Re: ERO #019-1406 _________…

Re: ERO #019-1406
____________________________________________________________________________

On February 28, 2020 the Proposed Regulatory Matters Pertaining to Community Benefits Authority under the Planning Act, the Development Charges Act, and the Building Code Act was posted by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing on the Environmental Registry of Ontario. The Township of Brock would like to provide the following comments to the proposal.

The Township is very pleased that some of the concerns expressed in previous communications have been addressed in this proposal and thank the Minister for proposing changes that provide additional clarity to improve the legislation before it is completely implemented.

1. Required content of a Community Benefits Charge Strategy
The proposal details what the municipality must provide and this will be of benefit to anyone who wishes to impose the community benefits charge. We have no concerns with this section of the proposal.

2. Services Eligible to Be Funded Through Development Charges
The proposal to use development charges to pay for the capital cost of certain community services such as public libraries, parks development and recreational facilities is a very positive improvement to the original proposal. This change will allow Municipalities to continue to develop complete communities with new residents having access to the same amenities as existing residents. Restoring these types of growth related services back to the development charges funding stream allows Municipalities to utilize their established processes for assessment and collection without incurring additional cost for land appraisals.

Giving the Municipality the option to maintain the current parkland dedication rate rather than establishing a community benefits charge by-law is also seen an improvement to the original proposal. As a lower tier Municipality in the Region of Durham, Brock Township is responsible for parks while the Region is responsible for administering many of the other community services remaining in the proposed community benefits charge. The Township would like to continue to use the parkland dedication under the Planning Act to keep our administrative burden to a manageable level and not incur the added cost of administering the community benefits charge.

The regulation is not specific to upper and lower tier Municipalities in that it does not specifically state whether it will allow one level to maintain the parkland dedication under the Planning Act while the other level applies the community benefits charge. This may be the case in some small lower tier municipalities with limited capacity and should be an option.

The proposed change to the development charges to fully recover the capital costs related to the provision of certain community services such as public libraries, parks development and recreational facilities is a very positive improvement to the original proposal and to the previous development charges legislation. Not discounting these services emphasizes the importance of these services to the development of a complete community.

This proposal does not address how these changes will be implemented into the Development Charges Act. It is important to know if existing by-laws and background studies will need to be revised or if changes will be effective when the next study is completed. It is also important to know if there will be any changes to the current reporting requirements when the proposed change is implemented.

3. Percentage of Land Value for Determining a Maximum Community Benefits Charge
Appling the community benefits charge based on land value before the building permit is issued requires the municipality to complete land appraisals that add to the cost of the process. The amount of community benefits charge collected is not predictable and does not allow for good planning. As stated previously this is not feasible in a lower tier municipality with few qualified land assessors able to provide reports in a timely fashion. Appling a rate of 10% in Brock’s case to a land value in our rural area would most likely not produce an amount anywhere near what similar land would produce in a more urban area. This lower value equates to less of a charge for the purchase of parkland. From the Regional perspective, their 5% would not amount to as much as a similar size property in a larger urban area would produce. Would this translate into a lower level of service for our residents?

Again the section does not address the option of one level of municipal government using a community benefits charge while its upper tier or lower tier does not. Would it be possible for the other tier to collect the single tier charge percentage in the area if the other tier has opted not to use the community benefits charge? If this is considered, would the parkland dedication provisions still be allowed for the level not utilizing the community benefits charge?

4. Timeline to Transition to the New Community Benefits Charge Regime
The delay of the transition date from January 1, 2021 to one year following the date the proposed community benefits charge regulation comes into effect is a positive step as it allows municipalities additional time to complete the necessary study and do proper consultations. We have no concerns with this section of the proposal.

5. Community Benefits Charges By-law Notice
With the provisions being similar to the notice provisions under the Development Charges Act, the administration of the implementation of new community benefits charge by-law should not present any issues for the Township. We have no concerns with this section of the proposal.

6. Minimum Interest Rate for Community Benefits Charge Refunds Where a By-law Has Been Successfully Appealed
The proposal in this section is very clear and provides staff with easily accessible rates. We have no concerns with this section of the proposal.

7. Building Code Applicable Law
The proposal in this section is very clear and provides staff with the legal authority to collect the community benefits charges. We have no concerns with this section of the proposal.

Should you wish to discuss any of the above comments in more detail, please contact us and we will be happy to provide specifics from our lower tier perspective.

Yours truly,