Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Goderich Signal-Star, 2009-06-17, Page 19Goderich Signal -Star, Wednesday, June 17, 2009 - Page A19 8.4 BOIL WATER ADVISORIES - EFFECTIVENESS 8.5 BREAKS IN WATER MAINS - EFFECTIVENESS 2 1 0 Effectiveness Measure Weighted number of days when a boil water advisory issued by the Medical Officer of Health, applicable to a municipal water supply, was in effect. Objective Water is safe and meets local needs. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Resin cs 2008 7.81 2007 18.75 10.7 PARTICIPANT HOURS FOR RECRE- ATION PROGRAMS EFFECTIVENESS 6.25 6.26 Effectiveness Measure Number of water main breaks per 100 kilometres of water distribution pipe in a year. Objective Improve system reliability. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results 9.1 GARBAGE COLLECTION EFFICIENCY $43.71 $44.22 2006 $46.32 2005 t nt (Garbage 9.2 GARBAGE DISPOSAL EFFICIENCY 2008 $41.44 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for garbage collection per tonne or per household. (Specify) Objective Efficient municipal garbage collection services. N/A 2007 N/A 9.3 SOLID WASTE DIVERSION (RECYCLING) - EFFICIENCY 2006 2007 2006 2005 2008 2007 1864.06 1817.78 2006 1817.78 2005 1695.03 Effectiveness Measure Total participant hours for recreation programs per 1,000 persons. Objective Recreation programs serve needs of residents ion. (continued) 10.8 INDOOR RECREATION FACILITIES - EFFECTIVENESS 2007 2006 9522 9522 9522 Effectiveness Measure Square metres of indoor recreation facilities (municipally owned). Notes & Key Factors tor Understanding Results This measure was redefined in 2005 to exclude special events. The denominator of this measure is total population divided by 1,000 and does not represent the number of participants in recreation programs. Efficiency Measure Operating costs for garbage collection per tonne or per household. (Specify) Objective Efficient municipal garbage disposal services. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results Results Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results Efficiency Meagre Operating costs for solid waste diversion (recycling) per tonne or per household. (SPeCffy) Objective Efficient municipal solid waste diversion (recycling) services. • 2008 1312.84 2007 1318.47 2006 1318.47 Effectiveness Measure Square metres of indoor recreation facility space per 1,000 persons (municipally owned). Objective Recreation facility space is adequate for pout. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results in 2006, the measure for recreation facilities was split into a measure of indoor recreation facilities and a measure of outdoor recreation facility space. The new measures are defined as municipally owned facilities. 10.9 OUTDOOR RECREATION SPACE - EFFECTIVENESS 2008 2007 FACILITY 2006 87008 87008 87008 Effectiveness Measure Square metres of outdoor recreation facility space (municipally owned). 2008 2007 2006 11996.14 12047.63 12047.63 Effectiveness Measure Square metres of outdoor recreation facility space per 1,000 persons (municipally owned). Objective Recreation -facility time is adequate for population. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Result in 2006, the measure for recreation facilities was split into a measure of indoor recreation facilities and a measure of outdoor recreation facility space. The new measures are defined as municipally owned facilities. Formulas for all efficiency measures were changed in 2005 to improve the definition of operating costs. Formulas for all efficiency measures were changed in 2005 to Improve the definition of operating vists. Formulas for all efficiency measures were changed in 2005 to improve the definition of operating costs. 9.4 SOLID VIASTE MANAGEMENT 9.5 COMPLAINTS - COLLECTION 9.6 NUMBER OF MUNICIPAL OF GARBAGE & RECYCLED SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT MATERIALS EFFECTIVENESS FACILITIES EFFECTIVENESS (INTEGRATED SYSTEM) - EFFICIENCY 2008 N/A 2007 N/A 2006 N/A 2005 N/A Eificiency Measure Average operating costs for solid waste management (collection, disposal and diversion) per tonne or per household. (Specify) Objective Efficient municipal solid waste management (Integrated System) Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results Formulas for all efficiency measures were changed in 2005 to improve the definition of operating costs. 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 7.02 5.62 5,67 8.57 3.7 N/A N/A NIA N/A N/A Effectiveness Measure Number of complaints received in a year conceming the collection of garbage and recycled materials per 1,000 households. Objective Improve garbage collection of garbage and recycled materials.. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results 9.7 FACILITY COMPLIANCE - EFFECTIVENESS Effectiveness Measure Number of days per year when a Ministry of Environment compliance order for remediation concerning an air or groundwater standard was in effect for a municipally owned solid waste management facility, by facility. Objective Municipal solid waste services do not have an adverse impact on environment. FaciWty Days Days Days Days Days Name 2006 2007 2006 2005 2004 Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results - WI" Effectiveness Measure Total number of solid waste management facilities owned by the municipality with a Ministry of Environment Certificate of Approval. Objective Context for solid waste management facility compliance measure. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results 9.8 DIVERSION OF RESIDENTIAL 199 DIVERSION OF RESIDENTIAL SOLiD I'1ASTE SOLiD WASTE EFFECTIVENESS !Based on Combined Res. & Indus. Comm. Institutional Tonnage; EFFECTIVENESS 10.1 PARKS - EFFICIENCY 2008 $80.84 2007 2006 2005 '68.06 '64.56 '60.36 Efficiency Measutre Operating costs for parks per person. Objective Efficient operation of parks. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Resurfts Formulas for all.efficiency measures were changed in 2005 to improve the definition of operating costs. 3 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 13.39% 8.4% 8.1% 8.1% 5.2% Effectiveness Measure Percentage of residential solid waste diverted for recycling (based on combined residential and Industrial/ Commercial/lnstitutional tonnage). Objective Municipal solid waste reduction programs divert waste from landfills and/ or incinerators. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results 10 2 RECREATION PROGRAMS - EFFICIENCY1 10 3 RECREATION FACILITIES - EFFICIENCY 2008 2007 2006 2005 '0.97 '0.59 '0.92 '0.86 2008 2007 2006 '69.44 '71.11 '50.03 2005 '70.34 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for recreation programs per person. Objective Efficient operation of recreation programs. / Notes & Key Factors for Understanding iRewfe Formulas for all efficiency measures were changed in 2005 to improve the definition of operating costs. This measure is based on total population, not the population participating in recreation programs. Efficiency Measure Operating costs for recreation facilities per person. Objecffve Efficient operation of recreation facilities. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results . Formulas for all efficiency measures were changed in 2005 to improve the definition of operating costs. 10 4 RECREATION PROGRAMS & RECREATION 10.5 TRAILS - EFFECTIVENESS % 10.6 OPEN SPACE - EFFECTIVENESS' FACILITIES (SUBTOTAL) EFFICIENCY 2008 2007 $70.41 $139.16 Efficiency Mestere Operating costs for recreation programs and recreation facilities per person (Subtotal). Objective Efficient operation of recreation programs and recreation facilities. Notes & Key Faders for Understanding Results Formulas for all efficiency measures were changed in 2005 to improve Me definition of operating cats. This measure represents a subtotal and is automatically completed when a municipality reports one or mire efficiency measures for parks and recreation. • 2008 6.5 2007 6.5 2006 6.5 Efficiency Measure Total kilometres of trails. 2005 6.5 6.5 2008� �7 12006] 2005 I 2004 Effectiveness Measure Hectares of open space (municipally owned). 2008 2007 2006 10.14 10.19 10.19 Efficiency Measure Total kilometres of trails per 1,000 persons. Objective Trails provide recreation opportunities. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results Efficiency Measure Hectares of open space per 1,000 persons (municipally owned). Objective Open space is adequate for population. Notes & Key Factors for Undentandin g Results 11.1 LIBRARY COSTS PER PERSON - EFFICiENCY 2008 2007 2006 2005 $8.55 '7.86 '8.72 '7.51 Efficiency Measure Operating costs for library services per person. 11.2 LIBRARY COSTS PER USE - EFFICIENCY 2008 2007 2006 2005 N/A N/A N/A N/A 11.3 LIBRARY USES - EFFECTIVENESS 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 WA N/A N/A N/A N/A Efficient library services. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results Formulas for all efficiency measures were changed in 2005 to improve the definition of operating costs. Efficiency Measure Operating costs for library services per use. Efficient Objective library services. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results Formulas for all efficiency measures were changed in 2005 to improve the definition of operating costs. 11.4 ELECTRONIC LIBRARY USES - ri EFFECTIVENESS 2008 2007 N/A N/A 2006 N/A 2005 N/A 2004 N/A Efficiency Measure Library uses per person. Objective Increased use of library services. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results 11.5 NON -ELECTRONIC LIBRARY USES - EFFECTIVENESS N/A N/A N/A 2005 N/A 2004 N/A Effectiveness Measure Electronic library uses as a percentage of total library uses. Objective Better information on library usage. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results Effectiveness Measure Non -electronic library uses as a percentage of total library uses. Objective Better information on library usage. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results 12.1 LOCATION OF NEVI DEVELOPMENT - EFFECTIVENESS 2008 2007 12.2 PRESERVATION OF 12.3 PRESERVATION OF AGRICULTURAL LAND DURING / AGRICULTURAL LAND RELATIVE REPORTING YEAR - EFFECTIVENESSI TO 2000 - EFFECTIVENESS 100% 100% Effectiveness Measure Percentage of new residential units located within settlement areas. nbjective New residential development is occurring within settlement areas. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results In 2007, the measure for the location of new development was redefined for greater accuracy. 2008 100% 100% 1_ 100% 1 100x' 100% Effectiveness Measure Percentage of land designated for agricultural purposes which was not re -designated for other uses during the reporting year. Objective . Preservation of agricultural lands. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results /.. _. _._._,... ...., ,,.,.�.4.S u...,../,.,;ii+v..;yri<irissriin'iwHfGu7rviii 12.4 CHANGE IN NUMBER OF AGRICULTURAL HECTARE12.5 CHANGE IN NUMBER OF AGRICULTURAL DURING REPORTING YEAR - EFFECTIVENESS ' HECTARES SINCE 2000 - EFFECTIVENESS 2008 2007 .2006 2005 2004 1004 10P1100' 10' 10(P Effectiveness Measure Percentage of land designated for agricultural purposes which was not re -designated for other uses relative to the base year of 2000. Objective Preservation of agricultural land. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results 0 0 0 0 Effectiveness Measure Number of hectares of land originally designated for agricultural purposes which was re -designated for other uses during the reporting year. Objective Preservation of agricultural land. Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results Effectiveness Measure Number of hectares of land originally designated for agricultural purposes which was re -designated for other uses since January 1, 2000. Objective Preservation of agricultural land. • Notes & Key Factors for Understanding Results is here6y given to The Ratepayers of the own o oderich. Pursuant to the requirements of the ovincial Government, please find issued above the service delivery measurements according to the Municipal Performance Measurement Program. For further information or questions, please contact the Town of Goderich Municipal Office at 524-8344, (Mrs.) Judy Kay, AMCT, Treasurer, Town of Goderich, June 17, 2009.