►
From YouTube: City Council - April 16, 2019 - Part 2 of 2
Description
City Council, meeting 6, April 16, 2019 - Part 2 of 2
Agenda and background materials:
http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/decisionBodyProfile.do?function=doPrepare&meetingId=15352
Part 1 of 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suPeFu-kGh8#t=15m59s
Meeting Navigation:
0:18:05 - Meeting resume
0:37:52 - Public session
A
So
members,
the
mayor's
second
key
item-
we
decided
this
morning
that
DX
4.1
on
Toronto's
transit
expansion,
program,
updated
next
steps,
will
be
considered
a
4:00
p.m.
this
afternoon.
A
link
to
the
city
manager
supplementary
report
was
sent
to
members
of
the
recess
and
copies
have
been
placed
on
your
desk
council
was
also
advise
at
the
public
debate
on
appointment
items
see
a
5.4
5.5
would
take
place
after
the
lunch
recess.
We
will
consider
those
items
after
release
of
member
holds
have
also
reviewed
a
number
of
urgent
motions.
A
C
Speaker,
I'm
quite
happy
to
go
a
long
thought,
but
I
could
I
can
I
make
a
subject
to
which
would
be
that
we
do
the
vote.
I
think
we
carried
over
one
item
to
we
could
just
finish
up,
do
the
release
of
holds
and
then
have
it
at
3:15
or
something
without
an
hour.
But
just
do
this.
We
do
these
little
bits
of
business
and
I'm
quite
happy
to
do
that,
because,
quite
frankly,
I
had
anticipated
that
people
would
have
the
report
to
have
to
read
over
the
lunch
hour
which
they
did
not
and
I'm.
C
A
A
E
B
F
G
J
A
F
A
K
Thank
you
very
much,
madam
Speaker.
It's
on
page
six
CC
6.4,
1832,
Eastern
Avenue,
one
Khalid
place
and
two
Sackville
Street.
The
official
plan
is
zoning.
Bylaw
amendment
application,
there's
a
request
for
directions.
Report
I
would
need
to
reopen
and
just
hold
that
down
until
the
technical
amendment
is
ready.
Okay,.
B
B
A
L
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker,
and
while
I
have
the
floor,
madam
Speaker
I
apologize
for
my
absence
this
morning,
but
I
just
want
to
report
to
the
proud
Scarborough
councillors
that
both
birch
Mount
Hospital
and
General
Hospital
treated
my
father
very
well.
This
morning
my
motion
is
boilerplate,
section
37,
but
it
is
urgent
because
project
has
already
been
tendered
and,
and
this
allows
the
project
to
proceed
with
the
much-needed
last
$10,000.
Thank
you
on
paper.
D
A
A
J
J
A
J
I
J
H
M
Through
the
chair
counselor,
no,
our
officers
do
not
have
the
authority
to
pull
over
a
vehicle.
Moving
on
the
roadway,
that's
under
the
Highway
Traffic
Act,
that's
a
trauma.
Police
Service
has
the
enforcement
authority
also
we're
proposing
the
same
methodology
that
two
other
municipalities
in
Ontario
have
employed,
Oakville
and
Cal,
which
is
measuring
noise,
with
a
motorcycle
pull
to
the
side
of
the
roadway
and
recognizing,
if
we're
measuring
by
the
tailpipe
a
certain
level
as
noise
travels?
M
M
Are
subtle
variations
to
it,
but
in
essence,
yes,
they
do
have
some
different
where
they
route
the
engine
at
2,000
rpm.
But
then
it's
based
upon
the
engine
size.
It
gets
much
more
complex
depending
upon
the
number
of
cylinders.
So
we
took
the
approach
that
the
Society
of
Automotive
Engineers
recommended
through
there.
Okay.
J
H
So
they
currently
as
it's
written
the
general
prohibition,
is
a
catch-all
clause.
That
is
it's
very
subjective
and
it's
we're
unable
to
enforce
it.
What
we're
doing
is
bringing
rigor
to
the
process
introducing
six
different
categories
of
noise
and
then
a
seventh
which
is
unreasonable
and
persistent,
which
is
going
to
allow
us
to
capture
other
areas
that
that
we,
you
know
that
we
don't
foresee,
or
that
could
happen
in
the
future,
so
so.
J
J
M
J
M
The
the
approach
we've
taken
I
think
there's
been
misunderstanding
from
the
original.
The
current
noise
by
lava
has
a
general
prohibition,
but
that
general
prohibition
does
not
overrule
existing
restrictions.
They
exist
in
the
current
bylaw.
So
it's
it's
again.
It's
to
catch
those
noises
that
are
currently
not
regulated.
We've
brought
this
forward
the
same
concept.
All
we've
done
is
built
a
bit
more
clarity
about
what
noise
will,
if
it's
not
prohibited
by
ours
or
sound
level,
we're
having
some
rigor
around
how
it
can
be
more
consistently
approaching.
M
What's
an
unreasonable
and
persistent
noise
versus
somebody
makes
a
noise
once
and
somebody
wants
to
have
to
take
issue
with
it.
It
will
help
us
manage
those
because
we're
currently
we
get
complaints
from
residents
that
somebody
did
something
a
one-time
issue
and
we're
tying
up
our
resources
investigating
something
that
we
truly
don't
need
to
be
investigating.
But
if
it's
an
ongoing,
unnecessary
and
persistent
noise,
we
want
to
have
an
ability
to
do
enforcement
on
those
types
of
noise
situations.
M
The
chair,
the
councillor
Fletcher,
so
when
we
our
current
practices,
when
we
get
a
noise
complaint,
we
send
out
what
was
called
an
advisory
notice
to
the
person
that
is
believed
to
have
been
causing
the
noise,
reminding
them
or
informing
them.
Of
the
a
we've
received
a
complaint
and
what
the
rules
are.
That's,
not
an
enforcement
action
whatsoever.
G
Just
dealing
with
my
experience
with
one
of
my
businesses
on
Queen
Street,
where
someone
had
sent
an
email
unidentified,
perhaps
vexatious
or
vengeful,
at
which
point
someone
decided
to
have
a
look
at
it,
but
took
that
as
a
prior
offense
in
dealing
with
any
noise
coming
from
that
location.
Are
you
aware
of
that
in
the
past?
Is
that
your
standard
that.
G
Absolutely
because
do
you
think
it's
fair
if
I
make
up
a
name
and
send
it
to
you
and
say
it's
very
noisy
at
such
and
such
a
place
and
might
not
be,
but
I
may
have
a
bone
to
pick
with
that
business,
but
now
they're
on
your
radar
as
having
a
problem,
and
maybe
they
do
have
a
problem
later
and
the
file
shows
that
they
had
a
noise
complaint
which
may
have
been
unsubstantiated,
which
of
course,
I.
Think
in
your
review
has
some
weight
be
honest
with
me:
it
has
weight.
Doesn't
it
no.
M
G
A
J
M
And
to
be
clear,
counselor
and
again,
looking
at
what
the
other
miss
policies
do.
If
we're
going
to
be
doing
a
noise
enforcement
for
noisy
motorcycles,
it
would
be
a
planned
event
with
conjunction
with
trial
police,
because
we
will
not
be
staying
at
the
side
of
the
road
waiting
for
a
motorcycle
to
come
to
a
stop.
It
would
be
similar
to
like
a
ride
check
that
they
do
that.
M
J
J
J
Because
this
is
an
arrangement
that
is
a
common
occurrence
in
my
area,
especially
late
at
night,
on
the
Don
Valley
Parkway.
So
how
often
does
the
Toronto
Police
Service,
actually
you
know,
put
on
those
noise
noise,
sensors
or
to
measure
the
noise?
How
often
do
they
do
that?
How
often
do
they
plan
to
do
that?
How
often
did
they
do
it
last
year,
for
example,
how
you
know,
did
they
go
out
there
and
try
and
catch
motorcycles
and
other
you
know
loud
engines,
so.
M
Council,
currently,
the
noise
bylaw
does
not
have
that
provision
in
it.
This
is
a
new
provision
proposed
in
this
ouais
by
law.
So
this
is
a
brand
new
provision
and
requirement
so
that
we
have
no
previous
experience
on
doing
this
enforcement
or
how
often
or
how
frequent
so
should
council
adopt
this.
The
bylaw
will
come
into
effect
on
October.
1St
is
what
staff
is
recommending,
so
it
wouldn't
be
until
the
fall
of
this
year
or
possibly
into
early
next
year
that
we
actually
would
be
gearing
up
with
enforcement
strategies
with
GPS.
So.
M
J
October
seems
a
long
way
off
and
it'll
be
troublesome
this
summer,
because
you
know
folks
drivers
with
owners
of
cars
that
make
loud
noises.
You
know
that
I
think
they're
they're,
typically
known
to
want
to
rev
their
engines
on
warm
summer's
summer
evenings.
Yes,
and
so
there's
no
really
so
you
you're
proposing
October
the
first.
Is
there
any
way
you
can?
You
could
accelerate
that
to
give
some
relief
to
communities
that
are
suffer
through
this
all
summer,
yeah.
H
So
it's
a
fair
question:
I
understand
where
you're
coming
from
the
reason
we
build
in
the
longer
lead
time
is
to
do
the
necessary
education
to
the
various
industries
involved
in
noise.
We
need
to
train
our
officers.
We
need
to
operationalize
how
we're
going
to
do
this.
We
need
to
purchase
the
noise
meters.
We
need
to
do
a
number
of
things
in
the
next
few
months
and
that's
why
we
build
in
a
a
reasonable
lead
time
that
allows
us
to
to
do
this.
H
J
Couldn't
buy
a
couple
or
a
few
for
being
quite
serious,
I'm
a
Don,
Valley
Parkway,
it's
a
big
deal
and
I
remember
last
year
the
mayor
was
talking
about
doing
something
about.
You
know
a
lot
knows
on
on
major
roadways.
Is
there
any
chance?
We
could
get
this
going
a
little
bit
earlier.
I,
don't
know
what
you
mean
by
defying
various
industries
per
se,
I
other
noise,
making
industry
I'm
not
familiar
with
that
in.
H
The
industry
I'm
referring
to
is
there's
a
number
of
categories:
there's
the
music
industry,
there's
the
construction
industry
bars
and
restaurants.
Many
people
are
the
landscape
industry
with
with
equipment.
So
there's
a
there's,
a
number
of
different
players
in
this
in
this
area,
that's
the
will
of
Council
on
on
when
they
would
like
it
to
be
adopted
or
to
come
into
force
an
effect,
but
we
recommend
October.
First
are.
J
N
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker
I'm.
Just
gonna
stop
about
I've
got
in
front
of
me
a
few
letters
correspondence
from
various
organizations,
the
Toronto
Noyes
coalition,
Fonterra
the
financial
district
they're
concerned
about
a
number
of
things
asking
for
additional
consultation.
Do
you
can
you
just
enlighten
me
because
I
haven't
really
followed
this
process?
Why
would
they
be
expressed?
Have
you
read
this
correspondence
and
why
are
they
expressing
these
concerns?
Yes,.
H
I
have
this
has
been
a
lengthy
process
over
five
years
and
a
number
of
consultations.
We
had
a
noise
working
group
that
met
a
number
of
times.
Many
of
those
were
members
of
them.
We
then
held
two
meetings
in
between
committee
and
council
clarified
a
number
of
options.
It's
they're,
not
in
full
agreement
with
what
we're
doing,
but
we
feel
strongly
that
what
we're
introducing
is
some
rigor
to
the
process.
That
is
not
there
right.
Now,
it's
a
stronger
bylaw
and
we
feel
it's
important
to
move
forward
with
it.
Okay,.
N
And
I'll
ask
you
just
a
quick
question
about
leaf
blowing,
so
councillor
mackovic
and
councillor
McMahon
and
I,
were
you
know
we
were
having
meetings
last
term
about
this
issue?
All
of
our
wards,
former
wards
were
deeply
affected
by
that
some
neighbors
experiencing
two
or
three
leaf
blowers
at
one
time,
I
think
it's
fairly
well
known
the
impacts
about
level
of
noise
on
people's
health
etc,
and
they
also
the
environment.
So
what
have
you
done
to
address
leaf
blowing
in
neighborhoods
I
understand?
Some
cities
have
been
very
aggressive
on
this
matter.
H
In
Western,
Canada,
I,
believe
Westmount
and
another
municipality
outside
Vancouver
have
actually
banned
them.
We,
we
did
not
recommend
a
ban.
We
have
decibel
limit
that
that
there
are
to
adhere
to
again
we
we
met
with
the
industry.
We
met
with
residents
group
I
in
the
meeting
with
you
yourself
in
customer
havoc
a
couple
years
ago
on
this.
We
are
well
aware
of
the
issue,
but
we
feel
that
the
the
bylaw
and
one
of
the
requirements
in
it
now
is
about
landscaping
equipment
that
it
will
help
us
enforce
this.
How.
H
D
N
For
those
people
who
and
I
get
lots
of
emails
from
various
neighborhoods
on
this
issue,
because
obviously
a
lot
of
my
neighborhoods
up
very
big
lots
and
landscapers,
etc.
So
that
could
literally
come
in
with
the
big
guns
like
two
or
three
at
a
time
so
you're
saying
really,
the
only
alteration
has
been
reduction
of
hours
by
to
two
hours
on
weekdays,
any
would
anything
on
weekends.
It's.
N
N
H
O
N
D
A
P
On
one
side
of
the
coin,
it's
having
the
noise
by
law
itself.
The
other
side
is
the
enforcement
of
the
noise
by
law
and
we've
had
a
number
of
discussions.
But
about
this
my
understanding
is
that
there
are
allocated
funds
that
are
unspent
to
hire
I
believe
in
additional
1010
or
so
by
law
enforcement
officers.
Would
you
clarify
where
we
are
at
with
respect
to
hiring
and
to
ensure
that
we
are
able
to
provide
more
reasonable
response
times
through.
M
The
chair
to
councillor
Matt
Lowell
is
a
constant
like
a
lot
of
other
divisions
in
the
city.
We
have
a
constant
churn
of
staff
leaving
and
it
takes
us
time
to
fill
them,
so
there
is
always
gaps
in
our
complement
of
officers
available,
for
instance,
we're
currently
going
through
a
hiring
process
right
now
to
hire
25
new
additional
officers,
replace
those
that
have
left
so
come
August
we'll
have
them
in
place,
trained
and
ready
to
go.
M
However,
you
know
gain
between
now
and
then
we're
going
to
have
other
staff
that
retire
or
leave
for
other
opportunities.
So
we
are
looking
at
how
we
can
be
more
effective
at
filling
those
vacancies
quicker
and
we've
put
in
place
some
new
strategies
for
that
well,
but
we
will
have
we
always
that
we
do
have
some
level
of
vacancies
in
our
officer.
I've.
P
P
If
there's
a
noise
by
law,
violation,
you're
expected
to
call
3-1-1,
so
they
call
3-1-1
and
then
they
get
somebody
through
and
one
telling
them
that
somebody
might
be
able
to
come
by
within
five
days
to
investigate
which
neither
responds
to
the
incident
that
night,
that's
keeping
them
up
all
night,
for
example.
Let's
say
some
contractor
decides
to
in
the
morning
is
a
great
time
to
build
a
high-rise
or
early
on
a
Sunday
or
whatever,
but
then
there's
no
ability
to
actually
compile
any
evidence
to
prosecute.
P
M
Through
the
chair
to
Council,
yes,
we,
if
it's
an
ongoing,
repetitive
type
of
noise
situation,
we
can
investigate.
We
do
investigate
and
we
deal
with
those
if
somebody
makes
a
noise
one
time
in
the
middle
of
the
night,
we're
not
first
responders
we're
not
going
to
be
able
to
dispatch
officers
immediately
for
those
instances
and
we're
not
we've
never
been
able
to,
and
we're
not
going
to
be
able
to
do
that.
I'll
go
forward
basis.
M
But
if
it's
noise
that
is
occurring
on
a
repetitive
basis,
we
will
definitely
have
the
resources
and
the
ability
for
our
officers
to
respond,
and
we
have
made
changes
to
our
hours
of
operations
for
our
officers
and
again
we're
looking
at
some
other
ways
of
how
we
can
be
more
effectively
utilize.
Our
resources
to
have
our
officers
then.
P
P
The
noise
by
the
noise
coalition,
the
group
of
residents
who
have
been
most
engaged
in
this
discussion.
Are
they
satisfied
with
the
outcome
or
have
they
requested
that
there
be
two
months
a
two
month:
deferral,
so
that
there
is
an
opportunity
to
address
some
of
the
outstanding
issues
that
have
not
been
resolved.
H
So
there
there
has
been
discussion
of
a
deferral
meeting
for
in
the
next
consulting
over
the
next
two
months.
I'm,
not
sure
we'll
get
us
any
further.
We
feel
strongly
that
we've
put
together
again
years
worth
of
work.
It's
important
for
us
to
move
this
forward.
A
deferral
I,
don't
think
we're
going
to
it's
going
to
be
it's
very
challenging
on
this
file
to
get
to
a
common
ground.
We
feel
like
we
have
a
balanced
approach
and
a
new
objective
measures,
so
we
feel
its.
H
P
Your
your
one
party
at
the
table
right
so
I
appreciate.
That's
your
opinion
and,
frankly,
you
wouldn't
be
recommending
your
recommendations.
If
you
didn't
believe
they
were
the
recommendations,
we
should
consider
that
being
said
just
true
or
false,
the
other,
the
other
party
of
the
table,
or
at
least
a
significant
stakeholder,
the
Toronto
noise
coalition.
Have
they
not
said,
though,
that
they
would
prefer
to
have
simply
two
additional
months
to
resolve
the
outstanding
issues?
Is
that
not
what
they
are
formally
requesting?
I'm.
H
B
Q
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
Just
very
briefly,
I
know:
two
councillors
have
previously
touched
on
motorcycles
and
and
and
sound
levels.
Now
it's
my
understanding
that
the
federal
government
controls
emissions
emission
standards
manufacturing
standards
importing
of
spare
parts,
the
almost
the
entire
construction
and
composition
of
a
motorcycle,
and
that
would
that
would
include
the
noise
that
it
emits.
What
what
authority
do?
We
have
to
reverse
a
federally
approved
product.
H
Q
H
Q
Most
of
our
construction,
the
noise
bylaw,
is
at
7:00
a.m.
to
7:00
p.m.
now.
What
I
find
happening,
even
construction
sites
that
conform
to
that
rule?
They
have
their
their
trucks,
all
lined
up
down
the
street
with
their
engines
running
waiting
to
start
work,
so
they
can
be
sitting
there
at
6:00
a.m.
with
the
engines
running
particularly
in
the
wintertime
are.
Is
there
anything
embedded
in
the
regulations
before
us
that
prevents
them
from
running
their
engines,
and
this
is
sometimes
10
15
trucks
down
a
residential
street
waiting
waiting
to
launch
at
7:00
a.m.?
M
M
M
F
M
Through
the
chair
to
councillor
Thompson,
so
that's
where-
and
this
is
speaking
specifically
to
mostly
in
large
projects
high-rises
in
particular,
once
they
start
pouring
the
concrete
and
it's
been
placed,
they
have
to
complete
the
process
which
includes
floating
or
leveling
of
the
concrete
polishing
it
the
surface.
So
that
can
take
numerous
hours,
because
it's
a
chemical
reaction
so
concrete
when
it
comes
out
of
the
truck
once
they
start
that
process
until
they
finish
floating
or
leveling.
That
concrete.
That's
the
continuous
pour
so.
F
M
Currently,
our
noise
bylaw,
our
current
noise
bylaw,
provides
an
outright
exemption
for
continuous,
concrete
pours
yeah.
What
we
are
proposing
is
saying,
if
you
need
to
work
after
the
permitted
hours
of
7:00
p.m.
for
construction
work
or
sorry,
11
p.m.
for
construction
work
that
you'll
need
a
noise
exemption
permit
from
us,
not
that
you
can't
do
it.
It's
just
that
we
want
the
industry
to
come
and
seek
that
permit,
which
may
include
a
mitigation
plan
on
how
you're
going
to
minimise
that
noise
disruption
on
adjacent
residential
properties.
So.
F
The
from
us,
do
you
mean
councillors,
or
do
you
mean
staff,
because
I'm
afraid
that
I
don't
want
to
see
a
situation
where
it
actually
comes
to
a
counsellor
to
make
that
particular
decision,
because
that
councillor
may
have
certain
india',
secrecies
and
so
on
and
so
forth?
He
or
she
may
not
adequately
want
to
deal
with
that
particular
process.
So
should
it
not
be
staff
that
actually
the
executive
director,
whoever
it
else
that
is
dealing
with
this
particular
matter
and
not
left
to
the
whim
or
the
fancy
of
councillors?
So
the.
M
F
M
The
the
residents
keeping
a
noise
log-
that's
a
form
of
evidence
that,
should
we
be
laying
of
a
charge
if
the
noise
is
intermittent
an
indeterminate
period
of
time,
our
officers
can't
be
there
to
observe
it
themselves.
That
can
be
a
form
of
evidence
that
could
be
submitted
for
the
as
part
of
a
prosecution
case
on
behalf
of
the
affected
parties.
So.
F
M
Of
the
process
is,
if
it's
a
log
recorded
by
the
resident,
they
would
have
to
come
and
speak
to
their
evidence
right.
That
is
their
choice,
and
some
residents
do
in
fact
come
and
do
that
we
understand
not
everybody
wants
to
do
that.
So
that's
why
we
tried
to
build
the
bylaw
that
has
a
bit
more
quantitative
measures
in
it
versus
a
subjective.
It
was
disturbing
me
provision
when.
F
A
You
and
actually
my
question
was
similar
to
councillor
Thompson's
question,
so
the
complaints
I
get
especially
in
the
summer
is
the
noise
bylaw
where
people
are
in
their
backyards.
With
tents,
have
two
parties,
music
amplified
music
drinking
and
you
know
the
police
are
called,
of
course
in
the
police.
Well,
you
know
it's
a
noise
bylaw
and
they
really
don't
pay
any
charges,
but
we
have
told
our
residents
that
they
need
to
and
as
councillor
Thompson's
question
is
that
they
have
to
log
it
and
they
have
to
go
to
court
and
a
lot
of
residents.
A
They
feel
intimidated
by
doing
that
and
they're
that
they're
not
gonna,
get
up
at
2:00
or
3:00
in
the
morning
and
start
logging
noises
now,
if
you
have
a
location,
if
it
may
be
a
bar
or
a
residential
home,
where
the
song
going
on
weekends,
like
is
there
anything
that
we
can
do
other
than
tell
the
resident
to
start
logging?
The
noises,
because
it's
very
difficult
through.
M
The
deputy
chairs
of
councilman
zyada,
so
if
it's
an
ongoing
occurrence
such
as
a
restaurant
or
a
bar,
we
definitely
will
have
officers
there
to
do
that
observation
and
measurement.
We
have
officers
in
the
bylaw
enforcement
group
that
work
until
3:00
a.m.
on
the
weekends.
We
can
make
our
officers
available
to
be
there
when
the
noise
is
being
created.
M
If
we
know
it's
going
to
be
created
on
a
specific
day
consistently,
if
it's
a
one-off
occurrence
that
occurs
once
in
the
blue
moon,
then
that's
a
problem
for
us
and
challenging
for
us
and
that's
where
we
sometimes
we
rely
upon
the
residents
to
help
us
with
that
again
we're
looking
at
different
technologies.
Now
everybody
has
a
phone,
they
can
record
noise
and
sounds
that
may
be
sufficient
for
submitting
as
evidence
we're
looking
at
how
we
can
minimize
residents
having
to
come
to
testify
in
court.
A
It's
a
long
process.
If
you
ask
a
resident
to
log
and
then
it
goes
to
court,
sometimes
it
takes
months
even
years
to
go
through
the
courts.
Now,
when
you,
when
you're,
going
to
the
bars
to
the
after-hour
clubs
that
are
open
all
night
and
so
do
also
coordinate
your
in
your
inspection
with
the
AGCO
and
and
the
police,
because
under
the
Liquor
Act
as
well
right,
you
can
leave
charges.
I.
D
R
D
B
P
A
It
is
a
good
idea
when
we
have
members
motions
coming
through
Council
on
liquor
licenses
and
putting
conditions
on
liquor
licenses
that,
after
a
certain
hour
that
they
can't
well.
Of
course
you
can't
serve,
but
there's
no
noise.
It
has
to
you,
have
to
close
up
the
establishment,
so
those
conditions
on
liquor
licenses
also
helped
as
far
as
the
enforcement
and
correct
yeah.
C
Sorry,
a
speaker
yes,
I
had
a
couple
of
questions,
one
just
on
process.
I
wondered
if
you
could
comment
there
are
those
who
say:
there's
been
discussion
going
around
the
City
Hall
that
I've
been
sort
of
hearing,
but
in
my
own
office
about
if
we
spent
more
time
on
this
and
I
keep
hearing
various
reactions
ranging
all
the
way
up
to
and
including
self-harm
that,
but
but
on
the
part
of
the
officials
in
terms
of
their
attitude
about
that.
C
H
Don't
believe
so
I
believe
we've
gone
through
a
very
thorough
process.
We've
got
over
1220
public
meetings,
including
five
just
this
year,
which
were
facilitated
by
our
third
party
facilitator
again
to
try
to
to
get
a
common
ground.
We
have
done
numerous
studies,
numerous
surveys,
numerous
consultations,
seven
noise,
working
group
meetings.
We
have
met
over
and
over
again
and
we
feel
that
what
we
have
put
forward
is
a
workable
piece.
It
is
balanced
does.
Is
it
make
everyone
a
little
unhappy?
Yes,
but
it
is.
H
It
is
a
workable
piece
that
is
enforceable
that
is
far
more
objective
and
quantitative
than
the
current
one,
which
is
subjective
meeting
for
two
more
months.
I,
don't
believe
this
is
my
personal
opinion
and
an
opinion
of
staff
who've
been
working
on
this
for
years
that
it
it
I,
don't
see
it
moving
us
any
further
along
so
I'm.
C
Not
trying
to
put
words
you
about
that,
you
would
to
say
that
at
this
stage
all
things
being
said,
including
the
fact
that
you
acknowledge
not
everybody's
gonna-
be
happy
that
it's
time
for
us
to
punt
on
this,
you
know
one
way
or
another
and
then
another
three
or
four
months
or
six
months
or
two
months
or
ten
more
meetings
is
not
going
to
necessarily
result
in
any
different
result,
because
you've
done
so
much
so
far.
That's.
H
Correct
and
we
met
in
between
committee
and
council,
we
clarified
a
number
of
pieces.
The
rationale
behind
are
are
on
the
ten
major
items
again,
not
full
agreement,
but
it
on
a
file
like
this.
This
is
not
one
where
we
can
get
full
agreement
and
and
have
everyone
enjoying
it.
People
people
feel
that
it's
better.
It's
an
improvement
and
I
think
we
need
to
move
forward
all.
C
Right
now,
my
other
question
was
kind
of
along
the
same
lines
as
councillor
Robinson
had
asked
in
respect
of
some
aspects
of
this
regulation.
I'd
like
you
to
narrow
yourself
down.
If
you
would
be
so
kind,
and
that
is
a
particular
interest
I've
had
in
the
noise
caused
by
motorcycles
and
cars,
you
know
when
somebody's
doing
the
concrete
pour
for
a
building.
At
least
the
result
of
that
is
a
place
to
live
or
a
place
to
work
or
a
place
to
have
shop.
C
C
So
my
question
is:
could
you
summarize
for
us
what
changes
are
recommended
here,
because
they're
sort
of
sprinkled
through
what
changes
are
recommended
here
just
like
councillor
Robinson
asked
you
to
do
earlier
on
on
a
different
segment
of
this,
and
how
do
you
feel
this
will
improve
our
ability
to
enforce
the
law
because
I
think
right
now
short
of
having
police
available,
which
we
know
for
this
kind
of
thing
is
difficult.
It's
very
difficult
for
our
people,
the
city's
people
to
enforce
the
law.
C
H
So
it
again
very
challenging
it
is
you're
right,
there's
no
results
from
it.
It
is.
It
is
an
annoying
thing.
It
is
something
that
commonly
happens
on
Yonge
Street
in
Yorkville,
in
different
parts
of
the
city,
where
people
and
the
Don
Valley
Parkway,
and
on
on
ramps.
People
try
to
rev
it
up
even
louder.
H
C
I
just
can
ask
on
the
enforcement
piece.
You're
really
I
mean
the
bottom
line.
I
guess
since
you
didn't
say
otherwise,
it's
not
really
gonna
make
it
much
easier.
I
mean
right
now,
moving
of
a
moving
vehicle
can
only
stop
be
stopped
by
a
police
officer
that
isn't
going
to
change
and
and
this
this
level
will
make
it
a
bit
easier
for
for
us.
If
we
can
sort
of
happen
to
catch
a
person
in
the
act
as
we're
sitting
somewhere
still
or
whatever,
but
it
really
isn't
gonna
help
with
the
enforcement.
H
Then
so,
as
we
look
to
operationalize
this
over
the
next
few
months,
what
we
would
look
to
partner
with
the
Toronto
Police
and
to
have
blitzes
in
certain
parts
of
the
city
where
this
does
happen
and
to
work
with
the
police
to
to
pull
those
people
over
and
have
that
blitz
and-
and
in
you
know,
a
four
hour
period
lays
so
many
charges
on
different
pieces,
which
is
it
which
would
then
educate
other
people
doing
that
this
isn't
an
acceptable
behavior.
This
is
a
question.
Do
you
promise.
C
H
S
You,
madam
Speaker,
we've
talked
a
lot
about
some
very
specific
situations,
but
the
vast
majority
of
people
in
this
city
don't
call
3-1-1
I
want
to
zoom
in
exactly
how
this
affects
your
typical
homeowner.
Typically,
the
people
that
I
represent
I
rip
isn't
a
lot
some
in
high-rise,
some
not
so.
If
I
want
to
cut
my
grass
on
Labor
Day
can
I
do
that.
S
H
H
S
S
Of
years
ago,
New
Year's
Eve,
the
power
went
out
and
we
had
family
over
and,
and
fortunately,
I
was
lucky
enough.
We
had
a
generator
called
that
out
started
the
generator.
What
happens
in
this
situation
of
a
power
outage
and
somebody's
running
a
generator
at
night
or
after
hours?
Is
there
an
exemption,
or
is
that
something
you
wouldn't
prioritize
and
your
enforcement?
How
does
that
work?
Generators.
S
That's
because
it's
for
emergencies
or
okay,
excellent
second
question:
the
biggest
noise
complaints
I
get
out
in
Ward
2
has
to
do
with
aircraft
noise
and
that's
you
know,
maybe
it's
related
to
transportation
noise
in
general.
What
does
this
noise
bylaw
do
in
relationship
to
something
like
an
aircraft
noise
that
and
if
you've
lived
under
a
flight
path
or
near
a
flight
path?
You
can
appreciate
it
is
very,
very
loud
and
it
is
very,
very
repetitive:
do
we
have
any
relief
in
that
the.
S
H
S
S
Good,
so
the
last
is
I
know,
there's
there's
a
dialogue
about
continuous
poor.
Could
you
tell
me,
would
you
be
as
a
regulator
pretty
comfortable
and
getting
very
specific
about
what
the
activities
are
associated
with
continuous
poor
and
we
talked
about
them
today?
It's
the
delivery
of
the
concrete,
the
finishing,
and,
in
my
experience
it's
sometimes
it's
activities
outside
of
the
continuous
pour
that
looked
like
they're
part
of
it.
Do
you
feel
comfortable
as
a
regulator
that
you
were
able
to
discern
exactly
what
is
within
that
envelope
of
that
operation?
Yes,.
M
S
And
one
other
sort
of
piece
that
I
had
detected
in
the
reading
of
this
and
speaking
to
others
was
you
know?
Maybe
the
industry
is
a
little
concerned
about
the
process
around
the
exemption
or
not
exempting
a
particular
operation
related
to
construction
or
continuous
pour.
Can
you
tell
me,
does
counsel
have
ultimate
power
and
let's
put
aside
the
regulatory
that
changes
that
we've
got
here
or
what
we
got
today?
Could
council
cancel
a
noise
permit
or
a
noise
exemption
at
some
point
in
time?
S
If
there
was
something
obnoxious
going
on,
and
you
know,
I
will
add
to
that
that
it's
not.
You
know
one
bad
thing
on
one
weekend,
but
there
was
a
project
that
was
really
not
working.
Could
we
address
that
through
a
notice
of
motion,
or
some
other
thing
on
the
floor
here
to
deal
with
those
real
problematic
projects,
so.
M
Through
the
charity
counselor
holiday,
the
noise
bylaw
we're
proposing,
does
have
a
revocation
provision.
Excuse
me
revocation
provision
in
it
for
noise
exemption
permits.
Currently
we
do
not
have
such
authority,
so
that
is
a
new
piece
that
we've
recognized.
We
need
it
would
not
be
councils
at
their
discretion.
It
would
be
with
the
executive
director
to
do
the
revocation,
because
it's
the
executive
director
that
ultimately
is
issuing
the
noise
exemption.
M
But,
needless
to
say,
should
we
receive
a
complaint
from
anybody,
whether
it's
a
counselor
or
a
resident
about
a
noise
issue
associated
with
a
noise
exemption
permit?
We
would
investigate
it
to
see
if
they're
complying
with
the
terms
of
conditions
and
if,
in
fact,
there's
some
unintended
impacts
or
consequences.
We
would
take
those
into
consideration.
Thank.
A
N
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
My
first
question
would
be
to
our
city
manager,
just
regarding
the
announcement
last
week
about
the
1.1
billion
over
the
10
years.
How
critical
is
it
for
the
TTC
to
have
that
money
reinstated
by
the
province?
How
will
it
impact
your
state
of
good
repair,
a
capital,
profit
program
or
fleet
or
bus
improvements
or
track
upgrades?
What
kind
of
impact
does
this
have
on
the
system
through.
R
R
Well
again,
it
hits
directly
on
the
current
system
and
we
are
falling
behind
in
terms
of
the
amount
of
investment
that
should
be
making
in
that
system.
So
you
know,
as
it
relates
to
losing
over
a
billion
dollars
it's
you
know
we
would
hope
to
be
at
least
been
status
quo
and
be
working
at
the
table
to
negotiate
more
money
from
the
province
to
assist
with
the
state
of
good
repair
challenge
that
we
have
thank.
N
You
just
related
to
the
relief
line
we've
heard
these
we've
heard
many
overtures
about
state
of
state-of-the-art
technology
freestanding
you
and
I
actually
had
this
exchange
a
few
weeks
ago
about
our
last
council
meeting.
I
know:
we've
done
geotechnical
studies
about
digging
deep
they're
talking
about,
maybe
not
digging
so
deep
and
the
impacts
of
that
smaller
vehicles
would
that
be,
but
would
that
bring
forward
capacity
issues
they're
talking
about
36
to
40
trains,
I
head
ways
between
trains?
N
R
If
I
can,
through
the
speaker,
I,
don't
know
if
we're
much
further
ahead
than
we
were
when
we
talked
a
couple
of
weeks
ago
in
terms
of
having
a
detailed
understanding
of
exactly
what
is
being
proposed,
I
know
later
this
week
there
will
be
a
technical
briefing
provided
by
the
province
that
will
give
us
a
better
understanding
of
specifics.
Around
I
would
hope
everything
from
the
elevation
of
the
tunneling
to
the
technology,
to
other
things
that
that
you're.
N
The
Bloor
young
station
capacity
improvements,
which
we've
talked
about
at
I,
think
both
on
Council
and
TTC.
The
Commission
I,
don't
really
see
that
emphasized
in
here
at
all
or
the
province
really
paying
attention
to
that
critical
need
of
that
station
capacity.
Improvements
as
the
province
spoken
to
you
about
that
or
approve
that
or
where
is
that
sit
on
the
agenda?
I
can.
R
Say
the
conversations
that
we
had
at
the
table
where
we've
emphasized
the
need
to
address
existing
capacity
issues,
ie
congestion
and
related
health
and
safety
impacts
have
been
certainly
the
subject
of
talks
at
the
table.
We
have
stressed
that
you
know
the
some
of
our
priorities
ought
to
be
in
addressing
the
relief
of
the
congestion,
as
well
as
the
platform
itself
at
Bloor
and
young,
so
that
certainly
has
been
conversations
that
staff
the
staff
have
had
now
in
terms
of
specifics.
R
R
I
would
say,
through
the
chair,
obviously
very
important
and
very
important.
It's
the
reason
why
we
identified
priorities
and
hence
the
reason
why
we
have
provided
in
their
supplemental
a
need
to
better
understand
what
the
is
considering
in
terms
of
the
projects
that
we've
listed
in
our
p-type
application.
So
there's.
N
I
I
I
R
I
I
I
I
I
I
S
S
I
I
I
D
I
I
T
D
B
B
Addition,
but
absolutely
I,
guess
the
question
to
be
more
precise
if
you're
unable
to
maintain
lines
wanting
to
in
a
state
of
good
repair,
unable
to
maintain
the
the
rolling
stock
that
you've
got
unable
to
make
sure
that
the
signalling
and
switching
is
in
a
state
of
good
repair.
Is
there
any
point
in
adding
new
extensions
on
the
rest
of
the
system?
I
would
say.
B
2003,
the
city,
the
City
of
Toronto
and
the
Commission
directed
the
TTC
staff
to
go
look
at
what
would
be
the
most
cost,
effective
ways
to
invest
in
public
transit
and,
if
I
recall,
the
top
three
things
mentioned
were
investing
in
a
state
of
good
repair,
expand,
expanding
the
amount
of
rolling
stock
and
running
more
surface,
and
only
then
looking
at
expanding
to
new
lines.
Am
I
recalling
correctly
that.
B
You
say:
I
mean
I,
I,
believe
we're
in
a
similar
situation.
Right
now,
we've
got
a
serious
state
of
good
repair
backlog,
we're
short
at
least
on
the
streetcar
fleet
and
the
bus
fleet.
To
my
understanding,
we
are
short
on
funding
state
of
good
repair.
Would
you
have
similar
recommendations
today?
In
other
words,
invest
in
state
of
good
repair,
rolling
stock
and
service
frequency
first
through.
B
E
There's
a
little
confusing
there's
a
lot
of
stuff
there.
We
just
got
it,
but
thank
you
for
that.
Clarification
item
number
two
recommendation
number.
Two
specifically:
could
you
explain
why
in
particular,
you're
asking
us
to
make
a
conditional
endorsement
of
the
provinces
proposal
now
why
we
would
do
this
rather
than
waiting
to
see
your
recommendations
in
the
report?
Come
back
from
recommendation,
one.
R
So
again,
through
the
speaker,
we
think,
as
pointed
out
in
recommendation,
1
and
further
elaborate
elaborated
on
in
recommendation
2.
We
believe
there's
a
there's,
a
lot
of
information
that
you
require
before
you're,
going
to
make
a
commitment
that
adheres
to
the
provincial
announcement.
So
we
are
not
it's.
It's
conditional
is
conditional
on
all
the
homework
that
we've
identified
being
done
and
us
bringing
it
back
to
you
before
you
make
a
decision.
Okay,.
E
R
I
mean
we
had
heard,
as
you
know,
back
in
March
22nd
and
the
26
that
there
was
going
to
be
expansions,
they
did
identify
that
in
terms
of
specifics,
we
learned,
as
everyone
else
did,
when
the
announcement
was
made.
The
extent
of
certainly
the
relief
line
and
and
specifics
at
that
time,
I
guess
around
the
Scarborough
extension.
So
again,
I
can't
stress
enough.
E
E
S
S
E
E
If
you
had
to
I
know,
we
may
not
have
the
answer
today,
but
thinking
about
this,
if
we
were
expanding
north
and
having
that
the
scope
change
that
has
been
proposed
here,
is
it
reasonable
to
assume
that
there
might
be
another
tea
pop
required
if
we
were
crossing
the
Don
Valley,
maybe
at
two
times
and
extending
north?
Would
that
be
typical
through.
O
E
S
P
Just
saying
candidly,
is
it
not
true,
though,
then
we've
had
former
chief
planners
TTC,
CEOs,
etc?
Who
said
that
from
both
a
transit
planning
from
you
know,
and
also
from
an
economic
development
perspective,
that
the
ort
plan
was
preferable?
Is
that
not
true
that
that
has
been
said
in
this
room
through.
O
O
P
O
P
Seven,
stop
was
projected
to
be.
It
would
take
between
three
point:
five
five
years
to
build,
so
that
would
actually
be
built
quicker
and
be
able
to
provide
rapid
transit
sooner
to
scarper
residents.
Now,
within
the
same
funding
envelope,
we
could
build
both
the
seven
stop
LRT
to
replace
the
RT
and
the
17
stop
crosstown
extension
east
to
U
of
T
Scarborough.
Why
are
there
not
recommendations
to
do
the
best
thing
for
Scarborough
residents
in
front
of
us
today,
rather
than
conditionally
endorse?
Doug
Ford's
transit
press
conference.
O
P
P
You
know
what
I'm
saying
so
we
so
we
have
recommendations
in
front
of
us,
perhaps
the
city
manager,
to
you
to
conditionally
endorse
a
plan
that
was
done
in
a
press
conference
that
nobody
here
knew
any
details
about
that.
We
you
know
we
have.
We
haven't
asked
any
of
these
technical
questions
about
to
allocate
billions
of
dollars,
and
yet
we
know
that
there
are
preferable
plans
that
would
spend
less
money,
provide
more
service
and
actually
changed
people's
lives.
Why
aren't
those
recommendations
on
the
floor
in
front
of
us.
R
So
as
as
identified
in
a
report
to
the
executive,
we
had
recommended
for
projects
for
pita
funding
and
what
you
have
in
front
of
you
in
the
supplementary
are
two
of
those
projects
and
the
province
of
Ontario
has
identified
an
interest
in
those
projects,
and
so
what
we're
doing
simply
is
to
better
understand
those
projects,
assess
their
validity
and
come
back
here
and
present
that
information
to
Council
to
make
an
informed
decision.
Do
you
understand.
P
How
a
reasonable
person
could
read
this
language
and
an
unreasonable
person
who
all
referred
to
in
a
moment,
but
an
hour,
a
reasonable
person
could
read
this
language
to
to
endorse
the
following
provincial
priorities.
That
was
announced
in
a
press
conference
without
any
substantive
detail
for
the
public
or
council,
where
we
were
announced
that
we
would
fund
before
we,
even
in
so
called
partnership,
contributed
that
it
says
only
to
subject
to
the
completion
of
the
assessment
rather
than
agreement
that
we
would
be
allocating
most,
if
not
all
the
funds
that
we
have
allocated
these
projects.
A
P
A
A
G
S
S
G
G
G
G
Process-
and
so
then
I
guess
I'm
just
going
to
ask
about
the
environmental
assessments,
because
would
it
be
possible
to
just
have
a
project
with
such
as
changing
the
South
section
of
the
relief
line
and
adding
two
new
pieces
on
without
number
one
reviewing
at
least
the
current
environmental
assessment?
We
have
for
the
relief
line
south
and
doing
two
new
ones
for
each
of
the
other
segments
through.
G
G
G
So
there's
no
environmental
assessment
underway
even
for
the
north
and
there's
the
other
section
is
brand-new,
there's
nothing
there.
So
we
don't
anticipate
what
if
it
was
fast-tracked,
is
there
some
way
to
fast-track
that
and
have
that
as
a
let's
say,
a
three-year
environmental
assessment,
or
not,
especially
yes,
three
years
through.
G
O
O
L
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker
I
I
just
wish
to
unpack
some
of
the
discussion
that
the
city
manager
and
the
rest
of
the
rest
of
our
little
party,
who
have
when
they
go
I,
don't
unpack
the
term
roles
and
responsibilities
in
the
context
of
the
past,
changes
that
we've
had
so
far
up
until
now,
the
big
piece
between
going
from
transit
city
and
then
to
some
plans
under
Mayor
Ford's
term
and
some
modifications
here.
The
big
thing
has
always
been
who's,
the
leader
of
the
project.
We
we
all
play
a
role.
L
We
certainly
we
all
play
a
funding
role,
but
one
of
the
conditions
was
once
we
figure
out
who
has
the
leadership
of
the
project?
Is
it
a
Metrolinx
or
a
TTC
project?
One
of
the
things
that
the
province
has
always
been
firm
on
is
that's
yours,
City
of
Toronto
and
TTC,
and
therefore
all
contract
and
budget
overages
to
complete
the
project
are
now
your
responsibility.
Has
that
been
discussed
through.
R
The
chair
speaker,
sorry,
no
not
to
our
satisfaction.
This
is
really
why
we
got
to
get
into
what
their
expectations
are
with
the
four
projects
that
they've
identified.
So
we
hope
that
there's
some
room
for
discussion
around
that
as
to
what
who
is
the
most
practical
to
lead
on
on
which
project
right.
L
Would
you
be
surprised
to
hear
that
in
the
past
when,
when
we
were
saying,
thank
you
very
much,
we
want
to
do
something
different
province
and
Metrolinx.
The
condition
has
has
always
been
okay.
Here's
our
funding,
it's
a
flat
amount.
You
are,
you
can
go
ahead
and
execute
as
your
project
City
of
Toronto,
but
we
are
done
at
the
end
of
this
1.8
billion.
All
the
rest
is
your
responsibility.
L
R
I,
don't
know
through
the
speaker
whether
I'd,
say
I'm
surprised
but
I
mean
all
I
can
say
to.
You
is
I
think
we
outlined
in
recommendation
1
of
the
Supplemental,
the
kinds
of
issues
that
we
want
to
take
up
with
them
and
to
try
and
get
as
concrete
and
understanding
of
how
it
is
that
we're
going
to
move
these
projects
forward,
subject
to
the
assessment
that
we
need
to
do
so
right.
L
And
would
it
be,
would
it
be
fair
to
assume
that
if
there
is
something
that
we
have
chosen
as
a
priority
that
well
the
smart
taxations
in
in
in
my
part
of
the
universe,
the
smart
track
station
being
just
a
little
bit
east
of
us
at
Sheppard
and
Kennedy?
That
is
relief
people
in
my
neighborhood
at
Sheppard
in
Victoria
Park?
Why
would
you
go
over
to
Yonge
Street
if
I
can
go
jump
on
that
train
and
be
at
Union
Station,
so
they
they're
very
much
looking
forward
to
that?
That's
relief.
L
R
The
speaker
as
you're,
aware
I
think
it
was
in
December
of
2018
that
the
stations
themselves
that
the
Metro
links
is
is
is
announced
that
they
would
take
them
to
market
to
see
whether
or
not
there
be
an
interest
private
investment
in
those.
So
we've
not
heard
back
on
them.
We
have
certainly
talked
about
our
priorities
as
they
relate
to
Pete.
R
L
So
would
you
would,
would
you
see
a
motion
right
now
defining
that
responsibility,
if
you
have
leadership
of
it,
you're
responsible
for
the
overages?
Would
that
be
problematic,
or
should
we
wait
till
you
report
back
to
us
on
how
these
initial
conversations
went
but
then
nail
down
that
responsibility
project-by-project
through.
S
You
questions
for
TTC
to
start
with
what
type
of
fare
structure
is
the
province
proposing
for
the
Ontario
line
through
the
chair?
We
do
not
know
the
answer
to
that
question.
Our
work
on
the
relief
line
has
assumed
that
it
would
be
part
of
our
fare
system.
So
is
the
assumption
that
their
fare
system
would
be
different
than
our
fare
system,
or
do
we
not
know
yet
through
the
chair?
We
do
not
know
the
answer
to
that
question.
S
S
E
S
And
if,
obviously,
if
it
had
an
impact
on
the
number
of
riders,
it
would
have
an
impact
on
the
ability
to
divert
people
from
line
1.
That
is
correct
right
so
that
I
guess
question
of
the
city
manager,
the
issue
of
the
fare
structure
and
the
compatibility
how
that
might
affect
ridership
and
how
that
might
in
turn
affect
the
ability
of
the
relief
line.
/
Ontario
Line,
to
divert
traffic
off
line
1.
Is
that
an
important
part
of
what
you
will
be
discussing
or
negotiating
through
the
speaker?
Yes,
I.
S
R
Again,
I
think
through
the
the
speaker,
I
think
those
kinds
of
questions
are
obviously
important.
So
where
were
early
days
to
understand
what
the
true
effect
of
this
Ontario
Line
is,
it
could
result
in
something
that
we
would
support,
but
at
this
point
we
don't
have
those
kinds
of
answers
right.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
T
T
T
R
Through
the
speaker,
we
all
do
respect
men,
sir.
Let
mr.
Lindsey
is
not
unlike
today,
fishel,
so
he
didn't
make
the
cut,
and
in
terms
of
did
we
raise
this
at
the
table.
We
certainly
talked
about
our
concerns
about
the
state
of
good
repair,
how
we
have
to
address
condition
issues
and
that
certainly
the
impact
the
gas
tax
would
be
in
effect,
taking
us
in
the
wrong
direction,
but
in
in
fairness
to
mr.
Lindsey,
he
did
not
make
that
decision.
No.
T
He
didn't
make
a
decision,
but
you're
bargaining
at
the
table
with
him
he's
the
point
man
for
the
premiere
on
this
plan,
and
you
didn't
ask
mr.
Lindsey:
how
could
this
be
in
good
faith?
If,
in
the
middle
of
these
negotiations,
we
get
blindsided
by
a
1.1
billion
dollar
cut?
What
did
you
raise
that
with
mr.
Lindsey
through.
R
The
speaker,
we
certainly
did.
We
certainly
mentioned
that
this
is
taking
us
in
the
wrong
direction
and
that
you
know
again,
one
of
the
priorities
that
we
should
all
collectively
have
at
the
table
is
is
addressing
as
I
think.
Our
CEO
of
the
TTC
has
indicated
that
we
first
things
to
take
care
of
is
the
condition
of
the
system,
and
so
obviously,
I
withdraw
of
over
a
billion
dollars
is
moving
us
in
the
wrong
direction.
So
what.
R
Wouldn't
have
expected
him
to
apologize.
To
be
honest,
what
I
would
expect
him
to
do
is
to
honor
what
our
table
is
trying
to
address,
and
that
is
addressing
both
the
existing
subway
system.
That
they've
expressed
an
interest
and
talking
to
us
about,
as
well
as
the
expansion
of
that
system.
So
I
expect
that
this
will
continue
to
be
our
our
discussion
of
it.
T
R
T
Next
question
is
in
your
report
on
page
14:
it
talks
about
the
appointment
of
these
mysterious
inspectors
that
the
province
is
going
to
send
to
the
TDC
properties.
It's
going
to
make
sure
that
they're
you're
complying
the
entities
and
complying
with
all
these
provisions,
requirements
they're,
going
to
take
photographs,
conducting
tasks
requiring
production
of
records,
observing
activities
of
employees,
officers
and
agents,
and
should
the
city
or
the
TDC
in
the
opinion
administer
transportation,
not
comply.
They're
gonna.
Take
you
to
court
Superior
Court
of
Justice
for
an
order
directly
to
see
Toronto.
T
R
Through
the
speaker
me,
our
conversation
has
been
a
willingness
to
share
information
with
them.
That
would
help
them
understand
the
state
of
good
repair.
So
this
is
a.
This
is
an
extra
step,
maybe
an
extraordinary
step.
I,
don't
know
if
it's
entirely
necessary
in
order
for
us
to
share
with
them
the
information
they're
looking
for,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day
they
are
going
to
have
to
satisfy
themselves
as
to
the
state
of
good
repair
that
that
system
is
in
now.
D
R
The
speaker
and
I
think,
as
we
stress
these
are
preliminary
questions,
so
we
fully
expect
that
there
will
be
follow-up
questions
depending
on
how
they
respond
to
that
initial
question.
So
we
have
no
difficulty
making
it
abundantly
clear
the
importance
of
that
line
to
the
citizens
of
this
community,
in
particular
in
the
Scarborough
area.
So
if
there's
something
you
wish
to
amend,
that
would
further
make
the
point
we'd
be
more
than
happy
to
communicate
that
yes,.
D
R
J
J
J
J
O
O
Speaker,
we
also
have
a
date
that
we
have
talked
about
in
terms
of
when
we
would
like
to
see
relief
line
north.
We
have
not
yet
seen
the
details
of
any
analysis
that
the
province
has
done
on
this,
and
what's
your
date,
we
have
talked
about
the
need
for
that
shortly
after
the
opening
of
the
Yonge
subway
extension,
so
in
the
2031
range
you'll.
O
J
D
J
O
A
Q
Q
It
says
staff
are
recommending
the
TTC
will
assess
market
capability
and
develop
work,
a
work
plan
to
start
planning
and
designed
for
two
additional
subway
stations.
Are
we
working
on
a
on
a
one,
stop
line
or
on
a
three
stop
line,
and
if
the
province
is
taking
it
over,
why
are
we
doing
any
work
at
all?
There's
two
questions
through.
Q
Q
Q
R
Certainly,
if
I
can,
through
the
speaker,
if
you
go
back
to
I,
think
our
first
recommend
our
first
recommendation.
We
do
point
out
that,
if
there
are
any
costs
that
we're
incurring
as
a
result
of
this
transition,
assuming
for
a
moment
that
that
in
fact
occurs,
I
will
be
seeking
reimbursement
for
those
those
costs
or
those
those
aspects
of
the
the
design
that
are
no
longer
required.
Q
There's
there's
two
items
on
our
on
our
tax
bill.
Maybe
this
is
for
the
the
CFO
there's
something
we
started
loving
a
number
of
years
ago
for
line
two
extension.
We
called
it
the
Scarborough
subway
back
then
I.
Guess
it's
on
everyone's
tax
bill
and
then
we
have
an
infrastructure
fee
as
as
well,
do
those
funds
go
directly
into
reserve
accounts
for
for
future
transit
needs
or
through.
Q
Q
Okay,
through
through
you
to
staff
I,
guess
it's
been
a
little
over
three
years
since
we
directed
the
chief
planner
at
the
time,
the
deputy
city
manager
and
the
chief
executive
officer
of
the
Toronto
Transit
Commission
to
report
back
to
Council
on
the
cost
range
and
funding
options
for
an
environmental
assessment
for
the
Shepherd
line.
West
and
I'm
just
wondering
how
that
how
that
work
is
going.
O
Through
the
speaker,
we,
as
I
indicated
to
you
and
in
an
email
this
week,
councillor
we
have,
we
will
be
undertaking
further
work
related
to
a
number
of
options
and
what
would
be
required
a
number
of
optional
lines
that
council
has
raised
and
what
would
be
required
to
advance
the
planning
on
those
lines,
including
the
extension
of
the
Shepherd
subway
to
the
West.
Okay,.
Q
Well,
certainly,
we
take
another
look
at
that
email
going
back
to
May
of
2013.
We
we
ranked
a
series
of
of
transit
projects.
Council
did
to
be
the
recipients
of
new
revenue
tools
and
the
first
one
was
the
downtown
relief
line,
as
it
was
called
at
the
time.
The
second
one
B
was
the
the
Scarborough
Scarborough
a
subway
line,
and
the
third
one
was
the
Shepherd,
the
Shepherd
subway
a
line
as
well
now
new
revenue
tools,
I
guess
since
since
this
period
were
certainly
it's
certainly
the
the
infrastructure
piece
on
on
the
tax
pasternak.
A
A
D
K
Yes,
thank
you,
I'm,
just
picking
up
on
the
questions
regarding
this
some
cost,
so
the
Scarborough
extension
so
far,
we've
invested
about
one
hundred
and
eighty
two
point:
five
million
dollars
and
the
relief
line
study
has
accumulated
about
proximately
fifteen
point:
four
million
dollars
in
song
costs.
That's
correct.
K
D
M
D
K
Thank
you
very
much
so
if,
if
we
are
not
able
to
use
the
plans
that
we've
already
created
under
way,
especially
the
big
quantum
for
the
Scarborough
extension,
we
will
not
be
able
to
recover
that
cost
or
I
know
that
we're
gonna
be
asking
the
province
to
recover
that
cost
the
last
time
we
did
it
to
ourselves.
So
we
couldn't
recover
the
seventy
five
million,
but
this
time
somebody
else
is
doing
it
to
us.
What
are
the,
what
are
the
likely
chances
of
the
province,
giving
us
back?
R
The
confidence
I'm
sure
members
of
council
would
want,
but
will
I'll
take
it
as
face
value
and
continue
to
pursue
the
matter
with
them
to
see.
If
they
can
give
us
an
answer
as
as
black
and
white
as
possible
as
to
what
extent
they
will
commit
to
compensating
us
for
those
kinds
of
costs.
So
we'll
raise
that
immediately
and.
K
K
R
So
our
goal
is,
as
I
think
I
said
earlier.
There
will
be
a
technical
meeting
this
week.
I'll
raise
that
particular
question
that
you
just
mentioned:
counselor
about
compensation,
we're
gonna
see
if
we
can't
understand
what
a
schedule
might
look
like
to
be
able
to
answer
the
61
questions
we
raised
and
be
able
to
get
back
to
you
as
quick
as
possible.
I'm
expecting
I
will
be
in
front
of
you
in
some
manner
in
June,
I.
R
K
You,
and
with
respect
to
the
map
that
the
the
premier
had
unveiled
a
day
before
the
budget
launch
and
then
I
guess
in
greater
detail
at
the
budget
launch
eleven
point.
Two
billion
dollars
would
be
the
provincial
contribution.
Approximately
seventeen
point
three
would
be
to
the
city
and
the
federal
government
to
negotiate
the
PAF
dollars
right
now
is
sitting
at
four
point.
Eight
nine
seven
billion
is
is
the
recommendation
here
that
we,
if
everything
goes
according
to
the
provinces,
plans
that
we
would
be
on
the
hook
for
twelve
point.
R
I,
don't
ever
I
it's
not
it's,
not
the
expectation
of
any
of
us
that
we
would
be
expected
to
pay.
That,
and,
and
I
would
add,
that
in
terms
of
other
parties
that
would
be
contributing.
There
is
an
expectation
that
York
Region,
as
well
as
I,
would
expect
possibly
Mississauga,
as
well
as
the
airport
would
in
some
way
shape
or
form
contribute
to
the
cost
of
these
expansions.
Okay,.
F
D
The
speaker,
the
only
additional
revenue
tool
that
councils
actually
approved,
is
the
city
building
fund,
which
is
a
dedicated
property
tax
levy
intended
to
fund
transit
as
well
as
affordable
housing.
How
much
when
we
raise.
So
it's
it's
to
be
phased
in
over
a
period
of
five
years,
at
a
half
a
percent
increment
and
in
the
fullness
of
time
it
will
raise
roughly
seventy
five
million
annually.
D
F
F
O
Through
the
speaker
that
request
has
come
has
come
several
times:
okay,
if
we're
done
any
work
on
that
request.
Through
the
speaker,
we
are
doing
some
work
on
on
the
ship.
The
latest
request
about
Shepard
ease
that
you
put
forward
to
council
looking
at
modeling
the
the
current
or
more
recent
demand
growth
demands
and
what
that
might
mean
for
the
line.
We
also
already
have
an
approved
ei
along
Shepard
for
the
LRT
extension
that
Metrolinx
has
has
undertaken
that.
F
O
O
O
First,
phase
of
the
relief
line
south
was
to
go
from
Pape
station
at
the
at
the
blur
line
downtown
to
to
Queen
and
Haws
good.
The
intention
was
always
that
there
would
at
some
point,
be
an
extension
northbound,
as
well
as
an
extension
to
the
west,
but
the
first
phase
was
the
one
that
we
are
advancing
right
now.
So.
O
F
So,
on
page
eight
we
do
have
the
proposed
Ontario
line
project
and
it
shows
that
we're
going
east
and
I
want
to
thank
you
for
putting
that
detailed
report.
But
our
intention
was
and
we're
going
to
stop
what
Queen
and
I'm
sorry
at
Union,
Station
and
some
point
in
time
in
the
in
the
not-too-distant
future.
We're
going
to
have
an
extension
through.
O
The
speaker,
we
were
never
intending
to
go
to
Union
Station.
The
upon
line
that
was
approved
was
always
a
long
Queen
Street
and
would
go
to
Osgood
stayin
out
or
was
gonna
stop.
That
was
where
we
were
to
planning
till
now
with
the
intention
that
there
would
be
a
western
extension
in
the
future
right,
but.
F
I
D
M
O
So
the
through
the
speaker,
the
waterfront
Ella,
the
waterfront
transit
network,
is
a
series
of
projects
spread
out
over
the
next
ten
plus
years
and
what
we
want
to
see
move
ahead.
First
is
the
Union
Station
to
Queen
ski
and
East
Bay
front
piece,
a
chunk
of
of
line
from
exhibition
to
Dufferin
gate
and
then
we're
looking
at
some
other
some
other
improvements
in
the
park.
Lon
Humber
Bay
shores
in
the.
D
D
O
O
F
Put
my
name
up
because
I'm
hoping
that
councillor
Lane
will
come
but
I
just
sort
of
asked
a
couple
of
questions
of
the
city
manager,
mr.
city
manager,
could
you
just
just
help
us
or
help
me
to
understand
how
things
are
progressing
at
the
table?
Are
you
finding
that
the
discussion
is
one
in
which
there's
a
strong
partnership
relationship
and
that
you're
able
to
bring
the
concerns
of
counsel
to
the
table
and
they
are
being
addressed
in
in
in
ways
that
they
can
be?
F
R
Speaker,
you
know
the
nature
of
the
table
is
very
professional,
as
you
would
hope
and
expect
you
know.
I
would
say,
there's
evidence
of
that
respect
in
how
the
terms
of
reference
have
evolved.
We
certainly
started
in
a
very
narrow
position,
but
they
have
certainly
understood
the
the
concerns
that
we
have
as
the
City
of
Toronto
and
so
the
terms
of
reference
I
think
have
been
have
evolved
accordingly.
R
We
look
forward,
quite
frankly,
to
be
able
to
sit
down
with
them
and
understand
in
specific
terms
what
their
proposals
entail
for
the
reasons
that
we've
outlined
in
this
report,
so
I
don't
expect
that
will
change
I
think
we'll
continue
to
serve
our
respective
decision-makers
and
the
manner
which
you
would
hope
us
to
do.
So
you
know,
there's
always
going
to
be
challenges.
F
So
the
discussions
at
the
table
and
the
proposals
and
the
number
of
questions
that
you're
looking
I,
think
61
questions
that
you're
seeking
to
ask
and
I
guess
the
additional
question
from
councillor
Ally
terms
of
clarification.
So
you
go
through
all
of
those
and
you
get
some
answers
that
you,
like
some,
that
we
don't
like
the
province
has
an
objective
in
terms
of
the
uploading
June.
That's
in
a
couple
of
months.
Do
you
think,
reasonably
as
part
of
this
process,
to
the
table
that
we'll
be
able
to
address
these
issues
in
time?
F
R
Like
I,
say,
I've
already
issued
the
letter
to
Michael
Lindsay
and
Deputy
Minister
of
Transportation,
and
so
they've
got.
They
got
our
61
questions.
I
would
expect
when
we
see
them
later
this
week.
We
would
get
a
sense
of
the
speed
in
which
they'll
bail
to
address
those
questions,
so
I'm
interested
in
getting
at
some
sense
of
timing,
because
I
know
this
council
is
expecting
to
know
what
the
results
are.
R
J
That
is
Mike
sticking
together.
I
tell
you.
Thank
you
very
much
councillor
Thompson
I'm,
looking
at
this,
this
graphic
on
page
I
think
it's
29
of
the
original
report
that
goes
through
the
stage
gates
and
what
projects
are
where
you
know
what
I'm
referring
to
I
just
want
to
get
an
idea
of
the
length
of
time
it
takes
us
to
move
through
these
stage
gates.
J
G
J
J
J
Be
three
weeks
like
on
King
Street
or
a
decade
or
never
can
we
go
through
some
of
the
projects
so
what
the
later
stage
gates?
Five
and
six
Eglinton
crosstown
nearing
completion;
Finch
LRT
completion
in
2023,
correct
through
the
speaker.
That
is
correct,
so
that
would
put
roughly
the
initiation
and
development
phase
being
four
years
ago
for
Eglinton
and
Finch
right
odd
four
years
ago.
Sorry
because
they're
nearing
construction
so.
J
So
line
the
line
to
east
extension
that
we've
been
preparing
for
gone
through
the
preliminary
design
and
engineering
that
said
that
the
gate
around
the
funding
decision
that
would
move
into
the
procurement
correct
who
the
speaker,
that's
where
we
are
on
that
that's
or
we
are,
as
on
the
smart
track
stations
right.
Yes,
so
any
changes
in
scope
would
set
us
back
by
one
of
the
stage
gates,
maybe
two,
depending
on
whether
we
were
going
back
to
the
drawing
board
on
the
initiation
and
development
or
just
on
the
preliminary
engineering.
There's.
J
O
O
J
O
O
J
C
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker
I
have
two
motions,
and
maybe
we
could
put
the
first
one
up
motion
a
and
I'll
try
and
summarize
people
obviously
have
a
chance
to
read
these
but
I
think
motion
a
and
I
by
the
way
move.
The
staff
recommendations
contained
in
the
supplemental
report
as
well,
but
motion
a
I
think
is:
is
it
probably
provides
for
the
most
complete
assessment
by
our
professional
public
servants,
as
you
could
possibly
have
in
our
TTC
transit
experts?
C
This
supplementary
report
recommends
the
city
consider
redirect
consider
redirecting
the
3.15
1
billion
in
PTF
$2
to
the
proposed
Ontario
line,
subject
to
the
outcome
of
further
analysis
on
the
commercial
and
tactical
merits
of
the
project
and
its
effect
on
the
overall
transit
network
to
the
satisfaction
of
City
Council.
So
this
was
the
language
that
was
always
in
the
report
and,
notwithstanding
the
attempts
of
some
to
suggest
that
that
wasn't
the
case,
but
we'll
make
it
perfectly
clear
in
these
motions
and
so
I
think
that's
what
that's.
C
C
C
And
furthermore,
it
says
that
we're
going
to
continue
within
reason
to
work
on
that
plan,
because
I
think
we've
all
agreed
over
time.
That
delay
is
our
greatest
enemy.
And
so,
if
we
have
a
plan
that
has
been
approved
many
times
many
times
here,
with
the
exception
of
people
who
want
to
keep
themselves
in
a
kind
of
a
time
warp
spin
cycle
and
go
over
and
over
these
things
again,
we've
had
a
plan,
that's
been
approved
and
that
we
are
saying
that
we
still
do
and
we're
gonna
keep
working
on
it
within
reason.
C
While
we
get
this
report
back,
hopefully
not
too
long
in
the
taking
because
of
the
monthly
cost
that
is
outlined
in
the
city,
manager's
report,
and
so
I
really
do
hope
that
we
will,
we
will
send
that
positive
affirmation.
Today,
we
will
endorse
the
city
manager
going
to
the
table
and
I've
said
it
before
and
I'll
say
it
again.
C
I
trust
him
I
as
the
mayor
and
as
one
member
of
this
council
trust
him
going
to
the
table,
accompanied
by
the
CEO
of
the
TTC
and
by
by
one
of
our
most
senior
financial
officials,
to
have
those
discussions
and
put
those
questions
and
express
those
concerns
and
come
back
here
with
an
assessment
of
what
they
learned
when
they
were
at
that
table.
I
trust
them
to
do
that.
I
think
they're
as
good
people
as
we
could
possibly
get
to
do.
C
In
my
submission
to
answer
the
questions
about
why
their
route
to
be
taken
is
better
for
the
people
of
Toronto,
not
for
us
and
not
for
anybody's
particular
plan
better
for
the
people
of
Toronto
and
so
I
hope.
People
will
endorse
these
motions
and
we'll
send
that
positive
affirmation.
Strong
positive
affirmation
from
us
that
we
have
a
plan,
but
we
are
willing,
in
good
faith,
to
go
and
assess
these
things
properly
with
the
proper
detail
and
to
come
back
here
and
consider
the
results
of
that
assessment
and
make
further
decisions
after
that
Thank
You
speaker.
C
P
Speaker,
mr.
mayor,
a
few
years
ago,
you
you
acknowledged
that
the
three
stops
subway
plan
was
not
good
for
Toronto
and
not
good
for
Scarborough.
In
fact,
I
believe
it
was
your
words
when
you
said,
to
paraphrase
that
it
was
back
of
a
napkin
planning.
So
why
would
you?
Why
would
you
argue
that
we
should
be
considering
to
endorse
a
plan
that
you
yourself,
along
with
every
expert
that
I've
ever
heard
from,
has
said
that
it
is
not
a
good
plan
to
move
forward
with
again.
C
Madam
Speaker,
through
you,
you've,
come
up
with
these
words
that
sort
of
suggest
I've
said
you
know
different
things.
What
I've
just
finished,
so
you
know
what
I'm
sorry
I
didn't
interrupt
you.
What
I've
just
finished
saying
in
the
last
five
minutes
when
I
was
given
time
to
speak,
is
that
we
should
do
a
thorough
assessment,
it'll
be
done
by
our
professional
public
servants
to
look
at
the
provinces.
C
So
that's
why
we're
asking
our
public
servants
and
that's
what
this
report
always
said.
Notwithstanding
suggestions
made
by
people
to
the
contrary
that
that
we're
gonna
have
that
assessment
mate,
it's
going
to
come
back
here
and
then
we
have
to
be
satisfied
that
it's
either
better
or
worse
or
something
in
between
and
we'll
make
a
judgement
at
that
time.
Hue.
P
Madam
Speaker
I
didn't
just
pick
words.
I
was
I
was
using
your
words
and
you
seem
to
agree
that
a
three-stop
subway
plan.
It
was
not
a
good
scheme
that
that
that,
in
fact,
you
led
council
to
reject
it
in
favor
of
your
one-stop
plan.
So
what
I
don't
understand
is
if,
if
you've
led
council
to
sink
funds,
tax
dollars
into
a
plan
that
you've
endorsed
you've
gone
out
and
spoken
in
favor
of
it
numerous
times
you
have
you
rallied
for
it
you've
championed
it
you've
fought
for
it.
P
P
C
I
make
it
clear,
madam
Speaker,
madam
Deputy,
Speaker,
that
what
we've
just
finished
talking
about
again
is
that
we
should,
in
good
faith,
go
and
assess
what
has
been
put
forward
here
by
the
premier
and
the
government
of
Ontario
I
haven't
said
anything
about
endorsing
it.
I've
specifically
said
we
want
to
assess
it
and
get
a
professional
report.
Evidence-Based
I
think
is
the
expression
we
often
hear
around
here
from
our
professional
public
servants
about
the
merits
and
EEMA
of
that
plan.
C
But
I
will
tell
you,
because
I've
been
very,
very
clear
and
very
consistent,
as
you
have
been
in
doing
everything
you
possibly
can
to
oppose
and
and
slow
down
and
change
and
read
aside
the
Scarborough
subway
that
goes
to
Scarborough
town
centre,
I've
been
absolutely
100%.
Consistent
on
that
and
I
stand
here
today
saying
as
I
just
did.
C
If
and-
and
we
will
continue
with
the
work
on
it
tomorrow,
because
we're
achingly
close
to
being
able
to
start
construction
of
that,
it's
actually
you
that's
had
a
problem
with
that
through
you,
madam
Speaker,
but
we're
gonna
proceed
with
that,
but
we
owe
it
I
think
if
we're
gonna
be
in
good
faith
discussions
to
look
at
the
merits
and
demerits
through
the
eyes
of
professional
public
servants,
not
politicians
with
their
own.
You
know
with
their
own
predispositions
about
what
they
may
think
about
these
projects.
P
Do
you
understand,
though,
that
over
years
not
only
was
that
reviewed
and
examined
by
my
planners
by
experts,
but
in
fact
what
we
know
authority
already
is
that
this
change
not
not
could
but
will
end
up
in
delays,
delays
for
providing
rapid
transit
to
Scarborough
residents
more
time
left
on
the
bus
for
people
who
already
have
a
two-hour
commute
in
the
morning
and
in
the
afternoon
rush
hours.
So
what
is
your
position?
I
mean?
Do
you
support
a
three
stop
subway,
so.
C
So
that
we're
clear,
I,
madam
Speaker,
again
I
support
the
City
Council
approved
transit
plan
that
we
have
in
place
at
the
moment
and
proceeding
as
we
were
well
along
doing,
we
were
making
more
progress
and
actually
proceeding
with
that
subway
than
ever
before
and
same
on
the
relief
line
by
the
way
and
and
and
several
members
of
council,
including
the
council,
are
asking
questions
through
you,
madam
Deputy
Speaker,
we're
here
long
before
I
was
and
got
nothing
done
on
the
roof
on
the
relief
line.
So
so,
having
said
all
that
I
privilege,
councillor.
P
L
L
P
You
I
share
many
people's
frustrations
with
the
lack
of
progress
of
this
council,
but
to
suggest
that
whether
it
be
me
or
any
other
member
of
council
here
was
directly
responsible
for
delaying,
the
relief
line
is
impugn.
Its
impugning
rather
their
their
reputation
is,
is
an
unfair
characterization.
It's
it's.
It
sounds
politically
motivated,
but
it
is
it's
not
an
accurate
representation
and
I
would
like
the
mayor
to
withdraw
that.
If
not
apologize,
did
you
withdraw
that?
Yes,
I
did
okay
I,
accept
that
then?
Yes,.
C
And
I'll
just
give
the
answer
to
it.
Now.
I
will
say
that,
while
nobody
I
guess
consciously
delayed
the
really
fine,
precious
little
had
been
done
on
it
up
until
the
time
of
after
the
2014
election.
But,
having
said
all
that,
when
you
ask
me,
the
question
am
I
in
favor
of
delay,
of
course,
I'm
not
in
favor
of
delay,
which
is
why
I
would
proceed
right
now
and
in
fact
we're
saying
we
are
ready
to
proceed.
C
We
as
a
council,
maybe
with
some
exceptions,
who
want
to
oppose
these
things,
madam
Speaker,
but
we're
ready
to
proceed.
This
is
ready
to
go
to
construction
tender
at
the
end
of
this
year
and
we
can
move
forward
on
that
and
other
projects.
So
the
relief
line
was
making
significant
progress
and
that
would
still
be
my
preference.
C
And
now
all
we're
saying
is,
since
they've
put
some
ideas
on
the
table,
that
in
good
faith,
we
should
assess
those
through
the
eyes
of
our
professional
public
servants
and
see
what
they
tell
us
back,
and
we
will
then
be
in
a
position
here
as
a
council
to
make
those
decisions
as
to
how
to
go
forward.
Okay,.
C
C
C
F
C
Well,
I
tried
to
answer
it
in
a
way
that
was
complete
and
honest,
which
is
to
say
we
were
asking
them
specifically
to
examine
our
staff
to
examine
the
projects.
The
province
said
they
were
going
to
significantly
alter,
which
previously
and
currently
form
a
part
of
our
approved
transit
plan.
Scarborough,
a
subway
extension
relief
line
and
Eglinton
West
LRT
were
asking
back
in
particular
on
the
first
two
and
tell
us
what
the
merits
or
demerits
and
answers
to
the
question
about
the
technology
and
so
on
with
all
the
other
projects
that
are
mentioned
in
there.
F
C
Glad
you
asked
me
that
madam
secret,
because
it
gives
me
another
chance
to
say
that
I
have
myself,
talked
to
people
Eadie,
as
have
other
members
of
council.
That
say
there
are
going
to
be
billions
of
dollars
of
development
that
are
going
to
go
into
that
area.
Around
the
Scarborough
town
centre.
There
are
going
to
be
new
places
to
work
new
jobs,
new
residences,
it's
a
little
to
walk
through
townsend
and
expounded
Scarborough
town
centre.
C
C
F
I'm
not
gonna,
tell
you,
madam
speaker,
what
might
make
my
thinking
is,
but
I'm
gonna
ask
the
mayor.
The
question
never
mind.
Also
I'm,
not
his
master's
voice
through
through
the
speaker.
What
about
the
20,000
units
that
are
going
to
be
built
along
Sheppard?
Isn't
that
going
to
be
a
mecca?
Don't
you
think
that
deserves
more
than
four
lines?
What.
C
Also
answer
to
questions
from
this
honourable
member
before
is
the
following,
which
is
that
at
the
present
time
we
have
an
approved
transit
plan.
We
fought
hard
to
get
one.
We
didn't
have
one.
When
I
came
to
office,
there
wasn't
one.
There
have
been
plans
cancelled.
There
were
people
that
wanted
to
change
plans,
but
there
wasn't
a
plan.
We
have
one.
Today
we
know
what
the
elements
of
it
are.
We've
been
working
really
hard
as
a
team
with
our
officials
to
move
that
plan
forward.
C
We've
made
great
progress
and
I've
said
to
the
member
before
through
you,
madam
Speaker,
that
I
am
not
in
a
position
where
I
can
sort
of
have
our
public
servants
or
the
province
reviewing
every
one
of
those
plans
that
are
not
included
in
the
present
plan
in
detail.
At
this
time
they
have
indicated
in
their
documentation
an
interest
in
looking
at
the
line.
You're
making
reference
to
the
counselor
is
the
madam
Speaker,
namely
a
Shepherd.
You
know
converting.
Q
F
C
Speaker
through
you
all
I
can
say,
is
this
I
want
to
leave
office
whenever
that
is
in
the
coming
years?
A
long
time
from
now,
I
want
to
leave
office
having
turned
Scarborough
in
and
and
all
parts
of
Toronto,
so
that
everybody
can
enjoy
the
same
kind
of
success
in
the
same
kind
of
investment.
The
same
kind
of
confidence,
the
same
kind
of
transit
service,
the
same
kind
of
access
to
opportunity
that
other
parts
of
the
city
have,
and
that
is
simply
saying
that
we've
got
to
lift
the
whole
city
up.
C
So
that-
and
you
know
we're
at
the
point
now
in
terms
of
housing,
availability,
land
for
job
land,
to
put
jobs
on
and
so
on,
where
we
need
to
have
every
part
of
the
city
benefiting
from
investments.
We
make
in
transit
in
housing
and
these
kinds
of
things-
and
that
is
my
objective
and
that
will
make
Scarborough
Mecca
and
other
parts
of
the
city
as
well,
including
North,
York
and
including
Etobicoke,
and
that
will
be
good
for
Toronto.
B
You
speaker
I,
will
be
supporting
the
motion
made
by
merit
or
II
III.
Think
that
I
I
do
that
not
believing
for
a
moment
that
anything
that
the
province
has
proposed
will
ever
get
built.
Quite
frankly,
Donald
Trump
will
get
his
border
wall
before
we
see
any
of
this
and
I
and
I
also
don't
I'm
not
supporting
it,
because
I
believe
that
the
province
is
at
the
table
in
good
faith.
We
set
out
some
principles
about
transparency
and
including
the
public
in
consultation
and
the
province
has
gone
the
route
of
secrecy
and
then
dropping
plans.
B
Without
talking
to
anybody
about
them.
They
have
ignored
this
council's
decisions
on
transit
and
overridden
them
and
without
any
warning
they
have
gone
and
cut
1
billion
point
1.1
billion
dollars
out
of
urgently
needed
capital
repairs.
None
of
that
is
good
faith,
but
I
think
it's
time
to
call
the
provinces
Bluff
call
their
bluff.
You
know,
mr.
mayor,
if
you
won't,
if
you
won't
join
me
out
on
the
on
the
end,
the
protests
call
their
bluff
and
call
it
now.
The
list
of
questions
prepared
by
the
city
manager,
I
I,
can
tell
you
right
now.
B
B
Then
we
walk
away.
Then
we
say:
that's
enough!
That's
enough!
You
are
really
in
bad
faith
now,
but
more
important
than
any
of
that.
I
want
to
take
you
back
to
the
answers
that
we
heard
from
our
staff
from
the
TTC.
If
they
had
a
choice
between
building
something
new
and
maintaining
what
we've
got,
they
would
maintain
what
we've
got
they
would
keep
in
a
state
of
good
repair.
B
Now,
we've
heard
previously,
the
TTC
feels
that
to
do
that,
they
need
about
20
billion
dollars
and
for
those
of
you
who
recall
the
deal
always
used
to
be
that
the
province
of
Ontario
would
pay
three
quarters
of
the
capital
cost
and
we
would
pay
a
quarter.
Well,
let's
take
a
look
at
how
much
money
they
put
on
the
table.
They
put
11
billion.
B
Now,
if
you
go
and
stand
at
the
intersection
of
Sheppard
and
Victoria
Park,
where
Doug
Ford
promised
us,
there
would
be
a
subway
station,
you
will
see
what
his
current
transit
plan
will.
Look
like
ten
years
from
now,
20
years
from
now
and
30
years
from
now,
there
will
be
nothing
there.
There
is
no
subway
station
there.
The
Ontario
line
will
never
be
built.
There
will
not
be
an
underground
extension
of
the
Eglinton
East
line.
B
There
will
not
be
three
stops
on
this
on
the
Sheppard
sub
of
the
Scarborough
subway
and
there
will
be
nothing
built
up.
Yonge
Street,
none
of
it
is
going
to
happen
at
all.
But
if,
in
order
for
this
council
to
show
unity
in
getting
the
premier
to
answer,
questions
serious
questions
about
his
intention,
we
have
to
collectively
take
the
bow
risk
and
work
together
and
in
that
metaphor,
your
Prime
Minister
Mulroney.
We
have
to
take
the
bull
risk
and
work
together.
Let's
do
it
for
now,
but
let's
commit
to
each
other.
A
P
You,
madam
Speaker
I,
have
a
motion
that
is
just
about
to
be
put
up
on
the
screen.
There
was
a
technical
problem
with
the
clerk's
desk.
My
motion
I'll
just
describe
it
as
as
they
do
this.
What
it
essentially
does.
It
replaces
the
subway
scheme,
with
the
evidence-based
LRT
plan,
to
build
24
stations
in
Scarborough.
The
reason
I
do
this
is
because,
for
the
same
amount
that
we
would
be
I
believe
miss
spending
on
providing
whether
it
goes
to
one
stop
or
three
stops.
P
We
could
not
only
fund
an
r/t
replacement
that
could
be
built
quicker
and
provides
service
to
residents
of
Scarborough,
providing
more
service
for
fewer
dollars
to
more
people,
but
could
be
built
quicker
without
delays
and
actually
move
forward
on
on
providing
them
transit.
Well,
so
they
don't
have
to
wait
on
the
bus
during
during
reconstruction
of
waiting
for
subway
to
be
built.
It
also
funds,
the
17
stop
LRT
line
the
Eglinton
East
to
to
U
of
T
Scarborough.
P
What
this
also
does
is
that
evidence
is
demonstrated
that
the
extension
of
Malvern
is
better
served
through
the
seventh
stop
RT
replacement,
then
going
out
east
and
then
going
back
it's
less
time
on
the
bus
for
Melbourne
residents.
So
this
plan
is
my
I
guess
what
I
the
way
I
phrased
it
to
a
friend
earlier
today.
Is
that
you
know,
even
when
people
do
the
wrong
things
in
life?
P
Sometimes
you
know
their
last
wish
is
to
maybe
do
the
right
thing,
and
this
is
our
opportunity
to
advocate
to
the
province
that
we
want
to
make
the
evidence-based
decision
to
use
every
tax
dollar
well
and
wisely
and
provide
the
best
service
to
as
many
people
as
possible
in
Scarborough
to
change
their
lives.
You
know
when
I
was
asking
the
mayor
earlier
about.
You
know
his
comments
about
the
three
stops:
subway
I'll,
just
he
sent
his
kind
of
coming
up
with
words.
P
P
Every
expert
we've
ever
heard
from
has
said
that
that
is
not
a
good
scheme.
It
is
not
a
good
way
to
support
residents
in
Scarborough.
It
is
not
a
good
use
of
tax
dollars,
but
the
LRT
plan
is
so
it
be
to
endorse
or
to
even
to
consider
to
endorse
a
plan
that
isn't
honest
that
we
heard
about
through
a
press
conference
to
Doug
Ford
and
his
members
made
I
think
is
reckless
and
irresponsible.
P
I
do
support
the
concept
of
asking
the
detailed,
difficult
technical
questions
arriving
at
what
the
truth
is
and
then
potentially
looking
at
what
pieces
we
endorse
them,
what
we
don't,
for
example,
at
first
blush.
It
doesn't
make
sense
to
me,
for
example,
to
bury
the
the
Eglinton
west.
It
doesn't
make
sense
to
me
to
move
forward
with
a
three
stop
subway
ad
in
Scarborough.
It
makes
more
sense
to
do
the
Artie
plan
to
me.
There
are
aspects
of
the
Ontario
line,
though
that
do
seem
to
have
merit.
P
Now
there's
many
more
questions
we
have
to
ask,
but
there
are
aspects
of
it
that
do
seem
to
make
sense.
In
fact,
most
experts
would
agree
that
actually,
we
should
have
always
been
at
least
whom
I've
heard
from
we've
always
should
be
considering
going
up
to
Eglinton
as
part
of
phase
one.
If
there's
technology
like
light
Metro
potentially
that
can
actually
provide
more
service
for
fewer
dollars
that
could
that
could
be
driverless
that
that's
something
we
should
be
entertaining
that's
something
we
should
be
considering.
P
I,
don't
understand
the
leg
Ontario
place
unless
there's
an
Exhibition
/
Ontario
place
redevelopment
that
could
benefit
from
that
that
we're
not
aware
of
those
planes.
I,
don't
know
those
plans,
but
then
we
start
considering
what
we
endorse
and
what
we
don't
based
on
the
evidence
in
front
of
us,
but
what's
going
to
happen
now,
is
we're
gonna
go
in
and
we're
gonna
conditionally
endorse,
and
that's
how
it's
gonna
be
inferred
by
some
people.
It's
definitely
gonna
be
inferred
by
Doug
Ford.
P
What
I'm
concerned
about
is
that
if
we
even
consider
going
out
there
endorsing
even
in
principle,
a
plan
that
doesn't
actually
make
sense
in
its
totality,
it
will
be
used
politically
and
it
will
snowball
and
we've
already
seen
the
Board
of
Trade
and
others
start
announcing
that
we
are
allocating
all
these
dollars.
So,
finally,
let's
do
the
right
thing
and
take
a
position
that
is
principled,
not
endorsing
something
in
principle
that
doesn't
make
sense.
Thank,
You.
N
N
N
There's
a
second
it's
coming,
there's
the
other
one,
so
this
is
about
reinstating
the
the
promised
provincial
gas
tax
increase
to
the
TTC,
so
this
happened
actually
last
Thursday
afternoon
when
the
provincial
budget
was
released,
as
we
were
sitting
in
a
TTC
board
meeting
where
we've
lost
1.1
billion
over
the
next
ten
years
for
our
state
of
good
repair.
So
thank
you,
madam
Speaker,
for
reminding
me
about
the
second
motion.
So,
on
the
first
motion,
again,
730,000
riders,
you
know
historical
maximums
of
number
of
riders
per
hour.
N
These
are
all
very
important
statistics
that
we
think
about
as
we
go
through
this
pros
and
basically
we've
been
told,
we've
been
advised.
Our
current
plans
really
could
have
been
ready
to
roll
for
procurement
and
construction
by
next
year.
2020,
so
I
want
to
ensure,
through
this
motion
that
any
additional
complications
of
extending
the
line
wherever
its
extended
to
west
north,
that
will
not
lead
to
any
significant
delays.
N
We've
heard
the
mayor
say
that
over
and
over
again
till
he's
blue
in
the
face
delays,
delays,
delays
so
any
way
to
curb
that
is
very
important
and
then
on.
My
second
motion
is
I've,
introduced
it
just
to
reinstate
that
that
funding-
that's
so
critical
to
our
core
business
I
know
we're
talking
a
lot
in
recent
weeks
about
transit
expansion,
but
we
can
never
forget
about
our
core
service
and
let
it
deteriorate
so.
N
N
These
projects
are
critical
to
addressing
capacity
and
maintaining
service
on
our
whole
network
and
I
understand
protect
not
particularly
politically
rewarding
to
talk
about
state
of
good
repair,
but
it's
very
important
to
us
as
a
city,
the
list
of
unfunded
projects
have
grown
every
year
since
2014
and
we
have
a
massive
state
of
good
repair
backlog.
The
number
that
you
heard
earlier
today
is
33
billion,
plus
23.7
billion
of
that
is
unfunded.
So
we
can't
ignore.
You
know
the
need
of
expects.
N
We
can't
we
cannot
fund
expansion
while
ignoring
our
core
services,
and
we
have
to
find
that
sustainable
funding.
Again,
as
I
mentioned
last
week
in
the
TTC
board
meeting,
we
were
literally
many
of
us
in
this
room
sitting
around
the
table,
listening
to
really
an
in
a
very
impressive
presentation
by
the
TTC
staff
talking
about
line
1
capacity,
enhancement
program,
the
to
the
tune
of
nine
billion
dollars,
that's
the
price
tank.
So
currently
we
were
running
about
25
trains.
We
want
to
get
up
to
30.
N
We
hit
that
once,
but
we
have
a
phase
plan
to
permit
modest
capacity
increases.
We
have
a
plan,
but
without
this
critical
investment
we
we'd
really
be
compromising
customer
safe
safety,
certainly
by
the
twenty
mid-2020s
absolutely
by
the
mid-2020s.
So
to
conclude,
I
just
want
to
make
it
clear,
despite
my
many
reservations
about
the
provincial
plans,
we
have
more
questions
than
answers.
I
will
be
supporting
staff
recommendations,
as
the
city
manager
confirmed
today.
It's
critical.
E
Thanks
very
much
madam
Speaker
I
just
like
to
start
by
saying
I'm
open
to
any
proposal
that
is
going
to
fund
and
build
transit
in
this
city
faster,
but
I'm
not
permit
convinced
what
the
province
has
presented
us
with
is
necessarily
a
plan
to
do
that.
What
we
have
today
is
61
questions
that
need
to
be
answered.
E
That's
really
concerning
it,
took
us
3
to
4
years
to
get
the
T
PAP
done
on
the
relief
line,
as
we
heard
to
hear
heard
today,
and
the
new
proposal
from
the
province
of
the
Ontario
line
would
cross
the
Don
Valley
not
once
but
twice
so
you
know.
Surely
common
sense
would
suggest
that
that's
going
to
require
extensive
study
to
resolve
and
I
think
that's
important.
E
It
was
always
our
intention
to
use
the
Greenwood
yard
for
the
relief
line
for
for
maintenance,
but
this
proposal
would
require
us
to
find
a
new
site
may
be
as
much
as
40
acres
and
certainly
in
a
city
like
Toronto,
40
acres,
easier
said
than
the
and
then
done
to
come
by
that.
Lastly,
I
would
say
that
the
province
is
proposing
a
smaller,
lighter
vehicle.
That's
what
we've
heard
you
know
this
is.
This
is
curious
too,
in
that
we
are
servicing
an
area
where
demand
has
actually
supported
the
relief
line
since
the
80s.
E
That's
what
we,
when
we
look
at
the
data
on
the
young
line
and
the
blue
line
this
this
could
be
justified
since
1980s
that
was
40
years
ago.
So
you
know
it's
concerning
to
move
forward
with
a
proposal
for
smaller
vehicles
where
demand
in
the
downtown
is
perhaps
going
to
be
our
highest
with
all
that
said,
I
think
what
we're
really
here
to
do
is
focus
on
action.
That's
what
people
elected
us
to
do.
That's
what
we
need
to
do
here
and
the
time
to
build
transit
in
Toronto
is
is,
of
course
now.
E
The
city
manager
really
had
an
important
message
for
all
of
us.
I
think
on
page
eight
of
this
report,
and
that
was
there
is
no
authority
to
proceed
to
procure
and
construct
the
one
stop
line
two
extension
project
in
the
absence
of
all
parties
agreeing
to
proceed
so
basically
to
get
anything
built,
we
actually
need
to
work
together.
We
can't
do
this
alone,
but
neither
can
they
I
would
just
add
that
we
really
do
need
to
keep
moving
forward
on
this.
E
We
have
to
ask
the
critical
questions
and
we
have
to
put
push
for
our
objectives,
our
transit
plan
that
we
have
here
in
the
City
of
Toronto.
That's
why
I'll
be
supporting
councillor
Robinson
and
the
mayor's
motions
and
I
think
it's
important
at
this
point
for
us
to
get
back
to
the
table,
get
the
answers
so
661
questions
and
maybe
more
that
we
need
to
actually
make
informed
decisions
going
forward.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.