Regarding "Current Service…

Regarding "Current Service Levels"

- The addition of adding energy usage and cost to the current levels of service adds another complex layer to the asset management plans. Recording energy usage in the asset management plans may be very time consuming for municipal staff as well as a duplication from other provincial requirements to monitor energy usage. Also, setting measures for energy usage and cost may prove to be somewhat difficult when assessing complex assets such as buildings, storm water system, or roads.

Given the amount of information to be collected the Town's asset management plan, it does not seem warranted at this time to add any further complex components which may make it prohibitive for providing useful information.

Regarding "Updating"

- The proposal include the requirement for the asset management plan to be approved in writing by a licenced engineering practitioner representing the municipality. Three main comments on this proposed requirement: 1. This will add an extra expense to the municipality which will reduce our ability to fund any capital plans (especially given most municipalities infrastructure deficits). 2. It may be difficult to find one engineer who would be capable or willing to approve the plan when there are many different types of assets (i.e. roads, bridges, facilities, fleet). There may not be the knowledge base with one engineer or firm. 3. I believe one of the core purposes of municipalities having asset management plans is to ensure that they are recognizing the assets they have, prioritizing needs over wants, ensuring investments in assets are made at the right time and being sensitive to the needs of the community it serves. Although municipalities may need assistance from the engineering community for certain assets

- Municipalities should be encouraged to take full ownership of this information and the recommendations being made.

[Original Comment ID: 210007]