particular attention to hydrologic and hydraulic methodologies and consolidating floodproofing guidance along rivers and lakes.

Risk Analysis:

With voluntary participation of property owners

To date, the City has only had experience with municipal infrastructure local improvements where Administration deals directly with consultants and contractors, not in connection with private property. Although the two processes are similar, they are not identical. Internal processes would need to be established and responsibilities defined within departments such as Public Works, Finance and Legal Services. In addition, processes would have to be developed for interactions with consultants and contractors in connection with private property local improvements. A detailed analysis of administrative time for this endeavour has not been determined at this time.

There are no provincial or municipal standards for flood abatement measures. This was confirmed by An Independent Review of the 2019 Flood Events in Ontario, as its first fifteen recommendations are enhancements to various pieces of provincial legislation that address this lack of regulatory guidance.

Flood abatement measures are traditionally site-specific engineering solutions for protective walls or barriers such as dykes, berms or seawalls. This means that any measures would be substantial undertakings requiring engineering design, contractors who specialize in such works and federal, provincial, municipal and conservation authority approvals and permits. It is anticipated that the costs of such undertakings and time to complete them will also be substantial.

The advantage of the local improvement process for the property owner is that the cost of the local improvement can be spread out over a number of years. Traditionally, the City has implemented a 10-year pay back period for municipal infrastructure local improvement charges. O. Reg. 586/06 does permit a longer payback period tied to the lifetime of the work. In addition, the City is able to provide favourable interest rates associated with repayment of local improvement charges. The ability to provide for a longer term (i.e. 20-year option) to repay charges for the works while available must be carefully weighed in light of current and future economic circumstances.

From the City's perspective, local improvement charges represent lower risk than other receivables because O.Reg. 586/06 provides that local improvement charges have priority lien status. This means that unpaid local improvement charges are treated exactly the same way as property taxes. These charges can be added to tax arrears through tax arrears certificates and would form part of the cancellation price in the event of a tax sale. Along with property taxes, local improvement charges are a first charge on real estate.

With involuntary participation of the property owner

Although a review of by-laws from other municipalities was undertaken, Administration could not find any by-laws which contain standards for this type of flood abatement. Further, there are no other standards from any other levels of government for flooding abatement, which McNeil notes in his report. The Province has acknowledged the lack