stakeholders that have the potential to be impacted by <project or initiative> and approaches engagement in a manner that incorporates feedback from stakeholders into project plans where possible. Metro Vancouver will provide a variety of forums, listed below, to learn about stakeholders’ interests and concerns related to the <project or initiative>. This information will inform the <project or initiative> and be reported back at the end of the process along with staff recommendations. Scope of the Engagement Metro Vancouver will be seeking input on the following aspects of the <project or initiative>

• Bullet the areas you are seeking input on or describe in paragraph format (e.g. bylaw requirements, parkland uses, building design and impacts on a neighbourhood etc.). Be as specific as possible.

Stakeholders Staff have identified the following stakeholders who may be impacted by, or have an interest in, the project or initiative.

• Use a bulleted list for when stakeholders consist of specific groups or use a paragraph format to describe more broadly the groups that will be engaged

Methods and Timing In order to engage with the identified stakeholders, the following methods are being proposed as part of the engagement strategy:

Method Purpose Timing

Insert detail Insert detail Insert detail

Insert detail Insert detail Insert detail

The methods included below are provided as an example:

Metro Vancouver website Provide up to date information about the engagement process

Ongoing beginning Spring 2018

Letter/Email notification and updates

Provide notification that engagement is beginning, provide information on

Spring 2018 Summer 2018 Fall 2018



31

Method Purpose Timing

opportunities to engage, deliver updates on what we heard

Winter 2018

Working group Provide an opportunity for in-depth regular discussions with key stakeholders

Spring 2018 – Winter 2018 (quarterly meetings)

Multi-lingual focus groups Provide an opportunity for education and engagement for those stakeholders that are not comfortable conversing in English

Summer 2018

Online survey Provide a quick and easy option for stakeholder who wish to participate remotely

Fall / Winter 2018

Site visits/interviews Provide an opportunity for in-person education and engagement during visits

Fall / Winter 2018

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS • Begin: “If the Board/Committee approves alternative one…” • Identify whether the alternative is included in the budget, and under which function, division or

program budget • Where applicable, reference the function that will be financially impacted by the alternative • Where applicable, reference the household impact • Separate the cost of the project/initiative from the cost of carrying out the engagement process • If alternative two is to provide alternate direction to staff, indicate that further analysis may be

required to determine the resulting financial impacts SUMMARY / CONCLUSION • Repeat the purpose of the report, including why the report is coming forward now • Summarize the main points of the report in the context of the alternatives • End by recommending alternative one Attachments Appropriate attachments include discussion papers or other relevant background information.



32

Appendix B Reports Describing Results

This section is intended to give direction on producing reports for Committee and Board consideration that report back on the results of an engagement process.

B.1 REPORT PURPOSE Primarily, reports that describe the results of an engagement process should give elected officials an accurate summation of what was heard from the public. Generally, reports of this nature need to do three things:

• Describe the engagement process that was undertaken, including what was asked; • Outline what was heard, using sufficient detail; and, • Describe how this input will affect the project or initiative going forward.

Depending on what was heard from the public, the report may confirm the existing direction of the initiative proposed by staff; recommend minor or major changes to the initiative; or recommend further engagement with a redefined scope. In each of these instances it is important to communicate the rationale for the recommendation being made to committee. “Issues/Response Tables” or “Issues/Communication Trackers” can be a useful attachment for giving Board and Committee members a sense of the breadth of feedback that was received and how Metro Vancouver staff are responding to the issues, comments or questions that are raised by the public. An example issues response table is included below.

Figure 1: Issues response table for Preliminary Consultation on a Residential Wood Smoke Regulation for Metro Vancouver



33

B.2 REPORT DESCRIBING RESULTS GUIDE Include the following information in your committee report describing the results of an engagement process. Insert these sections into the Report Template. RECOMMENDATION That the MVRD/MVHC/GVWD/GVS&DD Board receive for information the report dated Month Day, Year, titled “<Project Name/Initiative> – Public Engagement Results.

• Or another recommendation if authorization from Board/Committee is required for next steps for the project or initiative.

PURPOSE To communicate the results of the public engagement on <Name of Project or Initiative>.

BACKGROUND At the <date> meeting of the MVRD/MVHC/GVWD/GVS&DD Board, the following motion was passed:

That the MVRD/MVHC/GVWD/GVS&DD Board approve the scope of the proposed <Name of Project or Initiative> and authorize staff to proceed with the engagement process as presented in the report dated Month Day, Year, titled “Report Title”.

The engagement process has now concluded and this report communicates the engagement results.

• Include any other additional relevant background information on the project or initiative ENGAGEMENT FEEDBACK • List the engagement methods, the engagement period, stakeholders, and the approximate

number of participants • Summarize the feedback received (could be in bullet point) • Describe how the input received will influence the project or initiative <ADDITIONAL SIGNIFICANT TOPICS AS NEEDED> • If a particular topic needs to be elaborated on, use additional sections of the report to go

deeper into the issues that were identified and possible responses to concerns raised FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS • If the report is not just to be received for information, begin: "If the Board/Committee

approves alternative one..." • Identify whether the alternative is included in the budget, and under which function,

division or program budget • If a direction is proposed for the project or initiative as a result of the engagement

process, identify any changes to fees or operating costs that may arise, and the impact that may have on the public or other stakeholders



34

SUMMARY / CONCLUSION • Repeat the purpose and summarize the main points of the report. Attachments Appropriate attachments include issues response tables, a summary of engagement activities, or consultant’s reports.


24582320

2018 Finance and Intergovernment Committee Work Plan Report Date: March 1, 2018

Priorities

1st Quarter Status 2018 Standing Committee Events Complete 2018 International Program Complete Fraser Basin Contribution Agreement Complete Zero Waste Conference Update Complete National Zero Waste Council Update Complete Regional Prosperity Initiative Update Complete Public Engagement Policy In Progress Intergovernmental Communications and Engagement Update Pending Board Policies (As Required/Applicable) Pending 2nd Quarter Affordable Housing Development Cost Charge Waiver Bylaw Pending Statutory and Non-Statutory Reserves Policy Pending Financial Planning Policy Pending George Massey Tunnel Replacement Project Update Pending Intergovernmental Communications and Engagement Update Pending Board Policies (As Required/Applicable) Pending 3rd Quarter Review of Debt Management Principles Pending TransLink Federal Gas Tax Application and Annual Report Pending Zero Waste Conference Update Pending Regional Prosperity Initiative Update Pending Intergovernmental Communications and Engagement Update Pending Board Policies (As Required/Applicable) Pending 4th Quarter Asset Management Policy Pending National Zero Waste Council Update Pending Regional District Service Area, General Government & Corporate Support Annual Budget Review

Pending

Overall Annual Budget and Five Year Financial Plan Update approval for Districts Pending Intergovernmental Communications and Engagement Update Pending Board Policies (As Required/Applicable) Pending

6.1


METRO VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT FINANCE AND … … · 16/03/2018 · Mayor Derek Corrigan,...

Documents

Transcript of METRO VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT FINANCE AND … … · 16/03/2018 · Mayor Derek Corrigan,...