►
From YouTube: City Council - October 29, 2019 - Part 2 of 2
Description
City Council, meeting 11, October 29, 2019 - Part 2 of 2
Agenda and background materials:
http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/decisionBodyProfile.do?function=doPrepare&meetingId=15357
Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpr8ayR5gDM
Meeting Navigation:
0:11:55 - Meeting resume
2:14:24 - Meeting resume
A
B
C
C
I
can
get
rid
of
most
of
the
items,
but
if,
if
any
members
would
if
I
may
finish,
if
any
members
want
to
hold
an
item,
maybe
they
could
show
but
I'll
try
to
quick
release
a
number
of
the
items
so
I'm
going
to
start
with
a
you
four
point:
six
headed
fleet
services,
operational
review
phase,
two
stronger
asset
management
needed
I'm,
happy
to
release
that
item.
Okay,.
C
D
A
C
E
H
C
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
Hopefully
this
is
helpful,
starting
with
audit
item
number
six
I'd
like
to
quick
release
them
I
can
read
the
titles
quickly,
I,
don't
believe
they're
contentious,
but
if
a
member
has
wished
to
hold
I'll
happy
to
keep
them
held
a
you
four
point:
six
Fleet
Services
operational
review
phase.
Two
stronger
asset
management
needed
happy
to
release
that
eight.
A
A
C
I
You,
madam
Speaker,
with
Halloween
just
a
few
days
away.
I,
want
to
bring
your
attention
to
an
important
issue
facing
4,000
kids
in
Canada,
with
accessibility
challenges.
Trick-Or-Treating
these
kids
often
feel
discouraged
and
left
out
when
the
fun
when
homes
are
not
accessible
because
most
aren't
a
daddy
Long
Branch.
My
warrant
had
a
realization
of
a
couple
years
ago.
He
decided
to
do
something
about
it.
I
Rich
started
treat
accessibility
of
movement
that
raise
awareness
about
kids,
with
disposition
Halloween
and
encourage
people
to
take
a
few
easy
steps
to
make
their
homes
accessible.
All
trick-or-treaters
treat
excels.
We
started
with
one
sign
in
2017
and
has
grown
to
25,000
signs
across
Canada
this
year.
I
have
a
few
signs
here
be
happy
to
share
with
my
colleagues
or
they
are
available
for
free
at
Home
Depot
locations.
Please
visit
w-w-w,
more
form
information.
Thank
you.
Madam
Speaker
appreciate
it.
Thank
You.
A
J
D
B
D
B
And
what
we're
doing
right
now
is
actually
are
we
sharing
information?
Are
we
overlooking
what
they're
they're
doing
are
we
you
know?
How
are
we
making
sure
that
our
experiences
at
the
table
that
what
we've
learned
and
how
we
built
this
house,
our
community
voices,
are
at
the
table
like?
How
are
we
doing
that
so.
F
F
Well,
the
city
is
required
to
nominate
projects
that
it
wishes
to
endorse
to
the
federal
government
and
our
allocation.
The
total
federal
allocation
is
four
point.
Nine
billion
dollars
council
has
previously
approved
two
projects
to
be
nominated
for
peta
funding.
They
include
the
smart
track
proposal
as
well
as
the
floor
young
proposal,
both
valued
at
estimated
value
at
one
point,
1
billion,
so
the
remaining
amount
is
roughly
3.8
billion
and.
B
B
L
L
L
J
L
Billion
okay,
thank
you
to
the
city
manager.
What
we
are
approving
today,
if
it's
not
amended,
directs
you
to
go,
negotiate
a
preliminary
agreement,
there's
a
term
sheet
attachment
six!
Does
that
term
sheet
contain
any
commitment
of
money
or
percentage
for
state
of
good
repair
funding
of
the
TTC?
It.
L
F
H
L
The
term
sheet
give
the
City
of
Toronto
access
to
a
new
revenue
tool
such
as
road
tolls.
No
does
the
term
sheet
give
the
province
sole
responsibility
for
the
planning
design,
construction
of
the
4
priority
projects
according
to
point
two
in
the
term
sheet,
soil
responsibility
correct.
So,
despite
anything
that
council
has
moved
at
the
executive
committee
are
here
today
encouraging
you
to
get
more,
they
exhibit
a
term
sheet.
We
are
being
asked
to
get
you
to
go,
get
a
preliminary
agreement
out
of
says
they
will
have
sole
responsibility
for
planning
and
design.
That's.
L
L
True:
okay,
if
we
give
you
authority
to
go
and
sign
this,
you
go
and
sign
this
and
they
ignore
advice
from
the
community
or
the
local
councillor.
We've
already
committed
to
giving
them
the
ability
to
design
build,
implement
these
lines
and
to
use
the
federal
money
that
we
have
available
for
transit
expansion.
We've
already
done
that
once
you
sign
this.
Is
that
correct
once
you.
L
L
If
I
am
correct,
we
Pat
we
take
this
decision
today.
You're
authorized
to
go
sign
this
preliminary
agreement.
According
to
this
term
sheet,
they
go
out
to
the
private
sector.
The
private
sector
says
we
want
only
two
stations
and
they're
both
above-ground,
but
it's
in
the
corridor
that
we've
agreed
to
it's
the
Ontario
line.
We
have
given
away
already
the
federal
money
and
acknowledged
that
they
have
sole
responsibility
for
the
planning
and
design.
That
is
correct.
Is
it
not.
H
One
motion
is
just
go
through
item
by
item,
so
one
is
with
regard
to
understanding
the
details
of
what
we
signed
on
to
with
respect
to
the
ontario
line.
Now
the
other
two
motions
speak
to
the
added
money
in
the
provincial
plans
to
add
a
three
stop
subway
in
Scarborough
and
to
bury
the
Eglinton
West
rather
than
to
move
forward
with
the
light
rail
plan.
The
originally
proposed
light
rail
plan
for
Scarborough
and
to
move
forward
with
the
clearly
the
better,
the
better
way
to
go,
which
is
the
above-ground
plan
for
Eglinton
West.
H
Given
the
no
expert
Doug
Ford
has
said
it,
but
no
expert
has
suggested
that
barring
actually
makes
any
sense
and
from
a
fiscal
perspective,
it's
bonkers.
So
what
this
does,
though,
in
turn,
is
that
I'm
requesting
that
we
use
the
financial
savings
to
invest
in
the
Eglinton
East
extension
to
U
of
T
Scarborough
and
actually
change
lives
in
Scarborough
by
building
a
network
of
the
Eglinton
extension
out
to
U
of
T
Scarborough,
and
then
the
LRT
line
replaced
in
the
RT
to
Malvern
the
way
that
it
was
originally
envisaged.
H
In
fact,
if
we
had
gone
ahead
with
transit
City,
we
would
have
the
Etobicoke
Finch
West
line
the
Eglinton
crosstown,
which
is
the
survivor
and
all
this
Sheppard
wouldn't
have
been
sidelined.
Jane
wouldn't
have
been
forgotten,
waterfront
West
would
have
been
built
and
we
would
have
transit
to
Melbourne,
and
all
of
that
would
be
Matt
would
be
operating
today.
All
of
that
would
be
operating
today.
H
Instead,
plans
change
and
change
and
change
and
change
and
change
all
over
again,
but
they
become
far
less
evidence-based
and
far
more
expensive
and
serve
far
fewer
people
who
we
are
entrusted
to
serve.
In
fact,
this
plan
would
spend
a
per
new
rider
six
hundred
and
eighteen
thousand
dollars
per
rider.
You
could
essentially
say
this
rhetorically,
of
course,
but
you
could
essentially
purchase
a
small
condo
and
a
car
for
each
one
of
those
new
riders.
H
It
is
just
an
absurd
use
of
the
very
few
dollars
that
we
have
to
invest
in
our
infrastructure
priorities.
Moreover,
I
see
a
lot
of
exciting
potential
in
the
Ontario
line,
I
like
that
it
extends
further
north
than
the
face.
One
of
the
relief
line
I
I
welcome
Doug
Ford
as
a
recent
convert
to
light
rail
as
a
use
to
provide
transit
service
to
people
throughout
our
city.
H
It
is
remarkable,
though,
isn't
it
that
he
used
to
say
subway,
subway,
subway
or
nothing
and
all
of
a
sudden
he's
into
light
rail
Metro
projects
in
fact
he's
replacing
a
proposed
subway
with
light
rail,
but
we
don't
know
the
detail,
so
we
don't
know
the
technology,
we
don't
know
how
the
stops
are
being
identified.
We
don't
know
a
lot
of
things
about
this
plan
and
I.
H
Don't
know
what
you
know
if
you're
like
me,
speaking
of
the
car
I,
wouldn't
purchase
a
car
without
knowing
the
model
of
the
car
and,
knowing
you
know
just
some
basic
details
about
it.
I'd
want
to
understand
that
and
I
think
it's
reasonable
to
ask
some
of
these
questions
before
putting
our
federal
dollars
towards
it.
You
know
merit
or
you
when,
when
he
discounted
the
three
stop
proposal
in
lieu
instead
of
his
one
stop
proposal
for
Scarborough.
To
paraphrase
said
something
like
the
three
stop
subway
was
was
written
on
a
back
of
a
napkin.
H
You
know
justjust
dismissive
about
that
proposal
and
I
agreed
I
agreed
with
the
mayor
at
that
time,
but
all
of
a
sudden
now
this
plan
is
being
sold,
as
you
know,
the
best
thing
since
sliced
bread.
Of
course,
there
have
been
improvements.
In
fact,
I
move
a
motion
long
ago
that
we
should
only
stay
at
the
table
if
we
are
discussing
expanding
and
improving
transit
rather
than
you
know,
giving
away
the
the
secrets
to
help
the
upload
I
think
we
achieved
in
many
ways
along
the
same
direction
there,
where
improvements
have
been
made.
H
Ontario
Line,
exciting,
but
I
want
to
know
the
details
before
I
sign
off
and
say.
Hurrah
I
also
want
to
know
that
we
are
spending
money
wisely
in
Scarborough
to
improve
service
to
more
people
for
fewer
dollars.
I
want
to
know
that
we're
not
going
to
bury
common
sense
in
the
ground
in
Etobicoke
will
we
bury
a
line
that
was
meant
to
be
at
great
I
want
to
know
that
we're
gonna
use
every
transit
dollar
wisely
to
serve
as
many
people
as
possible
in
the
coming
years
and
I
also.
H
N
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker
I,
just
like
to
thank
staff
for
all
the
work
they've
done
on
this
transit
file
and,
of
course
congratulate
the
mayor
or
all
the
work
he's
done.
What
you're
looking
at
is
the
largest
urban
transit
funding
package
in
Canadian
history,
and
this
is
a
commitment
to
build
high-level
transit
in
Canada's
largest
city,
that
the
people
of
Toronto
have
been
asking
for
for
a
generation.
N
People
are
using
transit
today
and
and
I
am
a
transit
user.
At
the
end
of
the
day,
they
don't
really
care
who
has
built
the
line.
What
they
are
looking
for
is
reliable,
safe
and
affordable
transit.
This
package
may
not
be
perfect,
but
it
comes
pretty
close
is
what
your
aunt
onehans
has
been
asking
for.
It
gets
people
out
of
their
cars,
get
people
to
their
place
of
work
to
their
place
of
to
their
homes
and
to
their
educational
institutions.
N
We
want
to
make
sure
that
what
there's
no
more
politicization
of
transit
that
we
adopt
what's
before
us
today,
they're
still
worth
to
do
and
we'll
still
be
seeing
a
master
plan
in
the
future
there'll
be
bumps
along
the
way.
When
you're
doing
this
kind
of
infrastructure
in
a
tight
urban
setting,
they'll
be
bumps
along
the
way
when
it
comes
to
traffic
management.
N
When
it
comes
to
noise,
when
it
comes
to
vibration,
when
it
comes
to
appropriation,
these
are
all
very
difficult
issues,
but
I
think
the
city
is
ready
to
move
on,
to
get
these
deals
done
and
to
get
Metrolinx
to
build.
At
the
same
time,
I
think
we
have
to
look
at
the
fiscal
responsibility
of
the
city.
N
Province
has
agreed
to
fund
most
of
it
at
the
same
time,
I
think
it's
important
and
our
CFO
can
keep
it
contingency
to
make
sure
that
we
are
prepared
if
there
are
any
kind
of
unknowns
within
the
agreement,
such
as
civic
services,
civic
civic
improvements
that
we
built
been
billed
for
in
the
past
or
repairs
to
infrastructure
should
such
be
damaged
along
the
way,
including
hydro
and
stormwater
management
and
sewer
management.
That
being
said,
once
again,
I
want
to
congratulate
the
mayor
on
this
package
before
us.
N
A
F
O
Thank
you
very
much.
I've
got
a
couple
of
motions
motion:
a
that
City
Council
amend
executive
committee
recommendation
three
by
adding
the
following
between
city
manager
and
City,
Council
and
subject
to
all
transit
oriented
development,
prioritizing
inclusionary
zoning
and
affordable
housing
requirements,
while
advancing
the
principles
of
good
planning
to
the
satisfaction
of
the
deputy
city
manager,
infrastructure
development
services
and
the
chief
planner,
an
executive
director
city
planning
to
and
so
that.
The
recommendation
now
reads
as
follows.
It's
up
there
on
the
screen.
O
If
motion
a
fails,
that
City
Council
requests
the
city
manager
and
the
deputy
city
manager,
infrastructure
and
development
to
request
metro
links
to
ensure
that
transit,
oriented
development,
prioritizes
inclusionary
zoning
and
affordable
housing
requirements,
while
advancing
the
principles
of
good
planning
to
the
satisfaction
of
deputy
city
manager,
infrastructure
development
services
and
the
chief
city
planner.
An
executive
director
of
City
Planning
motion
see
that
City
Council
direct,
the
deputy
city
manager,
infrastructure
and
development
services
and
the
chief
executive
officer,
Toronto
Toronto
Transit
Commission,
to
ensure
there
will
be
enough
buses
available.
O
Should
the
Scarborough
rapid
transit
fail
earlier
than
the
completion
date
of
the
line
to
extension
and
that
this
does
not
impact
other
services
provided
by
the
Toronto
Transit
Commission?
Indeed,
that
City
Council
requests
the
chief
financial
officer
and
treasurer
in
consultation
with
the
general
manager
TTC
as
part
of
the
2020
capital
budget
to
report
on
an
accelerated
capital
plan
for
the
treant
Toronto
Transit
Commission,
made
possible
by
a
1%
increase
in
the
city
building
fund
to
characterize
this
proposal,
as
as
an
actual
plan
to
build
transit
would
be
overly
generous.
O
Drawing
based
on
nothing
more
than
some
conversations
between
the
Metrolinx
and
the
TTC
they've
taken
some
of
the
work
the
TTC
have
done
and
said:
how
can
we
shoehorn
our
idea
of
public
transit
into
it?
We
don't
know
their
technology,
we're
to
a
two
preliminary
stage
to
really
have
a
good
grasp
of
what
this
will
cost.
O
We
don't
know
at
the
end
of
the
day
how
it's
gonna
integrate
into
our
existing
system.
We
don't
even
know
where
the
stations
are
gonna,
be
for
one
of
the
lines,
some
of
the
very
basic
things
that
make
transit
planning
possible.
We
have
no
idea,
we
heard
just
in
the
final
question
of
this
debate
from
councillor
perks,
that
once
we
vote
YES,
they
can
come
back
with
a
radically
different
plan
and
we
won't
have
any
say
about
it.
So,
let's
keep
that
in
mind
when
this
thing
actually
all
shakes
shakes
loose.
O
You
know
it
strikes
me
that
we've
now
matched
the
number
of
transit
plans
under
our
current
administration,
as
we
did
under
Mayor
Ford's
administration.
Those
three
plans
their
three
plans.
Now
we
went
from
three
Ford
era:
plans
not
all
decided
by
him,
but
three:
four
Ford
era
plans
to
two
Torre
era
plans
and
now
a
mix
of
the
two.
O
O
Commitment
we
make
because
of
these
long-term
visions
is
such
a
critical
and
important
part
of
it
as
elections
change
leadership,
as
people
now
think
that
they're
cutting
a
new
deal.
This
is
what
is
taking
us
down
this
plan
of
empty
promises,
but
in
this
case
you
know,
I,
don't
I,
don't
fault
the
mayor,
I,
don't
fault
our
t,
TC
leadership,
I,
don't
fault
our
city
manager.
We
were
put
in
this
place
by
another
level
of
government.
O
We
were
put
in
this
place
in
in
this
place
by
premier
Ford
deciding
to
once
again
turn
the
City
of
Toronto
upside
down,
pencils
down
everyone,
no
more
planning
the
projects
that
we
had
under
the
previous
administration,
it's
time
to
move
ahead
with
a
new
plan.
If
we
keep
going
like
this,
nothing
will
ever
get
built.
O
I'm
limited
though
in
my
choices,
because
it's
either
you
support
this
half-baked
plan
and
then
see
the
next
plan.
That's
just
around
the
corner.
No
doubt
if
we
keep
at
this
pay
pace,
all
we
get
locked
into
a
war
with
the
province
and
see
absolutely
nothing
get
done
in
the
next
two
years.
I
have
no
doubt
we're
gonna
be
having
this
same
debate,
no
matter
what
we
end
up,
supporting
this.
A
O
P
O
P
Fair
enough
so
I'm
just
trying
to
understand,
if
that's
the
regulations
that
exist
on
the
books
today
beyond,
because
these
are
all
MT,
SAS
and
they're
required.
That's
where
inclusionary
zoning
will
be
used.
It's
a
shame.
We
should
be
using
it
elsewhere,
but
right
now
it's
just
around
Mt
SAS,
where
these
are
going
to
be
Mt
SAS.
How
does
your
motion
I
guess?
What,
above
and
beyond?
Is
your
motion?
Try
to
accomplish
there?
Oh,
my
my.
O
What
my
motion
is
trying
to
do
is
to
make
sure
that
our
staff,
our
professional
planners,
are
making
decisions
on
this
and
not
the
province,
not
the
premier,
and
not
the
minister
of
municipal
affairs,
because
you
know
what
they
did
to
the
last
plan
we
sent
them,
they
tore
it
up,
they
tore
up.
Our
downtown
plan,
turned
it's
on
it
turn
it
turned
it
on
its
head
and
took
away
all
the
great
work
that
our
staff
did.
P
P
O
O
P
So
it's
just
I'm
trying
to
understand
if
we're,
if
they're
already
contemplating
that
I
said
it's
actually
only
gonna
take
place
at
Mt
SAS
and
that's
a
problem
separate
issue
that,
but
what
does
this
do?
What
is
what
is
your
contemplation,
above
and
beyond
that
when
the
rags
already
specified
that
I
said
will
take
place
at
Mt
essays?
These
are
Mt
SAS,
so.
O
So
but
I'm
just
not
confident
counselor
that
the
provincial
government
will
do
what
they
say.
They're
gonna
do
so
I'd
prefer
to
take
the
only
leverage
we
have
right
now
and
that's
us
signing
this
agreement
saying
our
chief
planner
needs
to
be
satisfied
with
what
the
province
is,
allowing
us
to
do
with
respect
to
both
what
good
planning
is
and
for
inclusionary
zoning
on
those
sites,
because
right
now
it
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
that
the
the
ministry
could
either
not
approve
our
our
plan
for
inclusionary
zoning
around
our
around
transit
hubs.
O
They
could
also
decide
on
their
own
to
approve
something
altogether
different
through
a
municipal
zoning
board
like
I'd.
Ask
you
what
what's
the
harm
in
us
insuring
that
our
chief
planner
is
satisfied
with
the
level
of
affordable
housing
around
these
sites.
I
see
absolutely
no
no
issue
with
that.
Thank
You.
L
L
O
L
C
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker
I
just
wanted
to
continue
on
the
questioning
from
councillor.
Bradford
I
want
to
understand
the
mechanics
of
what
was
proposed
and,
if
I
could
ask
that
the
motion
go
back
up
on
the
screen
just
to
help
us
here,
I've
got
a
copy,
but
it
says
that
number
three
basically
says
that
council
endorsed
the
reallocation
of
federal
funding
under
the
is't
program,
subject
to
a
bunch
of
things
and
subject
to
entering
the
preliminary
agreement.
C
That
would
possibly
be
an
outcome
of
this
council
decision,
in
anticipation
of
the
realization
of
the
city's
project
and
inspection
expectations
and
subject
to
all
transit
oriented
development,
prioritizing
inclusionary
zoning.
Well
it
and
it
goes
on
to
say
basically
a
decision
point
is
with
our
staff.
C
My
question
is
at
what
point
in
time
on
a
calendar
would
counsel
then
endorse
the
isip
program.
This
says
our
staff
have
to
agree
to
a
bunch
of
conditions
around
around
these
development
around
these
sites,
in
the
way
that
I'm
seeing
this
is,
we've
got
to
look
at
the
actual
development
proposals
to
make
sure
they
fit
with
good
city
planning.
So
how
is
this
gonna
function?
C
O
I
suspect
what
will
happen
is
the
proposals
gonna
come
from
or
they
once
they
have
the
locations
of
where
the
stations
are
gonna.
Be
because
because
we
don't
know
that
yet
or
before
that
they
will
have
to
come
up
with
some
principles
of
development.
Of
what
will
happen
around
these
stations
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
inclusionary
zoning
is
one
of
them
that
affordable
housing
is
in
the
mix
in
any
transit
oriented
development.
O
Because
again,
as
was
pointed
out
by
the
previous
question,
that
doesn't
seem
to
be
their
priority
in
this
case
and
I
want
to
make
sure
it's
not
the
minister
of
municipal
affairs
or
the
premier
saying
we
can
say
no
to
affordable
housing
or
it
can
have
this
small
amount.
Instead,
I
would
prefer
our
chief
planner
giving
giving
his
best
advice
to
ensure
that
that
he's
satisfied
that
the
amount
of
affordable
housing
is
reflective
of
the
city's
need
and
and
and
policy
to
ensure
that
we
have
affordable
places.
C
So
this
is
a
very,
very
detailed
ask
of
our
staff.
This
is
deep
analysis,
especially
around
the
principles
of
good
city
planning
and
to
the
satisfaction
of
some
of
some
staff
members.
So
this
is
a
chicken
and
egg
question
to
you
is
how
on
earth
could
we
do
this
level,
this
detailed
level
of
analysis
and
still
realize
that,
at
the
outset
of
the
project
city
council
would
have
to
commit
to
the
funding
and
in
order
to
get
the
ball
rolling
on
the
whole
thing
or
we
don't
have
a
project
count
the
funding.
O
Sir,
we're
about
to
vote
on
something
we
have
absolutely
no
information
about.
How
is
asking
our
city
staff,
our
experts,
say
staff
to
give
their
opinion
when
these
plans
start
to
come
through
to
give
their
approval
about
some
simple
principles
like
inclusionary
zoning,
which
we've
been
studying
for
four
years
I
you,
you
think
the
problem
is
our
city
staff
not
having
enough
information
now
we're
about
to
prove
a
thirty
billion
dollar
transit
project
with
zero
information
about
what
the
technology
counts.
D
D
Also
can't
commotion
speaker
to
go
up
I
also
have
a
little
video
I'm
going
to
play
later,
so
I'd,
really
like
the
IT
guys
to
come
down
and
be
able
to
help
me
when
I
get
to
that
time.
In
my
my
speech,
that's
one
basically
looking
at
all
of
those
bridges,
including
the
one
that
has
to
come
down
for
the
gardener
and
what
that
means
to
be
puttin
in
a
bug
ground
grade
lane.
Another
track,
two
more
tracks.
There's
another
motion:
there.
D
That
is
the
six
meters
safety
requirement
between
heavy
rail
and
passenger
rail
and
I.
Think
that
that
has
to
be
met
has
to
be
our
standard
for
safety
and
there's
also
the
portals
we'll
be
going
right
in
the
middle
of
Riverdale
Plaza,
which
is
a
major
transit
station,
and
so
we
need
to
look
and
see
what
the
impact
financially
and
otherwise
would
be
for
that
for
redevelopment
there
and
meeting
those
targets.
So
those
are
the
three
motions
I
just
like
to.
D
First
of
all
on
this,
you
know
I'm
going
to
talk
about
the
Ontario
line,
but
thank
the
mayor
for
advancing
some
motions
that
came
from
my
community
last
week
about
25
people
came,
they
spoke
I,
think
they've
sent
in
about
280
letters
about
the
situation
of
this
above-ground
line
for
two
kilometers
through
their
backyards,
taking
out
the
community
center
people
from
the
sisters
of
st.
Joseph,
the
impact
on
those
tenants,
the
impact
on
green
space
and
Parks,
and
the
fact
that
trains
would
be
going
every
45
seconds.
D
There
are
three
tracks
already
go,
has
three
tracks
they
need.
A
fourth
for
re
are
smart
track,
and
they
also
this
line
still
has
via
on
it,
and
freight
trains
on
it.
Two
more
going
on
would
add
up
to
six
six
trains
45
seconds
each
for
the
Ontario
Line
and
about
two
and
a
half
minutes
each
for
go
so
I
do
want
to
say
that
the
Ontario
Line
will
be
running
under
the
same
roads,
the
same
sewers
and
have
the
same
problems
that
we
found
in
the
trash
assessment.
That
was
done
for
the
relief
line.
D
We
have
spent
a
lot
of
years
looking
at
how
to
run
an
underground
line
on
our
roads,
with
the
amount
of
infrastructure
that
we
have
and
to
remind
you
that
two
sections
will
have
brand
new
environmental
assessments
and
I
would
assume
the
city
will
be
there.
I
would
assume
any
citizens
will
be
there
and
I'm
hoping
that
Metrolinx
does
not
stand
aloof
from
environmental
assessments.
D
The
section
in
Ward
14
will
be
amended,
they're
going
to
use
the
work
that
was
already
done
by
the
TTC
staff
by
our
transit
planning
staff
for
parts
of
that
new
zone
in
the
central
and
then
they're
going
to
amend
it
by
running
this
line
above
ground
and
I.
Do
thank
the
mayor
for
adding
a
question
mark
to.
Can
we
look
at
running
that
a
below
ground?
Can
we
enclose
that
we
need
to
look
at
the
impacts
on
this
community,
which
will
be
very,
very
severe
and
Friends
I've
been
through
a
relief
line
assessment?
D
It
was
a
line
on
a
map,
guess
what
we
had
to
look
at
a
number
of
options.
Finally,
something
was
chosen
and
then
we
had
to
see
how
it
could
be
built
and
what's
there,
this
is
just
a
line
on
the
map.
The
Ontario
line
is
just
a
line
on
the
map
and
when
you
get
up
to
the
north
part
and
you,
how
do
you
cross
that
dawn
Valley,
it's
very
wide?
Where
does
it
come
out
everybody's
a
little
nervous
about
that?
D
So
all
of
these
big
issues
for
communities
really
really
need
to
be
looked
at
very
carefully.
I
just
want
to
thank
our
staff,
TTC
staff
transit
planning
staff
from
planning
for
the
work
that
they
did
on
the
relief
line
for
the
years
of
their
life
that
they
put
for
working
with
the
community
in
the
way
that
they
did
that's
a
standard
that
should
be
met
by
Metrolinx.
D
That's
the
standard
I
know,
that's
the
that's
the
environmental
assessment
I'm
expecting
when
Metrolinx
comes
and
does
their
amendment
or
does
their
other
two
new
ones
through
your
ward,
councillor,
Krusty
and
through
councillor
Robinson's
Ward.
So,
while
it
looks
great
on
the
map,
it's
only
on
the
map,
I
do
have
a
little
video
here
that
I
just
want
to
show
you.
The
trains.
E
Just
I
guess.
The
sort
of
silver
lining
here
is
that
this
is
the
only
forum
where
this
30
plus
billion
dollar
project
will
be
debated.
It
won't
be
debated
for
one
minute
at
Queen's
Park
at
Ottawa.
They
don't
even
consider
it
worth
talking
about
transit,
yet
they're
giving
money.
So
at
least
here
there
is
public
debate
about
this
very
important
investment
in
the
future
of
Toronto.
So
that's
one
of
the
benefits
of
having
a
City
Council.
E
Also,
the
the
ironic
thing
in
all
this
is
the
you
know
the
showcase
line
some
people
call
the
vanity
line
is
the
Ontario
line.
You
know,
and
it's
almost
a
repeat
of
what
Bill
Davis
did
when
he
forced
the
city
to
take
on
the
SRT,
which
was
supposed
to
be
the
answer
to
all
the
transit
issues
across
North
America
and
the
city
gladly
installed.
Yes,
RT,
the
poor
people
of
Scarborough
have
suffered
ever
since.
With
that
rinky-dink
system,
that's
been
afflicting
the
people
of
Scarborough.
So
there's
nothing
here.
E
That's
going
to
solve
these
major
transit
issues,
but
at
least
I
can
say
it's
an
attempt,
a
very
improved
attempt
from
what
it
was
a
couple
of
months
ago
when
we
were
told,
take
it
or
leave
it.
This
is
what
you're
getting
shut
up
and
accept
the
good
graces
of
the
Guru's
up
at
Queen's
Park
at
least
there's
been
a
positive
turn
and
they've
actually
sat
down
with
our
officials
as
we're
told
and
they've
come
up
with
a
meaningful
dialogue
going
according
to
it.
So
that's
been
an
improvement.
Dramatic
improves!
E
You
know
there's
a
big
change
at
Queen's
Park.
They
backtracked
on
almost
everything
from
nuts
to
noodles
so
anyways.
So
this
is
a
continuing
pattern
of
saying
they
made
mistakes
and
they
admit
the
mistakes
and
they're
coming.
So
thank
God
for
that,
and
then
the
ironic
thing
about
all
this
is
that
this
is
not.
The
Ontario
line
is
not
a
subway.
It
was
supposed
to
be
subway.
Subway
subway,
someone
said
it's
a
monorail
elevated
system
for
the
most
part
running
with
secret
technology,
that
nobody
knows
what
it
is.
E
So
that
worries
me,
because
that
means
that
projected
date
of
2027
for
the
finishing
a
complete
line
is
really
a
pipe
dream.
So
therefore,
what
I
think
has
to
be
done,
as
least
I
want
to
protect
the
residents
in
the
young
corridor,
especially
my
area,
Yonge
and
Eglinton,
because
we
are
not
only
faced
with
overcrowding
today
that
is
trying
to
be
managed
by
the
TDC,
but
we
are
going
to
be
hit
with
another
huge
overcrowding
issue
in
a
couple
years
when
the
crosstown
station
zoltes
opens
up
and
then
on
top
of
it.
E
So
that's
why
I'm
being
very
modest
at
my
request,
I'm
not
asking
to
change
the
agreement,
we'll
never
do
that,
but
at
least
I'm
saying
please,
as
a
city
council,
let's
stand
up
and
say:
please
defer
the
upzoning,
the
extra
densities
at
Yonge
and
Eglinton,
so
people
can
over
the
next
while
safely
get
on
the
subway
in
the
morning
without
waiting
for
five
subway
cars.
So,
if
they're
waiting
for
five
subway
cars
right
now,
if
the
densities
increase
as
a
result
of
108,
if
the
Eglinton
crosstown
is
completed,
you
know
it's
gonna
make
Tokyo.
E
Look
like
you
know,
bazarian
station,
that's
what
it's
gonna
happen.
So
all
I
ask
please
get
the
city
managers
say:
give
us
a
bit
of
a
timeout
on
your
up
zoning
and
maybe
go
forward
with
some
of
the
principles
of
the
Midtown
and
focus
plan.
So
we
can
at
least
wait
for
this
grand
line
that
is
someday
going
to
complete
it
to
relieve
us
of
the
congestion.
That's
all
I
asked
for
a
very
modest
report.
Thank
you.
A
A
L
F
You
miniature
I
have
three
motions:
these
were
essentially
motions
that
were
moved
at
the
TTC
council.
Robinson
would
have
moved
them,
but,
as
we
know,
she
can't
be
here
today,
so
I'm
I'm
moving
them
for
the
Commission,
okay
and
I'll.
Just
briefly
speak.
The
first
thing
I'd
like
to
say,
is
well
while
I'm
not
voting
for
cancer
Layton's
motion.
I
am
if
I
had
a
chance
to
vote
twice
against
cancer.
Layton's
motion
to
raise
taxes.
I'd.
F
F
F
They
didn't
even
have
a
line
on
the
on
the
return
on
the
on
the
line
on
the
proposed
transit
north
of
the
Danforth
there
was
it
not
even
a
line
so
this
proposal,
this
proposal
builds
rapid
transit
up
the
Danforth,
all
the
way
to
Don,
Mills,
Road,
and
so
so,
and
I'd
like
to
congratulate
the
mayor
for
and
I'm
gonna,
get
back
to
the
in
a
minute
for
end
staff.
We're
coming
up
with
this
this
arrangement.
F
D
F
Idea
of
the
interior
line
makes
sense
for
my
communities
for
thorn
cliff
in
Flemington.
It
creates
a
transit
hub
at
Don,
Mills,
Road
and
Eglinton,
and
it
does
does
it
far
faster
than
then
the
city
ever
contemplated.
They
actually
had
no
idea
when
they
were
gonna
get
up
to
dawn
those
road.
They
had
no
idea
when
they
were
gonna,
bring
rapid
transit
to
the
Flemington
community
on
the
thorn
cliff
community
and,
quite
frankly,
those
communities
with
any
high
needs
community
with
any
marginalized
community
that
opens
up
the
world
to
them.
F
It
opens
up
the
city
to
them
and
from
that
point
of
view
this
this
this
particular
proposal
is
remarkable
and
deserves
this
council
support
and
I
hope
everyone
will
well.
It
won't
be
unanimous,
but
I
hope
you'll.
Take
that
in
mind
when
you're,
considering
the
arrangements
that
have
been
worked
out
by
our
staff
and
the
report.
That's
in
front
of
us
today,
Thank.
A
M
Thank
you,
I
have
a
motion
in
two
parts.
The
first
part
is
at
City
Council,
director
city
manager,
in
consultation
with
the
chief
executive
officer
TTC
in
the
negotiation
of
the
applicable
Master
Agreement
with
the
province
and/or.
Its
agency
include
requirement
that
the
in-service
date
for
the
entero
line
be
prior
to
the
in-service
date
of
the
young
north
subway
extension,
as
stated
in
the
2019
provincial
budget,
and
that
the
relative
construction
schedules
be
planned
accordingly.
M
First,
the
the
first
part
deals
with
the
overcrowding
that
we're
already
familiar
with
on
the
on
line,
one
that
it
is
standing-room-only
by
North
York
Center,
which
is
the
second
stop,
that
it
is
crowded
by
Eglinton
and
it
is
jampacked
at
Bloor,
and
we
know
that
will
only
get
worse
until
it
gets
better.
So
we
need
to
does
not
have
vague
assurances.
We
need
to
require
this
in
the
agreement,
and
I
have
worked
with
the
city
manager
and
deputy
city
manager
on
these
motions
on
the
other
side.
M
It's
probably
a
good
thing
that
we
were
there
because
I
think
we're
in
a
better
spot
than
we
were
six
months
ago
and
in
a
better
spot
than
I
thought
we
would
be
in
so
I
think
you
know
comparing
to
where
we
were
we're
in
a
better
spot.
That's
a
good
thing.
I
said
at
the
time
I
thought
they
just
wanted
to
case
the
place
to
see
what
they
should
take
and
I
still
think.
That
statement
was
true.
M
M
Good
thing
we
were
there
at
the
table
too
to
have
that
discussion
and
end
up
in
a
better
spot.
How
do
we
evaluate
this?
Is
it
a
great
deal?
I,
don't
think
so.
Is
it
a
good
deal
I'm,
not
even
sure
it's
a
good
deal,
it's
a
better
deal
and
again
I'm
thankful
that
we
have
a
better
deal
than
what
we
had
from
where
we
sit
right
here
at
this
moment
you
know
I'm
uncomfortable
voting
either
for
or
against,
but
my
inclination
is
to
vote
for
because,
as
of
where
we
sit
now,
we
don't
I.
M
Certainly
don't
have
a
better
option
for
us.
We
don't
have
much
available
to
us.
Yes,
we
are
losing
even
more
control
through
this
deal,
but
really
with
the
current
government.
We
really
had
no
control,
so
you
know
I,
think
from
where
we
sit
now
that
we
should
support
this
from
looking
ahead
like
going
15
years
into
the
future
and
looking
back
on
this
deal,
what
will
we
say
that
was
it
a
deal
we
should
have
made
and
I
you
know,
I,
don't
know
the
answer
to
that.
I
hope
the
answer
turns
out
to
be.
M
Yes,
I
hope
we
don't
look
back
on
it
and
say
wow.
You
know
we
should
have
anticipated
this.
We
should
have
anticipated
that
and
we
really
gave
up
control
and
and
look
what
happened
that
I
hope.
It's
not
like.
Looking
back
on
the
construction
of
the
Sheppard
subway
and
the
filling
in
of
the
Eglinton
line
and
I
know
those
weren't.
S
Thank
you
very
much
speaker,
Deputy
Speaker
I
have
a
motion.
I
will
ask
their
clerks
put
this
on
the
screen.
The
City
Council
affirm
its
support
for
the
maintenance
of
the
new
and
existing
lines
to
be
done
by
the
integrated
and
in
professional
workforce
at
the
Toronto
Transit
Commission.
This
report
provides
no
guarantee
that
the
maintenance
will
be
carried
out
by
the
TTC
operators
as
of
today
and
during
my
my
questioning
to
staff,
they
were
also
not
able
to
give
us
any
further
assurances
than
what
was
already
contained
in
the
report.
S
We
talked
about
fair
integration,
it's
not
going
to
happen
if
the
province
continues
to
put
their
their
their
nose
in
our
business,
so
contracting
a
maintenance
of
the
new
or
existing
lines
will
actually
be
for
for
our
riders,
a
detrimental
blow
to
them
with
what
they
expect,
which
is
quality
of
service.
I.
Think
it's
also
important
for
us,
madam
Speaker,
to
recognize
that
the
entire
line,
despite
all
the
the
the
back-slapping
and
the
high-fives
that
I'm
hearing
on
the
floor
of
counsel,
is
that
it
has
no
business
case.
We
have
no.
S
We
have
no
business
case
for
the
Ontario
line
and
we're
about
to
make
a
decision
and
send
staff
further
off
into
this
discussion
and
and
probably
in
in
the
Quantum's
of
tens
of
billions
of
dollars
into
the
future.
We
have
no
idea
whether
or
not
this
is
financially
viable
and
whether
or
not
it
will
float
at
the
end
of
the
day
and
to
me,
that's
it's.
It's
highly
irresponsible,
madam
Speaker,
for
us
to
to
make
such
a
decision
in
a
commitment
right
now
by
even
suggesting
that
we
have
that
information.
It
is
entirely
false.
S
We
don't
not
and
I,
don't
think
madam
Speaker,
that
City
Council
can
make
an
informed
decision
about
a
very
important
infrastructure
project
when
we
don't
have
real
information
before
us
and
this
lack
of
transparency.
The
lack
of
a
business
case
is
incredibly
troubling,
because
this
seems
to
be
the
way
we're
asked
to
to
plan
transit
in
the
city
and
I
really
wish
that
we
were
not
put
in
this
position.
But
here
we
are
once
again
trying
to
make
lemonade
out
of
lemons
and
I'm,
not
interested
in
leading
from
behind
I.
S
I
cannot
imagine
how
we
can
actually
look
into
the
face
of
our
of
our
of
our
constituents
and
say
that
I've
done
the
very
best
for
you
and
I
stood
up
for
you
when
we
need
it
to,
and
it's
not
about
getting
to
the
table.
Madam
Speaker,
it's
about
working
with
partners
that
will
respect
us
and
the
plans
that
we
have
and
the
studies
that
we've
concluded
and
the
in
the
and
the
ambitions
of
the
city
based
on
evidence
and
based
on
our
vision
and
aspirations
for
the
city.
S
So,
madam
Speaker,
there
are
so
many
questions
that
have
left
unanswered
and
I
cannot
believe
that
we
went
through
a
round
of
questions
so
rapidly
and
I
still
have
more
and
I
know
a
members
do
as
well,
but
we're
not
going
to
get
them
because
the
staff
simply
don't
have
them.
But
yet
here
we
are
asked
to
make
a
decision
to
proceed
with
something
we
know
is
flawed
in
our
gut.
S
R
Under
the
new
terms
negotiated
with
the
province,
madam
Speaker
I
haven't
put
a
timeline
to
motion,
B
I
think
it's
I
think
would
be
B.
I
think
would
be
asking
for
work.
That's
not
complete
to
ask
that
this
be
ready
in
time
for
the
2020
budget.
It's
already
it's
already
being
inked
and
I
also
think
that
we're
deep
in
the
negotiations,
and
so
it
would
kind
of
hijack
a
special
budget
council
meeting
here
in
this
chamber
in
in
January.
R
Immediately
after
the
budget,
though,
we
know
we'll
get
a
good,
strong
five-year
plan
on
state
of
good
repair.
Our
capital
plan
will
give
us
a
rough
solid,
five
years,
that
that
don't
need
to
be
amended,
but
they
really
need
to
paint
a
picture
as
soon
as
we
get
through
this
Budget
Committee.
While
we're
still
getting
to
the
final
agreement,
they
need
to
paint
a
picture
for
this
chamber,
not
just
for
the
Commission,
but
for
this
chamber
of
what
is
the
cost
of
keeping
the
base
system
going,
because
it
is
our
burden.
R
Now,
if
we
we
agree
to
this,
we
sound
a
little
like
we're
sitting
here.
Thinking
you
made
a
bad
deal,
I'm
painfully
aware
of
the
whole
table.
If
there
are
problems
in
the
way
this
is
coming
to
us.
If
there
are
problems
that
they're
incomplete
things,
I'm
considering
the
whole
table
in
that,
and
so
I'm
not
passing
any
judgments
on
anyone
in
this
room.
Right
now,
unless,
unless
they've
sent
someone
to
listen
to
our
debate
and
there's
Stan
they're
sitting
behind
me,
so
all
I
know
is
this
once
we're
back
here
and
we've
got
our.
R
What
is
it?
1.2,
4
billion
is
really
all
the
money
that
we're
getting
back.
We
can't
let
our
eyes
be
bigger
than
our
stomachs.
We.
We
have
to
really
know
what
our
costs
are
of
our
based
capital
program
in
fine
detail
and
particularly
the
vehicle
purchases,
because
at
the
moment
it
sounds
like
the
province
is
abandoning
them.
The
federal
government
is
already,
in
their
previous
term,
coughed
up
a
lot
through
P,
Tip
and
p2
and
they're
now
in
a
minority
situation,
so
we
don't
know
what's
coming
from
them.
I
hope
they.
R
They
worked
with
the
the
side
of
the
house
in
Ottawa
that
wants
to
invest
in
transit,
but
we
don't
know-
and
so
we
better
darn
well
know
what
we're
responsible
for.
Under
the
terms
of
this
agreement
and
motion
a
madam
Speaker
in
operating,
we
have
had
good
news
from
the
province
before
they
change
their
minds.
R
We
change
our
minds,
whatever
we
always
say
from
1995,
when
the
province
walked
away
from
funding
operating
when
they
walked
away
from
the
Bill
Davis
formula
that
we
know
worked
for
funding
transit
on
the
operating
side
so
that
you
could
expand
while
keeping
your
base
system
afloat
and
from
the
time
we
walked
away
from
that
successive
premiers
keep
saying
yeah.
That
was
a
bad
idea.
We'll
talk
about
operating.
Let's
build
this
shiny
new
thing.
We
really
should
have
that
operating
conversation.
One
of
these
days.
R
What
I'm
asking
is
that,
as
part
of
this
negotiation,
we
ensure
that
we've
set
a
date.
I
want
there
to
be
a
date
in
city
manager,
Chris,
Murray's
diary
that
says
a
March
1st
or
whatever
the
whatever
is
the
day
that
I
phone
the
premier's
office
and
say
it's
time
to
have
the
operating
conversation
we
agreed
today's
the
day.
We
start
that
conversation.
It
will
end
up
being
a
negotiation
just
the
same
as
the
negotiation
we're
having
over
building
new
lines,
but
there
has
to
be
a
day
that
it
starts
like
a
labor
negotiation.
R
It
has
to
have
a
deadline.
So,
let's
set
one
as
part
of
these
negotiations:
I
don't
care
if
it's
12
months
from
now
36
months
from
now,
there
needs
to
be
a
date
at
the
city
in
our
diary
that
says
today's
the
day
we
open
that
conversation,
I've
shown
this
to
the
mayor.
I've
shown
this
to
the
city
manager
and
they
agree
with
me.
We
got
to
nail
that
down
this
time.
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
Thank
You.
F
You,
madam
Speaker
I,
do
have
a
motion.
If
staff
can
put
it
up,
we'll
appreciate
it.
Basically,
the
motion
asks
for
that.
We
have
the
city
manager
communicate
to
the
province
and
the
federal
government
that
in
future
stages,
when
they're
doing
transit
planning,
we
strongly
consider
extending
the
current
Sheppard
subway
to
connect
the
new
proposed
station
at
Sheppard
Avenue
the
McCowan,
to
identify
this,
and
there
are
coming
budgets
processes.
F
Madam
Speaker,
we
are
experiencing
a
boom
in
housing
along
Sheppard,
east
and
west,
and
one
of
the
things
that
we
must
do
in
order
to
make
sure
that
there
are
people
are
moving.
We
need
to
extend
the
subway
along
Sheppard
I
realized
that
in
Scarborough
for
the
last
40
years
since
1978,
we
have
not
built
an
inch
of
subway
and
we
keep
talking
about
it.
It's
about
time
that
we
stop
talking
about
it.
It's
about
time
that
we
engage
our
constituent,
especially
the
people,
nor
the
401
that
have
been
forgotten.
F
F
I,
don't
know
why
yeah
my
people,
some
say:
they're
coming
to
work,
downtown
they're,
coming
to
work,
downtown,
getting
paid
going
back
up
to
Vaughn
they're,
just
the
citizens
as
much
as
we
are,
but
the
City
of
Toronto
needs
citizens,
and
these
are
the
people
that
live
north
of
the
401
and
Scarborough
deserve
nothing
less,
but
a
subway
that
goes
the
goes
to
three
stops:
subway
along
Scarborough
discover,
subway
and
along
the
Sheppard
subway
to
connect
it.
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker
Thank.
A
D
D
Pragmatic
at
a
time
where
it
would
be
very
easy
for
him
to
have
been
political
Scarborough
needs
an
integrated
transit
network
that
relies
on
the
Scarborough
subway
extension,
the
Eglinton
East
LRT
to
Malvern
and
rapid
transit
on
Sheppard.
Today's
agreement
is
a
good
deal
for
Scarborough,
as
it
takes
the
next
step
towards
this
transit
network.
It
commits
the
province
to
finding
this
funding
of
the
Scarborough
subway
extension
and
it
frees
up
the
city
commits
commitments
to
that
project.
One
point:
two:
three
billion
is
being
collected
through
a
dedicated
tax
levy
and
development
charges.
D
These
funds
were
collected
with
Scarborough
transit
in
mind,
and
I
will
advocate
that
these
funds
are
spent
on
truck
Scarborough
transit,
specifically
the
Eglinton
East
LRT
to
Malvern,
but
I
appreciate
that
that's
a
debate
for
next
year.
But
what
I'd
like
to
draw
your
attention
to
is
the
letters
of
support
we
have
received
supporting
the
three
stop:
Scarborough
subway
and
the
Eglinton
East
LRT
to
Malvern.
There
are
letters
included
in
the
package
from
three
major
employers
and
anchor
institutions
in
Scarborough,
the
Scarborough
Hospital
network,
the
University
of
Toronto
Scarborough
campus
and
Centennial
College.
D
Collectively
they
represent
15,000
staff
35,000
students
in
over
500,000
patients
there's
also
letters
from
the
Scarborough
Business
Association
in
renu
Scarborough
that
speak
to
the
economic
development
and
housing
that
can
happen
with
higher
order
transit
in
Scarborough
there's.
Also
letters
of
support
from
three
local
community
associations
in
Eastern
Scarborough,
the
Centennial
Highland
West
Rouge
community
associations.
B
Bothell,
thank
you,
madam
Speaker
I.
Think
more
than
half
of
council
has
already
spoken.
At
least
you
know,
there's
not
many
of
us
and
I
think
there
was
probably
just
one
person
that
really
talked
about
the
big
issue
that
started
this
discussion,
which
was
the
upload
and
I've
seen
this
discussion
out
there
characterized
as
the
upload
is
no
longer
happening
because
in
exchange
for
the
Ontario
line,
approval
or
you
know,
the
the
the
upload
is
no
longer
a
big
deal.
It
was
big,
but
it's
it's
no
longer
big
deal.
B
The
reality
is
that
about
a
year
ago
we
were
facing
the
upload
and
many
people
said
we
should
not
be
at
the
table
and
the
table
proved
to
be
right
and
what
I
heard
from
our
city
manager
and
from
legal
department
as
well
is
that
there
is
no
legal
and
there
was
no
real
and
exchange.
The
Ontario
line
has
been
legislated.
The
Ontario
line
work
is
gonna
proceed
either
we're
gonna
be
once
again
at
the
table
or
not,
and
actually
we
wouldn't
even
be
able
to
continue.
B
Our
work
would
be
against
the
law
to
continue
a
work.
So
I
think
that
it
would
is
in
front
of
us
is
a
victory
in
that
sense
that
we
continue
to
own
and
to
operate
our
TTC.
We
do
have
a
major
capital
investment
and
we
have
funds
that
we
are
going
to
be
able
to
use
in
much
much
needed
upkeep
and
to
address
the
backlog.
Now
are
there
issues
with
some
of
these
things
that
are
in
front
of
us.
I
have
no
question
that
there
are
and
I
think.
B
There
are
that,
as
these
lines
are
being
connected
with
our
existing
TTC,
that
the
needs
of
the
existing
system,
the
sistine
sustainability
of
our
existing
system
is
brought
to
the
table,
and
that
is
why
it
is
important
that
we
continue
the
conversations
in
a
pragmatic
way
and
to
ensure
that
transit
is
built
and
for
that
I
want
to
thank
our
city
staff
for
the
work
that
they've
done
and
thank
the
leadership
of
the
man's
that
from
they
once
said.
We
need
to
be
on
the
table.
B
A
G
I,
thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
First
of
all,
I
like
to
echo
all
my
colleagues
here
to
thank
the
city
staff,
especially
the
city
manager
and
mr.
city
manager.
I
think
you
must
be
very
likeable
because,
when
you're
at
the
table,
people
like
you
they'll,
do
what
you
asked
for.
So
please
remain
like
a
vote
so
that
we
can
get
more
we
can
get
and
for
mr.
mayor
I
really
important.
You
know
really
congratulate
you
on
your
negotiation,
because
it's
not
easy
to
to
get
a
deal
for
me.
G
I,
don't
know
whether
there's
a
whether
there's
a
poor
plan
or
the
Tory
plan.
I
only
know
one
plan,
because
I'm
new
on
this
council
and
I
really
think
that
this
is
a
very
massive
plan
that
we
are
planning
that
the
that
is
the
least
cost
to
the
city.
A
subway
I
mean
a
subway
plan
that
is
with
the
least
costs
to
the
city
and
I
think
we
should
not
pass
and
we
talk
and
talk
and
talk.
You
know,
there's
no
perfect
plan,
let's
get
the
shovel
on
the
ground
and
we
can.
G
We
can
talk,
but
we
need
to
walk
so.
I
was
always
telling
this
story
about
in
the
70s
there
was
no
subway
in
Hong
Kong
when
I
came,
but
40
years
ago
later,
I
mean
at
that
time.
In
the
70s,
when
I
came,
there
was
subway
up
Addington
and
up
to
a
yeast
Lincoln
and
up
to
Canada
or
warden.
So,
basically,
you
can
see
the
the
number
of
subway
stops
that
we
built
a
number
of
some
ways
that
that
we
built
comparing
to
that
of
Hong
Kong
right
now
is
like
the
whole
web.
G
So
we
have
a
lot
of
catch-up
to
play
and
really
really
I
would
have
loved
to
have
my
Shepard
extension
line
to
be
on
this
plan.
But
it
wasn't
it
wasn't
on
the
on
the
plan,
but
the
thing
is
we
need
to
have
to
really
to
walk
together.
We
need
to
work
together
so
that
we
can
get
things
done
together.
So
we
shouldn't
be
debating
too
long.
G
T
Thank
you
very
much,
madam
Speaker,
and
I
too
would
like
to
put
my
faint
towards
our
exceptional,
hard-working
city
staff,
who
have
kind
of
been
inundated
this
year
with
transit
and
I.
Think
they
have
done
a
phenomenal
job
in
moments
that
have
very
divisive
debate
in
this
chamber
and
in
public
discourse.
T
T
Before
closing
my
remarks,
the
only
thing
I
would
like
to
put
on
the
floor
council
is
more
of
a
local
issue
around
the
Eglinton
West
LRT,
and
wanting
to
see
that
progress,
because
there
are
hundreds
of
thousands
of
people
in
Etobicoke
who
want
to
see
that
transit
and,
of
course,
the
greater
connection
to
Toronto
Pearson
International
Airport,
which
is
a
huge
economic
pillar
for
our
city.
So
I
think
that
is
a
big
part
of
gain.
Transit
moving
and
look
forward
to
continuing
those
talks.
T
L
L
We've
been
had,
we've
been
completely
swindled
without
our
pockets.
Picked
we've
been
tricked.
We've
been
fooled
since
about
1995
the
city
of
Toronto
every
year
in
its
budget
debate,
sends
a
letter,
the
province
of
Ontario
and
says
we
cannot
afford
to
run
the
system
we
have.
You
have
to
help
us
now
and
the
province
of
Ontario
got
sick
of
that.
Eventually
they
gave
us
some
money
along
the
way
which
I'll
talk
about
in
a
moment,
but
they
eventually
got
sick
of
it.
L
And
if
you
recall
about
two
years
ago,
the
Progressive
Conservative
Party
of
Ontario
said
we
know
how
to
solve
this
problem.
We
will
upload
that
the
TTC
so
that
we
can
better
finance
the
state
of
good
repair
using
our
vast
borrowing
powers,
which
the
City
of
Toronto
does
not
have,
and
that's
how
we
wound
up
with
the
upload
conversation.
The
upload
conversation
was
never
just
an
empty
threat;
it
was
a
way
for
the
province
to
get
away
from
the
fact
that
this
is
the
only
major
city
in
North,
America
or
Europe.
L
That
does
not
have
sustained
capital
funding
we're
the
only
one-
and
here
we
are
with
an
agreement
in
front
of
us
that,
as
mr.
Leary
pointed
out,
frees
up
1
billion
of
24
billion
dollars
that
we
need
just
to
maintain
the
system.
We
have
that's
5
percent,
the
agreement
that
you
have,
let's
the
province
off
the
hook
and
leaves
us
with
95
percent
of
our
state
of
good
repair
and
rolling
stock
needs
unfunded.
It
is
literally
the
worst
transit
deal
that
has
ever
been
put
in
front
of
this
council.
L
It
is
utterly
shocking
to
me
that
any
of
you
would
consider
this
beyond
that.
You've
heard
that
once
we
vote
yes
today,
it
will
be
at
the
sole
discretion
of
the
province
of
Ontario
how
to
plan
and
design
these
new
lines.
We
will
have
given
away
our
ability
to
do
anything
about
that.
Now.
Some
have
suggested.
You
know
the
province
has
always
been
hard
on
us
and
we've.
L
L
Who
was
able
to
get
the
land
transfer
tax,
which
is
the
only
reason
we've
been
able
to
operate
our
transit
system
and
who
was
able
to
get
the
federal
government
to
help
us
by
800
buses
and
who
was
able
to
get
the
federal
and
provincial
governments
to
help
us
by
204
streetcars?
If
we
would
just
remember
this
simple,
simple
principle
that
you
can't
add
a
story
on
top
of
a
building
whose
foundations
are
crumbling,
we
would
never
sign
a
deal
like
this.
We
would
say
the
first
job
is
to
maintain
this
system.
L
You
have
that's
the
question.
I
have
asked
the
CEO
of
the
TTC
every
time
I
have.
We
have
debated,
transit
I
have
said
what
is
job
one
and
every
single
time
he
has
said
the
state
of
good
repair.
If
you
build
the
Ontario
line
and
you
can't
afford
to
run
line
two,
what
do
the
people
who
are
getting
off
the
Ontario
line
connect
to
if
you
are
extending
the
subway
out
east
and
you
have
no
money
to
buy
buses?
How
do
people
get
to
these
new
stops
if
the
young
line
continues
to
crumble?
L
What
on
earth
is
the
point
of
having
a
discussion
about
where
the
Ontario
Line
terminus
is?
This
is
all
just
fantasy,
you're
chasing
Shimura.
It
is
ridiculous.
We
have
lost
the
plot
and
because
we
lost
the
pot,
premiere
Ford
picked
our
pocket.
The
only
person
who
walks
away
with
a
benefit
out
of
this
is
premier
Ford.
P
Think
we
can
all
agree
on
that.
Over
the
past
twelve
months
and
as
colleagues
have
mentioned,
literally
with
the
stroke
of
the
pen
bill,
107
completely
changed
our
transit
paradigm.
The
City
of
Toronto
is
no
longer
permitted
to
plan
transit
expansion
on
these
key
priorities.
That's
the
reality,
but
we're
in
a
much
better
position
today
because
of
the
mayor's
leadership,
because
the
city
staff
and
because
cooler
heads
prevailed,
we
sent
our
team
to
the
table
to
advance
Toronto's
interests
in
a
very
challenging
environment.
P
To
ignore
the
achievements
that
have
come
out
of
those
negotiations
is
irresponsible.
Now
I
think
that
we
all
still
have
a
lot
of
questions.
A
lot
of
questions
remain
and,
as
we've
heard
from
our
staff,
that's
pretty
typical.
That's
pretty
typical
of
linear
transit
projects
that
are
cut
cutting
across
the
city
and
many
stable
neighborhoods
in
a
very
challenging
urban
environment.
That
information
is
going
to
come
forward
through
a
detailed
design
process.
P
That's
what
you
get
in
a
stage
gating
process,
that's
what
you
get
with
transit
projects
in
North,
America,
that
information
presented
to
you
on
day,
one
staff
team,
two
engineers,
consultants,
work
and
build
that
information,
and
then,
as
politicians
as
staff,
we
have
an
opportunity
to
review
that
same
with
cost
class
estimates.
That
is
what
is
going
to
come
forward
to
this
and
that's
a
typical
process.
So
has
the
process
been
very
challenging
to
date?
Yes,
you
know
leaking
business
cases
and
documents
Friday
afternoon.
P
That's
regrettable,
that's
not
helpful,
but
where
we
are
today
because
of
the
work
and
because
we've
been
at
the
table,
we're
in
a
much
better
position
we're
actually
here
to
make
decisions.
That's
our
job,
we're
here
to
make
decisions,
and,
and
that's
what
we're
going
to
do,
we
need
to
look
at
the
facts.
We
need
to
look
at
the
legislation
that
literally
governs
what
we're
doing
as
a
municipality.
We
need
to
look
at
that
and
then
we
need
to
decide
how
we
move
forward
for
Torontonians,
for
TTC
riders
and
for
everybody
in
this
city.
P
How
do
we
move
forward
on
the
transit
file?
Now,
there's
18
motions
in
front
of
us
I
think
it's
18
and
some
of
them
are
gonna
completely
undermine
the
work
that's
been
done
today.
Some
of
them
are
fine.
Some
of
them
are
additive
and
benefit
some
of
them
jeopardized
the
terms
that
our
city,
manager
and
staff
have
worked
out
in
all
of
those
meetings,
and
unfortunately
this
is
politics.
This
is
the
politics
of
transit
that
has
failed
Torontonians
time
and
time
again
it
didn't
take
long
for
us
to
start
talking
about
transit.
P
City
again
great
plan
was
a
really
great
plan.
It's
not
getting
built,
I'm,
sorry,
that
that
wasn't
my
decision
as
a
new
counselor,
but
that's
that's
not
happening
and
I,
don't
think
it's
helpful.
It
also
doesn't
help
to
talk
about
the
delays.
I
mean
there
will
be
delays
and
show
me
a
transit
project
in
North
America,
where
it
hasn't
been
over
time
and
over
budget
like
that
is.
That
is
the
reality
of
these
large
infrastructure
projects
and
it's
unfortunate,
but
I
also
think
blowing
up
an
agreement.
P
That's
been
worked
out
over
the
past
year
and
then
starting
over
again.
You
know
that
will
further
delay
us
and
the
other
option
of
not
doing
anything
for
the
next
three
years
and
hoping
that
there's
a
change
in
government
that
doesn't
sound
very
responsible
to
me
either
so
I
want
to
I
want
to
find
a
way
where
we
can
all
move
forward
and
I.
Think
that's
the
original
agreement
that
we
have
in
front
of
us.
There
are
a
lot
of
valid
concerns
that
need
to
be
addressed
anytime.
P
You
bring
in
major
transit
infrastructure
ain't
as
dense,
stable
urban
neighborhoods.
There's
gonna
be
challenges.
It
doesn't
matter
if
it's
under
grade
at
grade
or
above
grade.
That
is,
gonna,
be
painful,
and
it's
gonna
be
painful
for
the
foreseeable
future
here
in
this
city,
because
we
haven't
done
it
over
the
previous
decades.
P
It's
only
gonna
get
harder,
but
the
best
way
to
mitigate
those
impacts
is
by
being
at
the
table,
sending
our
staff
there
to
negotiate
for
our
interests
to
advocate
for
city
building
priorities
and
to
shape
that
process,
and
that's
what
I
think
we
should
do
so.
I
want
to
focus
on
how
we're
advancing
transit
in
this
city
and
what
we
can
do
today
to
build
the
transit
for
tomorrow.
I
think
that
there's
some
recommendations
and
some
motions
here
that
that
are
thoughtful
again,
there
are
some
that
are
going
to
undermine
the
work.
P
C
Holliday,
thank
you.
Madam
Speaker
I
just
want
to
briefly
rise
to
acknowledge
the
great
work
done
by
the
team
on
city
staff.
This
is
a
really
exciting
time,
because
what
we're
talking
about
is
a
regional
transit
plan.
We
tend
to
be
Toronto
focused,
but
there's
a
couple
elements
in
this
plan
that
are
extending
beyond
the
city
and
there's
the
Ontario
Line,
which
is
going
to
do
a
lot
of
things.
But
it's
also
going
to
do
some
capacity
increases
that
will
help
serve
our
neighbors
outside
the
city
and
that's
a
good
thing,
especially
for
me.
C
C
But
I,
listen
to
the
council
debate
today
and
it
amazingly
the
amount
of
doubt
that's
cast
into
this
process
and
I
think
I.
Think
about
the
time.
I
go
with
my
kids
to
the
movie
theater
three
kids,
little
kids.
They
argue,
and
they
fighting
I,
want
to
see
this
movie.
I
will
see
that
movie
and
this
one's
no
good
that
one's
bad.
That
was
our
rating.
C
C
That's
that's
what
we're
contributing
to
the
capital-
and
there
was
a
there-
was
this
this
this
this
attack
just
a
little
while
ago
about
you
know
how
bad
this
is.
It
means
we
can
take
six
billion
dollars.
We
were
otherwise
going
to
use
to
build
infrastructure
and
put
it
in
a
state
state
of
good
repair.
I,
don't
know
how
else
we
could
possibly
do
that
other
than
to,
and
if
you
read
the
report,
we're
not
out
there
we're
not
being
asked
for
much
other
than
consent
to
have
a
federal
grant
directed
towards
this
project.
C
You
over
lie
the
Ontario
line.
It
almost
completely
overlays
where
the
other
subway
was
I,
know
it's
out
by
a
few
hundred
meters
in
a
few
spots,
but
it
overlays
it
and
then
goes
longer
so
I
went
through
this
report.
I
listened
to
the
debates
went
through
the
presentations.
I'll
tell
you
maybe
I've
been
here
too
long.
It's
cynical
I
was
looking
for
something
to
find
fault
in,
but
it
was
awfully
hard.
I
think
this
is
a
fantastic
deal
for
Toronto.
C
I
think
this
is
fantastic
that
that
the
government
is
going
to
come
and
build
this
infrastructure
I
think
it's
fantastic,
that
it's
regional
in
nature,
I
have
every
faith
in
our
staff.
We've
got
some
experience,
dealing
with
the
Eglinton
crosstown
that
they're
going
to
find
a
way
to
do
this
faster
and
better
I
hope
to
cooperate
with
the
Ontario
government
to
get
this
delivered
as
fast
as
possible,
because
at
the
end
of
the
day
it's
about
the
transit
riders.
C
It's
about
inviting
people
through
the
system
getting
them
from
A
to
B
in
an
efficient
manner,
I'm
also
delighted
to
say,
after
after
a
long,
long
push
the
light
is
at
the
end
of
the
tunnel
or
there's
a
tunnel
underneath
the
ground
for
the
Eglinton
West
LRT
councillor
Ford
mention
it
I
would
be
remiss
in
not
mentioning
it.
That
is
something
that
is
extremely
important
to
the
community
that
I
represent.
C
We
want
to
make
sure
that
the
transit
investments
are
enhancing
our
neighbourhoods
they're,
taking
into
account
the
needs
of
the
local
residents,
we're
not
just
a
pass-through.
We
are
people
that
that
enjoy
transit,
that
use
transit
that
need
transit,
but
we
also
rely
on
a
road
system
that
works
and
I
think
the
government's
commitment
to
doing
that
is
as
a
portion
of
this
plan
that
isn't
talked
about
enough.
So
I
really
hope
that
council
supports
this.
There's
some
poison
motions
in
here
that
I'm
concerned
with
that.
C
Look
too,
basically
planned
some
more
before
agreeing
to
consenting
to
have
a
federal
grant
go
forward.
So
there's
the
irony
of
it
right.
The
criticism
of
you
know
this
this.
This
is
going
to
set
back
the
clock
and
take
more
time,
but
the
motions
here
say:
let's
go
back
and
discuss
this
some
more
before
we
agree
to
move
forward.
C
K
Hi
well,
thank
you
speaker
and
let
me
begin
by
placing
an
amendment
which
is
to
direct
the
deputy
city
manager
in
consultation
with
the
CEO
of
the
TTC,
to
ensure,
as
part
of
the
discussions
at
fair
integration
is
incorporated.
Let
me
begin
first
of
all
by
thanking
our
city
staff
for
their
hard
work,
really
hard
work
under
challenging
circumstances
and,
and
they
went
out
and
did
a
solid
job
and
I
want
to
thank
them
for
that.
K
We
have
announcements
every
year
about
new
transit,
but
it's
very
hard
to
actually
build
transit,
and
so
with
with
the
proposal
in
front
of
us,
I'd
like
to
share
a
few
thoughts
on
what
I
see
is
the
positives.
What
I
see
is
the
negatives
and
what
I
see
is
the
unknowns.
The
good,
the
bad
in
the
unknown
and
I'll
tell
you
where
I've
landed
as
a
result
as
a
starting
point
when
a
tum
comes
to
the
positives,
there
are
positives.
K
I
will
acknowledge
that
the
upload
is
off
the
table,
whether
it
was
a
bad
idea
to
begin
with.
Frankly,
it's
off
the
table
and
that's
a
good
thing
and
I
think
that
a
great
deal
of
credit
for
that
rests
with
city
staff,
who
did
their
hard
work
and
this
chamber
in
Meritor
E
I.
There
are
new
provincial
dollars
committed
to
transit
expansion.
That
is
a
good
thing
in
doing
so,
the
province
is
taking
on
risk
associated
with
those
new
transit
expansion
projects.
K
That
is
a
good
thing,
and
if
this
does
result
in
relief
for
line
one
if
it
does,
especially
for
some
of
the
northern
the
neighbourhoods
north
of
the
Danforth,
many
of
the
underserved
neighborhoods
north
of
the
Danforth.
That
is
a
very
good
thing.
So
those
are
good
positive
benefits
in
front
of
us
now
is:
are
those
benefits
the
result
of
us
sitting
at
the
table,
or
they
result
of
a
new
desire
from
the
provincial
government
to
reset
the
relationship
with
us
as
a
result
of
our
collective
fight?
K
I
think
it's
probably
a
bit
of
both,
and
so
there's
credit
all
around
on
that.
So
those
are
good.
Things
are
there
bad
components
of
this
proposal.
There
are
if
you
live
in
Scarborough
you're
much
needed
Transit
is
going
to
be
further
delayed
in
nine
years.
In
Scarborough
we
have
gone
and
let's
go
through
it
in
nine
years,
just
nine
years
from
a
seven
stop
LRT
to
a
three
stop
subway
to
a
seven
stop
LRT
to
a
three
stop
subway
to
a
one:
stop
subway,
plus
a
14,
stop
LRT
to
a
one.
Stop
subway!
K
Now
back
to
a
three
stop:
subway,
that's
nine
years!
Nothing
has
been
built
nothing.
Meanwhile,
we
have
gone
through
all
of
those
changes
and
every
time
we've
changed.
Transit
we've
said
we're
bringing
transit
to
Scarborough,
only
further
delaying
transit
to
Scarborough,
and
so
this
deal
will
further
delay
and,
given
that
we're
in
early
designs
by
the
time,
we
have
more
details,
probably
result
in
further
delays
and
changes
to
transit
in
Scarborough.
Now
the
unknowns
when
it
comes
to
the
Ontario
line,
there
are
a
great
deal
of
unknowns
at
this
point.
K
They're
unknowns
related
to
the
alignment
to
the
depth
of
lines
and
the
geotechnical
analysis
to
the
way
in
which
we're
going
to
maintain
the
system
to
fair
integration
and
given
the
fact
that
we
actually
don't
have
any
design
work
yet
for
the
Ontario
line,
we
are
at
zero
to
10%
design,
which
means
we
are.
We
have
lines
on
a
map.
K
I
think
there
is
a
risk
that
a
year
from
now
after
design
work
has
been
done,
will
be
back
discussing
changes
to
the
Ontario
line
based
on
cost
escalations,
that's
a
very
real
risk,
so
those
are
the
unknowns.
So
that's
as
I
see
if
the
good,
the
bad
and
the
unknown.
So
where
does
that
leave
us
well?
For
me,
the
conclusion
I've
reached
is
that
we
have
a
tough
decision.
Do
we
support
yet
another
new
deal
for
transit
that
has
clear
benefits,
but
will
likely
result
in
further
delays
and
likely
changes.
K
K
That's
the
lesson
is
that
what
we
should
do
as
three
levels
of
government
is:
take
the
experts
advice
and
where
to
build
transit
and
as
three
levels
of
government
we
fund
it
and
we
fund
the
repairs
needed
and
the
expansion
needed,
but
enough
with
the
new
announcements
and
new
deals
every
year
and
every
election.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
R
I
You
think
thinking
Deputy
Speaker,
Carol
I'll,
start
off
by
saying
I.
Think
a
lot
of
people
have
got
up
here
today
and
started
thinking,
thanking
the
mayor
and
staff
I.
Think
that's
a
good,
a
good
indication
we're
at
and
the
police
are
in.
So
I
will
thank
the
mayor
for
his
leadership
on
this.
I've
had
many
conversations
on
it
with
them
and
Chris
Murray
and
their
team
PTC
we've
got
a
great
team
sitting
up
here.
Answering
these
questions
but
I
think
everyone's
got
up
and
kind
of
thank
the
mayor
for
his
leadership
on
staff.
I
I
People
don't
care,
I
think
counts
for
40
million
people,
don't
care
who's
building
it
now
they
want
to
see
us
working
together
and
getting
this
built
in
45
years
of
inactivity
on
this
file
and
30
billion
dollar
investment
and
and
and
and
our
staff
working
with
their
staff
I
think
there's
been
too
many
hands
in
the
pies
over
the
last
few
years
on
transit
planning,
but
people
don't
care.
You
just
go
see
mr.
I
Lyne
turn
over
there
and
say
how
many
applications
we
have
in
the
in
the
in
the
hopper
right
now
and
everything
meeting
on
going
to
these
new
we're
gonna
approve
the
secondary
plan
for
sure
way.
Today,
we've
done
the
one
for
Mimico.
Over
the
last
few
years.
We
had
another
one
coming
the
Christie
vans
people
don't
care,
they
want
to
get
out
of
the
cars,
they
want
transit
at
their
front
door
and
they
want
it
built
and
I
can
tell
you
the
amount
of
density.
We're
putting
in
this
city
is
unprecedented
and
people
don't
care.
I
They
want
to
see
it
built
so
again.
I
just
want
to
thank
staff
I'd
hate,
to
see
where
we
are
when
some
of
these
members
of
council
said
now,
let's
just
walk
away
and
leave
world
we
be
today,
but
there's
been
a
lot
of
great
work
done
up
here
in
the
front
of
the
room
and
I
look
forward
to
seeing
this
thing
gets
built
in
the
next
10
years.
Hopefully
we'll
be
working
on
the
next
one,
we'll
start
as
a
councillor
Holliday
said.
I
A
Much
I
would
also
like
to
thank
staff
in
the
mayor's
office.
Now
we've
been
debating
transit
for
over
30
years.
Well.
For
me,
it's
been
though
over
30
goes
back
when
the
Eglinton
subway
was
cancelled
and
then,
when
David
Miller
was
mayor,
he
brought
forward
transit
city
and
I,
remember
being
in
this
council
chambers,
where
I
pleaded
with
counsel,
please
transit
City
would
have
Beck's
procreated
45
homes
at
Eglinton
and
Western
Road,
nobody
cared,
they
voted
for
it
and
fortunately
that
didn't
happen
we're
getting
a
tunnel
at
Eglinton
and
Western
Road.
A
A
few
months
ago,
we
heard
from
members
accounts
so
and
protesters
outside
and
inside
against
the
uploading
that
was
announced
by
the
province.
So
what
we
did?
We
moved
to
motion
that
we
are
staff,
because
that
was
a
barrier
that
was
a
priority
for
council
to
sit
down
at
the
table
with
the
province
and
negotiate
a
deal.
So
the
deal
is
here:
maybe
not
everyone
likes
the
deal,
but
we
instructed
staff
to
negotiate
a
deal.
A
That's
best
for
the
City
of
Toronto
and
I
believe
that
this
deal
that
that's
been
negotiated
is
in
the
best
city
of
the
residents
of
Toronto,
and
it
was
mentioned.
It
may
not
be
perfect,
but
we're
going
to
get
transit
built.
The
main
thing
for
me
is:
let's
get
transit
built
and
stop
debating
I'm
sick
of
it.
Let's
start
building.
J
Or
as
ready
as
I'll
ever
be
speaker,
so
I
have
a
motion
which
I'd
like
to
move
and
which
I'm
hoping
people
will
support,
and
it's
self
explanatory
speaker
I,
don't
profess
to
be
the
smartest
guy
in
the
room
on
this
one.
No
I'm,
not
you
know,
I
will
be
the
first
and
I
will
be
the
first,
the
first
to
admit
that,
but
here's
what
I'm
looking
at
the
provincial
government
that
has
said
quite
clearly
it
wants
to.
J
There's
economic
benefits,
there's
jobs,
there's
infrastructures,
there's
transit,
there's
growth,
there's
regeneration,
there's
added
taxes,
there's
all
kinds
of
stuff
attached
to
all
of
that
thirty
billion
dollars.
You
know
what's
mind-numbing,
is
that
they're
gonna?
Let
it
rip
that
far
that
hard
that
fast
but
they're,
even
saying
it.
J
Irrespective
of
maybe
never
spending
it
just
saying,
it
is
absolutely
staggering
that
they
would
let
it
rip
that
far
so
some
people
here
are
saying
and
by
the
way,
they're
about
to
lose
their
minds
and
spend
this
much
money
in
the
City
of
Toronto.
We
shouldn't
accept
it
imagined
that
we
should
sit
back
and
say:
oh,
you
know
what
we're
not
gonna
be
able
to
handle
it.
We're
not
gonna,
be
able
to
pay
for
it.
We're
not
gonna,
be
able
to
manage
it.
We're
not
gonna
be
able
to
grow
it.
J
J
J
This
didn't
start
off
being
that
way
started
off
when
they
first
announced
that
they
wanted
us
to
pay
1/3
the
federal
government
to
pay
1/3,
all
kinds
of
other
machination
connected
to
it.
I've
had
the
benefit
of
having
been
around
on
this
file
for
a
long
long
time,
I
was
at
the
province
when
we
built
the
first
extension
from
Wilson
to
Downsview
station.
Did
it
in
a
year
and
a
half
record
time,
twenty
five
million
dollar
savings
at
the
end
of
it.
J
Why
we
were
in
the
middle
of
a
recession,
nothing
but
people
power
around
to
power
it
up,
but
when
you
have
competing
agendas,
that's
when
you
get
all
tripped
out.
I
have
a
really
good
story.
It's
too
bad
I.
Don't
have
the
time
to
tell
you
I
think
that
this
is
good.
I
think
we
should
just
proceed
with
it.
Thank
you
so
much
I.
E
Just
the
clarification
in
your
motion,
you
seem
to
imply
as
counselor
how
they
did
that
this
is
not
our
money,
that
the
City
of
Toronto
should
welcome
it
because
we're
not
paying
for
it.
Don't
we
pay
for
this
through
our
income
tax,
corporate
tax
sales,
tax
I
mean
we
must
support
the
whole
country,
but
the
taxes
we
pay
in
Toronto
and
what
we
pay
into
the
problem.
So
isn't
it
like
our
money,
whether
it's
the
province,
allocating
it
or
not?
This.
J
E
A
J
We
should
ever
say
and
everything
speaker
if
I
can
answer
that
question.
However,
they
are
the
provincial
government
and
sometimes
they
they
Trump
us,
and
in
this
case
they
want
to
give
us
a
great
deal
of
money
to
create
a
great
many
jobs,
a
great
a
lot
of
economic
regenerate.
Of
course,
it's
our
money
in
the
same
way
that
it
was
our
money
when
the
former
provincial
government
wanted
to
give
us
eight
point
nine
billion,
and
then
they
got
it
back
to
eight
point
four
for
transit
city
and
we
spent
some
of
that
money.
J
Q
Was
a
madam
speaker
and
I
don't
want
to
give
short
shrift
rather
these
things,
but
I
will
just
say
at
the
outset,
I
said
quite
a
bit
quite
a
few
words
of
gratitude
to
our
staff,
including
our
city
manager,
mr.
frog
and
mr.
Leary
and
others
the
other
day
and
those
words
stand
and
are,
it
can
only
be
amplified.
I
also
want
to
just
note
that
I
will
be
voting
against
councillor
Matt
Lowe's
motions,
as
they
I
think.
Q
He
said
this
is
the
worst
plan
ever
and
I
it's
difficult
for
me
to
compare
it
to
any
plans.
He
has
brought
forward
to
this
council
for
transit
cuz.
There
haven't
been
any
but
I'll
vote
against
that
motion.
The
councillor
Carol
said
during
the
debate,
madam
Speaker,
that
there's
a
lot
more
to
do
and
she's
right
there's
a
lot
more
to
do.
This
is
not
the
end.
This
is
a
very
significant
beginning,
but
acknowledging
that
as
I
do
I
think
this
Agreement
painstakingly
negotiated
by
professional
public
servants.
Countering
professional
public
servants
on
the
provinces.
Q
Side
gives
us
what
I
would
call
a
once-in-a-lifetime
chance
to
do
a
number
of
things
first,
to
get
a
good
start
on
getting
transit
fixed
on
the
state
of
good
repair
faster
than
otherwise
would
have
been
the
case,
and
we've
left
out
of
the
discussion
largely
during
this
debate
this
afternoon.
The
fact
that
we
had
put
some
money
aside
in
our
own
ten-year
plan
to
have
us
get
a
solid
start
on
that,
and
now
we're
gonna
get
a
more
solid
start
on
that.
Q
Secondly,
to
get
transit
expanded,
not
at
our
expense,
but
we
get
to
operate
it
and,
and
the
30
billion
dollar
number
is
the
right
number.
There
is
30
billion
dollars
of
transit.
That's
going
to
be
built
not
with
city
taxpayers,
money
per
se.
It's
true
what
accounts
there
Paul
said
it's
all
taxpayers
money,
but
it's
not
property
tax
money
as
it
were.
Thirdly,
to
give
us
the
financial
attitude
to
pursue
of
the
state
of
good
repair,
but
also
other
priority
projects
like
the
Eglinton,
East
LRT
and
the
waterfront
transit.
Q
Fourthly,
to
get
transit-
and
this
was
overlooked
quite
a
bit
today-
get
transit
to
two
underserved
communities,
dramatically:
underserved
communities,
thorn
theft,
Park
in
Flemington
Park,
a
lot
sooner
than
otherwise
would
have
been
the
case
to
get
relief
for
the
Yonge
Street
subway
line
a
lot
sooner
than
otherwise
would
have
been
the
case
and
at
the
same
time,
we
maintain
ownership
of
our
subway
I.
Remember
being
in
this
room
and
having
people
some
of
the
same
people
get
up
and
say
that
this
uploading
thing
was
the
worst
ever
was
the
worst
disaster.
Q
Ever
people
were
practically
letting
their
hair
on
fire
that
and
I
agreed.
It
was
a
very
bad
thing.
It
was
a
negative
development
for
us
and
we
have
now
succeeded
in
maintaining
the
ownership
of
our
existing
subway
system
and
we
have
a
couple
of
commitments
we've
never
had
before,
one
of
which
is
to
go
with
the
province
jointly
to
see
the
federal
government
about
an
ongoing
role
in
state
of
good
repair
and
capital
upkeep,
and
the
second
is
a
commitment
to
extract
from
the
other
cities
to
which
these
expansion
lines
run.
Q
A
contribution
to
operating
costs
and
I
would
point
out
deals
made
long
before
I
was
here
on
the
tys
SE
and
so
on.
We
we
pick
up
the
entire
tab
and
there
were
people
here
who
voted
for
that.
Who've
said
today.
This
is
a
bad
thing,
because
we
didn't
get
as
yet
an
operating
contribution.
What
we're
going
to
get
some
and
and
and
I
just
would
say
to
you
with
respect.
Madam
Speaker
compare
this
to
where
we
were
a
year
ago
today,
the
upload
was
underway.
Legislative
steps
had
been
taken
to
make
it
happen.
Q
Arbitrary
legislated
determination
of
exactly
what
transit
projects
would
happen
was
underway
and
and
worse
than
that,
in
a
way
they
were
saying
that
we
were
gonna
have
to
pay
a
third
of
the
cost
of
that.
So
a
big
chunk
of
that
30
billion
was
gonna.
Come
from
us,
the
there
was
no
prospect
beyond
the
amount
already
in
the
10
year,
capital
plan
to
help
us
finance
the
state
of
good
repair,
which
is
an
important
priority
and
people
I
could
name
in
this
chamber.
Madam
Speaker,
a
couple
in
particular
said
we
should
just
stomp
our
feet.
Q
We
should
bang
our
shoe
on
the
table
and
tell
the
provincial
government
to
stuff
it
well.
Councillor
Layton
was
right
today
when
he
said
there
were
two
alternatives.
There
were
two
alternatives:
one
is
to
go
and
talk
to
them
and
come
away
with
the
best
deal
that
we
could
and
I
think
it's
a
good
deal
and
the
other
was
fighting
and
that's
what
he
said.
The
choice
was,
and
he
was
right.
That
was
the
choice.
Well
I'm
for
building
not
for
fighting
and
I'm,
not
I'm,
not
I
mean
these
negotiations
were
not
easy.
Q
There
were
times
when
we
had
to
say
that
we
may
just
not
be
able
to
get
a
deal
and
we
might
have
to
walk
away
from
the
table
and
I
would
point
out
to
you.
The
discussions
continued,
even
at
the
worst
hour
of
the
budget,
confrontation
that
we
had
with
the
province,
but
they
continued
nonetheless,
and
they
ended
up
in
a
place
where
we
get
the
benefits
that
I
talked
about
today
and
I.
Q
Think
the
alternative
would
have
been
exactly
what
councillor
Layton
said:
an
endless
continuation
of
the
transit
fights
during
which
one
thing
is
certain
that
the
loser
would
have
been
the
people
of
the
City
of
Toronto,
the
transit
riders
present
and
future,
and
that
no
transit
of
any
substance
would
have
been
built
during
that
period
of
time,
because
we'd
have
all
been
so
busy
fighting
and
I.
Don't
think
the
people
want
that
I
think
they
want
us
and
they
expect
us
to
work
together
to
get
transit,
built
and
I.
Q
Of
course
we'll
continue
with
that,
but
in
the
meantime
I
don't
think
we
can
stand
still
and
just
say
we're
gonna
keep
fighting.
We've
got
to
make
a
deal,
we're
going
to
make
a
deal.
If
you
approve
this,
we're
going
to
move
forward,
we're
gonna,
get
the
transit
built
and
I
think
the
City
of
Toronto
will
be
way
better
off
as
a
result
of
what
we've
done,
especially
when
you
go
back
and
compare
it
to
where
we
were
one
year
ago
today,
Thank
You
speaker
thank.
D
D
A
D
A
D
A
D
A
F
J
A
C
P
Apologies
that
just
happened
really
quickly.
I
have
a
motion
here
on
behalf
of
councillor
Robinson
that
I'd
like
to
table
here,
put
it
on
the
screen:
City
Council
requests,
GM
parks,
forestry
and
Recreation
to
consider
consider
future
facility
improvements
to
the
generaiiy
Joe
Murray
community
senator
and
for
the
and
the
potential
for
additional
multi-purpose
space
to
serve
the
throne
club
Park
neighborhood,
based
on
the
current
needs
assessment,
work
being
undertaken
that
considers
population
growth,
cultural
needs
and
opportunities
both
within
and
existing
facility
and
surrounding
community,
and
to
report
out
through
future
years.
Capital
plans.
D
A
A
A
J
A
F
So
this
item
was
before
a
general
government.
Licensing
I
was
also
parts
of
our
heard
at
the
audit
committees,
so
I'm
just
moving
this
motion
for
a
report
back
to
the
general
government
licensing
and
it
falls
in
line
with
what
was
recommended
at
the
Audit
Committee
as
well,
and
also
for
the
information
to
be
released,
released
in
an
open
data
format.
A
O
O
Thank
you
very
much,
I
believe
my
colleague
a
councillor
Ainsley
has
the
motion
that
I
would
have
moved,
but
I'm
glad
that
that
he's
taking
carriage
of
it
and
had
it
in
advance
I.
It's
just
really
important
to
acknowledge
that,
based
on
the
climate
emergency
declaration
that
the
mayor
and
I
put
forward
at
our
last
council
meeting,
we
have
to
update
some
of
these
strategies
and
plans.
O
This
one
in
particular
had
our
old
target
of
80%
reduction
for
in
2090,
20,
90,
1990
levels
by
2050
and
I
believe
the
motion
coming
forward
is
going
to
advance
that
to
a
net
zero
by
2050
being
the
new
goal,
there's
also
a
recommendation
here
that
will
report
back.
I
have
no
doubt
that
when
our
plan
transform,
teo
is
improved
as
a
result
of
the
work
will
do
leading
into
next
year
that
we
will
have
to
advance
some
of
these
targets
faster.
O
Having
returned
from
from
c40
with
the
mayor,
Councillor
McKelvey
councillor
thompson,
it's
clear
that
other
cities
around
the
world
are
also
taking
their
fleet
their
purchasing
power.
More
seriously,
we
don't
have
regulatory
authority
over
the
emissions
from
vehicles.
We
don't,
unfortunately,
but
what
we
do
have
that
can
impact
transportation
patterns
not
only
in
approving
buildings
and
built
form
is
use
our
purchasing
power
as
a
city,
in
conjunction
with
other
cities
around
the
world,
to
try
to
drive
the
market
towards
zero
emission,
low
carbon
and
zero
emission
vehicles.
We
need
to
do
that.
O
F
You,
madam
Speaker
I,
do
have
a
motion
that
I
would
like
to
move
and
as
councilor
late
and
said.
So
this
item
was
hurted
general
government
licensing
prior
to
the
mayor
and
council
relating
going
to
the
c40
summit.
So
this
is
basically
putting
the
work
that
fleet
services
did
and
I
want
to
thank
the
staff
for
all
their
hard
work
on.
This
basically
brings
it
in
line
with
what
the
city
is
trying
to
do
undertaking
with
the
climate
declaration
work.
Thank
you.
A
A
K
K
Think
it's
exceptionally
helpful
and
worth
a
read,
because
this
past
summer
we
had
flooding
for
the
second
time
in
three
years
on
the
islands
hundred
year
flooding
for
the
second
time,
and
we
had
flooding
that
due
to
outstanding
work
by
city
staff,
the
TRC,
a
and
partners
even
Toronto
Fire,
we
were
able
to
mitigate
the
impacts
and
keep
the
islands
not
only
open
but
safe
this
year.
But-
and
we
know
that
an
annual
sandbagging
effort
is
not
the
solution
to
rising
water
levels
and
what
is
happening
to
Toronto.
K
Islands
is
also
happening
to
neighborhoods
from
east
west
and
north
to
south
in
our
city
and
so
whether
we're
dealing
with
basement
flooding
in
York,
South,
Weston
or
we're
dealing
with
rising
water
levels
around
the
islands
or
whether
we're
dealing
with
flooding
along
the
waterfront
in
Scarborough.
We
know
that
this
is
part
of
climate
change,
adaptation
and
so
in
front
of
us
today.
K
It's
not
just
about
the
islands,
it's
about
our
neighborhoods,
because
our
geography
hasn't
changed
what
our
climate
has
and
I
want
to
thank
staff
for
their
work,
we're
going
to
continue
to
stay
on
it
collectively
this
upcoming
season,
and
with
that
all
conclude,
my
remarks
and
I
understand
that
some
of
my
colleagues
have
amendments
as
well.
Thank
you.
K
F
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker
I.
Just
have
a
small
amendment
like
to
make
is
that
City
Council
requests
the
general
manager
parks,
forests
and
recreation
to
identify
and
provide
a
list
of
all
waterfront
properties
that
have
been
subject
to
flooding
and
and
those
properties
which
have
lease
agreements
with
the
city
and
be
to
identify
available
options
to
address
impacts
from
flooding
and
to
provide
details
for
complaint
process
framework
which
may
include
requests
for
mitigation
or
adverse
impacts
such
as
a
rebate
programs
or
any
other
types
of
relief.
Just
very
quickly.
F
N
City
Council
request
of
the
general
manager
Toronto
water
report
for
the
infrastructure,
Environment
Committee
by
the
first
quarter,
2020
with
a
formula
to
modify
the
current
cost
for
benefiting,
have
a
property
special
to
32,000
to
allow
for
exemptions
and
sensible
flexibility.
When
proceeding
with
detailed
design
and
construction
estimates
related
to
basement
flooding,
protection
programs
well,
I
mean
I.
Think
this
motion
speaks
speaks
for
itself.
We
have
hundreds
of
homes,
perhaps
thousands
of
homes
excluded
from
infrastructure
upgrades
across
our
city.
N
Because
of
this
cap,
you
need
some
flexibility,
we'd,
like
staff,
to
bring
a
report
back
to
see
how
we
might
we
might
deal
with
it.
What
does
this
have
to
do
with
flooding
on
the
island?
Well,
flooding
on
the
island
was
costing
$61,000
per
household.
If
you
work
out
the
calculations
now
it
is
true,
some
of
it
was
parks.
N
Funding
and
part
of
it
was
road
infrastructure,
but
when
you
add
it
all
up,
when
you
take
the
number
of
residents
on
the
island
and
the
amount
of
money
we're
spending,
we
were
in
around
sixty
thousand
dollars
per
household.
So
my
residents
and
council
nunzio's
residents
and
other
residents
are
saying:
wait
a
minute.
I'm
told
I
can't
get
any
of
these
upgrades
to
protect
my
home
because
it's
going
to
cost
more
than
32,000.
How
on
earth
is
this?
Is
this
going
on
at
sixty
one
thousand?
N
That
being
said,
I
just
wanted
to
thank
staff
for
this
report.
Clearly,
the
islands
are
a
valued
treasure
for
the
City
of
Toronto.
We
have
made
the
commitment,
through
this
report
and
through
council
vote,
which
I
guess
will
come
in
the
next
minute
to
to
save
the
islands
and
the
same
time
the
TRC,
a
which
I
am
now
proud.
N
So
I
was
watching
on
the
news
every
night
about
the
the
sandbag
brigades
that
was
costing
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
a
week,
but
to
save
the
islands
I
think
it
was
worth
it,
but
clearly
there's
some
more
work
to
do
to
make
sure
there's
a
comprehensive
plan
in
place
to
make
sure
the
funds
are
there
to
do
it,
but
most
important
to
do
it
correctly
and
I
think
with
our
team,
TRCA
and
strong
local
representative
I
think
we
can
get
it
done.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
A
A
Page
7
IE,
8.8
counselor
lie
you
held
the
item
down,
speak,
you
have
questions
to
staff.
No.
Does
anybody
have
any
questions?
I?
Have
a
motion
update
on
counsel,
requested,
Rose
safety
initiatives?
I
have
a
motion,
madam
Speaker
I,
just
wanna
know.
If
anybody
has
any
questions,
nobody
has
questions,
okay
to
speak,
counsel,
I.
Thank.
G
You
you
can
stop.
Please
motion
on
the
screen
just
make
a
very,
very
tiny
amendment
here
on
July
council
meeting
I
actually
defer
this
speed
reduction
until
further
consultation
that
my
community
I
didn't
hear
out.
A
town-hall
meeting
and
I
actually
asked
for
a
raise
of
hand
for
sure
han.
How
many
agree
and
how
many
don't
agree
and
majority
of
people
do
not
agree
for
the
speed
limit
reduction
and
they'd
say
that
maybe
there
are
some
other
reason
why
they
weren't
the
accident
wasn't
caused
by
the
speed.
G
G
You
know
Fincher
McGowen
and
the
alternate
our
area,
but
I
actually
have
researched
myself
on
mockin
road
driving
during
the
day
or
in
the
evening
most
of
the
area
and
industrial,
and
they
don't
have
too
many
pedestrians
or
it's
not
commercial
at
all
and
and
there's
some,
you
know
highways,
and
it's
not
really
that
much
so
I
just
thought:
I
put
a
motion
here
to
exclude
the
mahkum
Road
from
you,
nor
to
steal
them
new
East
for
the
speed
reduction
from
60
kilometers
to
50
kilometers.
How
can
can
you
support
a.
F
F
F
G
O
G
R
R
There
not
a
concern,
I
mean
there's
a
stretch
on
Markham
Road
at
one
point
where
there's
a
plaza,
there's
a
McDonald's
kids
run
all
the
way
over.
There,
kids
sometimes
go
through
the
industrial
area
from
from
Malvern
all
the
way
to
get
over
there,
because
there's
a
bunch
of
things,
there's
a
chocolate
shop
and
things
like
that
I've
I've
had
to
be
careful
to
avoid
jaywalkers
out
there.
Are
you
not
concerned
that
you'll
have
a
series
of
roads
in
which
one
is
the
outlier?
That's
still
60
kilometers
and
the
50.
It's.
R
G
R
G
P
P
So
the
staff
recommendation
still
stands,
yes,
lower
the
speed
limit,
okay
and
when
the
staff
gave
the
presentation
on
vision
zero
with
the
community.
Did
they
outline
some
of
the
reasons
why,
on
our
artillery
arterial
roads
like
this
in
suburban
areas,
it's
particularly
important
to
reduce
speed
limits
in
light
of
all
the
fatalities
that
we
thought
this
year
well,.
G
Staff
didn't
made
the
presentation,
and
these
are
40%
of
the
fatalities
left
turn
and
some
of
them
are
being
you
know
the
intersection
not
being
not
well
lighted
and
also
the
the
the
recent
one
in
bitten
in
Shepherd,
because
you
know
other
other
trees
were
not
trimmed
properly.
So
there's
different
reason
for
that,
and
it's
not
just
about
speeding
but.
P
A
H
This
keeps
happening
over
and
over
and
over
again
and
every
time
these
things
happen,
we
say:
we've
got
to
do
something
about
it.
We
know
what
we
need
to
do
about
it:
vision,
zero
throughout
the
world,
where
cities
are
being
determined
and
focused
to
see
them
through
to
fruition
and
a
pace
that
matters
do
all
three
pillars
of
what
vision.
H
Zero
really
means,
one
is
regulatory
reform,
and
that's
what
we're
addressing
right
now
in
the
debate
with
councilor
live
safer
speeds
ensuring
that
roads
are
at
safer
speeds
based
on
reports
that
we've
received
from
our
own
medical
officer
of
Health,
who
has
said
that
lower
speeds
mean
that
you
will
be
more
likely
to
survive
if
you
are
hit
by
a
car.
How
can
we
responsibly
ignore
that
advice?
H
Another
pillar
of
vision,
zero
understood
around
the
world
is
road
redesign,
better
visual
cues,
ensuring
that
we
do
everything
we
can
in
a
thoughtful
way
to
ensure
that
each
of
our
roads
are
designed
in
a
way
that
promotes
safety.
Many
of
our
owns
were
not
designed
that
way
initially
and
now.
The
last
part,
obviously
is
enforcement,
both
human
resources
and
technology,
which
we
need
to
improve
to
be
able
to
enforce
the
rules
that
were
even
discussing
today.
H
The
facts
remain
that
we
know
that,
whether
it
be
our
kids,
whether
it
be
our
parents,
whether
it
be
our
friends,
your
family,
anyone
we
love
and
anyone.
You
love,
if
they're
hit
by
a
car
at
a
higher
speed,
they
are
more
likely
to
die.
So
that's
not
the
kind
of
thing
that
you
just
kind
of
show
how
many
hands
are
at
a
meeting
you
you
do
the
right
thing
when
I
worked
with
councilor
perks
and
others
at
Toronto,
a
nice
short
Community
Council
to
lowered
the
speed
limits
in
Toronto
New
York
I
was
worried.
H
What
happened
was
that
actually
we
found
it
was
actually
very
popular
that
people
received
it
really
well,
they
knew
why
we
were
doing
it
they're
still
demanding
for
better
enforcement.
That's
something
that
we
need
to
continue
in
to
advocate
for,
but
we
did
that
for
the
right
reasons
and
I
guess
I
just
ask
us
all
like
don't
be,
don't
be
afraid
of
the
the
popular
the
political
pushback.
Actually,
I.
H
The
last
thing
I
just
want
to
add,
with
just
the
40
seconds
remaining
we've
been
incrementally
rolling
out
of
vision,
zero
strategy.
Where
we've
got
you
know:
community
safety
zones,
the
senior
safety
zone
this
and
that
I,
don't
I,
don't
believe
we
should
be
having
these
community
safety
zones
anymore.
I,
don't
believe
that
we
should
be
having
senior
safety
zones
anymore.
The
entire
city
should
be
a
safety
zone
and
I
really
am
convinced
that
if
we
invest
the
appropriate
amount,
I
know
it's
a
lot,
but
I
think
safety
is
worth.
H
F
You,
madam
chair,
madam
chair,
wasn't
too
long
ago
that
we
were
talking
about
vision,
zero
and
I
pushed
for
lowering
the
speed
limits
on
Sheppard
Finch
and
the
rest
of
my
streets
down
to
50.
Lo
and
behold,
little
little
after
that,
there
was
a
young
lady
by
the
name
of
Charmaine
that
crossed
on
on
the
street
and
Shepherd.
It's
a
shepherd
at
that
point.
In
times
the
five
lane
highway
2
lanes
coming
two
lanes
going
and
the
center
lane
for
change
for
changing.
F
She
was
going
across
the
street
in
order
to
grab
a
to
to
grab
the
bus
at
the
stop
and
she
was
killed
the
streets
in
Scarborough.
They
were
built
back
in
the
60s
and
the
70s
those
streets
are
white
driver,
sent
a
tendency
to
speed
and
not
enforcing
lower
speeds.
When
drivers
know
that
it's
a
60,
they
will
speed
up
to
75
80.
We
all
do
it.
F
There's
nobody
in
this
room
that
says
that
if
I
have
an
open
road
on
speed
and
if
an
older
person
or
a
pedestrian
crosses
across
that
the
chances
of
them
making
it
or
the
chances
of
the
driver
being
able
to
see
them
is
very
unlikely.
So
I
would
ask
my
colleague
to
reconsider
her
motion.
Leaving
Markham
at
60.
Markham
is
a
very
wide
street.
F
It's
got
three
lanes
going
three
lanes
coming,
there's
a
lot
of
trucks
that
are
going
to
Markham,
there's
a
lot
of
traffic
that
goes
down
to
Markham
everybody
that
comes
up
from
just
north
of
steals.
That
Markham
goes
down
Markham
Road
in
order
to
go
catch
the
the
401,
and
if
we
were
to
lower
that
speed
at
50,
people
just
might
go
when
they
travel
do
60
or
65.
F
If
any
pedestrian
was
to
get
hit,
they
the
chances
of
them
surviving,
will
be
much
higher
than
leaving
the
speed
at
60
and
people
doing
75
and
80.
So
I
would
ask
my
colleague
to
reconsider
and
ask
you
not
to
support
60.
We
need
to
lower
the
speeds
in
Scarborough,
I've
done
it
in
my
ward.
I
know.
Others
have
worked
to
do
it
and
leave
Markham
at
60
is
certainly
something
that
will
only
encourage
people
to
speed
down
the
street.
F
Yeah
there's
been
a
couple
of
people
that
might
come
to
your
town
hall
meetings
and
they
say:
oh,
we
want
to
be
faster
and
faster
to
those
people.
I
say
get
up
a
little
bit
earlier,
get
get
off
work
a
little
bit
earlier
and
take
the
time
to
go
home.
Let's
make
sure
at
the
end
of
the
night
that
we
all
arrive
home
safe.
F
What
would
we
any
one
of
us
that
is
the
ones
that
support
the
60
mark,
say
to
a
pedestrian,
be
it
tomorrow
be
at
five
days
be
at
a
month
from
now,
if
a
pedestrian
was
hit
and
be
killed,
what
we
say
to
that
family?
What
are
we
going
to
say
to
the
families
that
are
saying
lower
the
speed?
So
in
view
of
that
I
ask
of
you
please
to
support
the
fifty
word.
Thank
you.
Thank.
D
O
O
But
the
other
thing
and
the
other
piece
to
this
was
questioning
when
I
asked
how
long
it
takes
to
get
a
set
of
lights,
a
pedestrian,
a
pedestrian
or
pedestrian
cross
over,
but
to
get
a
set
of
traffic
lights
put
in
the
the
actual
install
time
after
we
say
yes,
so
after
you
vote
in
favor
of
lights
to
make
an
intersection
safer,
the
the
wait
time
is
a
year
and
a
half
at
best
and
there's.
There
are
some
reasons
around
that
they
bundle
the
projects
together.
O
Then
they
put
them
out
to
tender,
probably
to
save
money,
but
but
here's
so
they're
they're
getting
does
they're
paying
a
company
to
design
the
lights,
and
then
we
have
our
experts
go
over
and
make
sure
they're
designed
correctly
there's
something
fundamentally
wrong
there.
The
words
works,
getting
done
twice,
you
see
we're
paying
for
one
company
to
do
it
and
we're
checking
to
see
and
then
we're
bundling
it
together
and
then
we're
putting
it
out
there
there.
We
know
we're
gonna
be
constantly
doing
these.
This
work.
O
Why
wouldn't
we
try
to
to
just
bring
this
work
in-house
and
just
start
actually
having
our
our
teams
put
the
work
in
so
that
we
could
try
to
execute
on
this
on
this
work
faster,
so
I
don't
have
a
motion
I
just
wanted
to
flag
this
for
people,
because
that's
after
you
guys
have
all
many
of
you
have
done
this
before
you
do
a
traffic
study.
You
get
a
report,
then
you
come
here.
How
long
does
that
take
councillor?
O
Grimes
come
on
that's
about
a
year
there's
about
a
year,
then
you
add
the
one
and
the
add
the
year
and
a
half
you're
at
two
and
a
half
I've
got
one
instance
where
I
have
a
developer
paying
for
it.
The
developer
is
doing
some
work
for
the
city
on
site
and
it's
still
a
year
and
a
half
to
get
a
light
at
price
and
young
for
for
the
development,
but
my
mark
Grimes
can
get
it
done
for
me
in
a
weekend.
The
the
the
notion
that
it
takes
that
long
is
unfortunately
unacceptable.
O
Q
Madam
Speaker,
thank
you.
I
may
be
able
to
do
accounts
relating
him.
That
I
want
to
associate
myself
with
all
of
the
comments
of
councillors,
Matt
Lowe,
Cara,
Janice
and
Layton
and
I
just
want
to
say,
look
I,
think
you
know
when
we
talk
off
and
around
here
about
evidence-based
decision
making
since
2014
on
the
stretch
of
Brimley
Road,
that
is
meant
to
be
covered
by
the
speed
limit
reduction.
There
been
two
fatalities
and
seven
serious
injuries
on
Markham
Road,
the
one
that
is
proposed
to
be
deleted.
Q
There
have
been
two
fatalities
and
nine
serious
injuries
on
McCowan.
There
have
been
three
fatalities
and
eight
serious
injuries,
and
that
is
precisely
the
problem
when
we
did
the
deep
dive
on
the
analysis
of
the
deaths
and
injury,
serious
injuries
that
were
taking
place
in
Markham.
It
was
these
kinds
of
roads,
as
a
number
of
the
preceding
speakers
have
said
that
madam
Speaker,
that
presented
the
problem-
and
there
is
not
one
easy
answer
to
it.
Q
That
way,
in
many
cases
they
have
very
little
access
and
egress,
because
there
aren't
plazas
and
driveways
along
there.
There's
kind
of
neighborhoods
that
back
on
to
those
streets
and
people
drive
too
fast,
and
it
comes
back
to
something
I
said
to
the
media
this
morning,
which
is
that
we
simply
have
to
change
human
behavior,
but
it'll
start
at
least
in
one
in
some
instances,
with
a
speed
limit
reduction
and
then,
hopefully,
the
use
of
the
automated
enforcement
going
forward.
H
I,
just
I
wanted
to
acknowledge
that
we
are
debating
an
item
that
councillor
Robinson
would
have
a
lot
to
say
about
if
she
was
here
and
I
just
wanted
to
say
both
as
a
colleague
a
friend
and
as
a
fellow
Midtown
councillor
who
serves
the
Yonge
and
Eglinton
community
with
Jay.
That
I
just
want
to
acknowledge
whether
or
not
I've
agreed
or
disagreed
with
her
on
certain
aspects
of
vision,
zero.
R
E
Out
of
this
motion
by
council
there's,
obviously
some
significant
issues
that
her
motion
has
raised
and
I
I
think
it's
a
combination
of
what
counts
relating
sand
and
the
mayor
said.
You
know
we
can
put
up
and
reduce
all
the
speed
limits
we
want.
But
if
there
isn't
any
enforcement
out
there,
there
is
no
enforcement,
because
the
police
are
so
busy
doing
everything
else.
We
were
asking
them
to
deal
with
gun
crime,
drug
crime,
so
we
need
to
move
out
of
the
horse-and-buggy
area
era
and
start
to
deploy
technology.
E
You
know,
we've
got
the
automated
speed
enforcement
count.
We've
been
using
that
since
1998,
when
we
had
the
red-light
cameras-
and
we
can't
seem
to
get
around
to
using
this
technology,
basically
to
help
an
enforcement.
It's
beyond
me
why
this
isn't
deployed
like
yesterday
and
sure
is
the
province
who,
by
the
way,
has
not
even
passed
the
regs.
Yet
the
province
has
not
even
passed
and
regulations
nevermind
asking
them,
which
we've
asked
repeatedly
for
the
regs.
E
E
It's
very
theoretical,
like
we
got
to
push
for
this,
and
we
also
got
a
push
for
a
funding.
That's
councillor,
Layton
says:
I've
got
I'm
asking
for
a
study
now
at
having
he
wrote
in
401
talked
about
traffic
safety,
as
people
go
about
a
hundred
miles
an
hour
trying
to
get
up
Avenue
Road
ago
401
or
coming
a
hundred
miles
an
hour
coming
off
the
401
to
go
down
the
Avenue
Road.
You
can't
even
dare
approach
an
intersection
without
some
guy
in
a
Porsche
going
100
miles
an
hour
every
day
every
single
day.
E
We
need
that
technology
yesterday
and
we
need
to
expedite
the
reports.
You
know,
as
the
counselor
Layton
said
it
takes
months
and
years
to
get
signal
lights.
It
takes
all
kinds
of
reports
to
get
a
four-way,
stop
four-way
stop
signs.
I
have
to
go
through
hoops
like
you,
wouldn't
believe
to
basically
get
in
fact.
People
were
so
impressed.
I
got
a
four-way,
stop
there
up
in
Yong
Boulevard.
They
had
a
party
on
the
stand,
a
street
party
because
they
got
a
four-way
stop.
They
couldn't
believe
that
it
was
done
in
a
couple
of
months.
E
So
that's
what
we
should
do
as
a
result
of
council
eyes
motion.
She
brings
to
attention
the
need
for
us
to
start
yelling
and
screaming
about
the
province
to
get
off
their
rear
end
and
give
us
the
ability
to
put
in
the
automated
speed
enforcement
cameras
to
save
the
lives
of
people
in
the
City
of
Toronto.
We
need
to
do
more
to
press
them
because
again,
they
haven't
even
had
the
courtesy
of
passing
the
regs.
That's
what
they
think
of
us.
A
You
very
much
counsel
I
appreciate
what
you're
trying
to
do
for
your
constituents,
but
I
can't
support
it.
I
I'm,
getting
hundreds
of
requests
in
my
ward
for
residents
wanting
to
reduce
the
speed
limit
to
30
and
councilor
holiday.
You
know
every
council
meeting
I
have
tons
of
recommendations
going
through
because
people
are
very
concerned
about
traffic
and
speed,
and
it's
happening
near
the
schools
and
and
everywhere,
and
yesterday
the
83
year
old
senior
that
was
hit
was
in
my
ward
on
st.
Clair
Avenue,
and
there
was
actually
two
that
were
hit,
that
on
st.
A
Clair
Avenue
but
I'm
I'm
in
full
support
of
reducing
the
speed
limit
and
traffic
calming
on
whatever
street
and
the
president's
in
the
in
the
community
support
it.
I
do
support
it,
I'm
one
of
the
biggest
supporters
on
traffic
calming
I
think
just
recently,
when
I
reduced
the
lanes
on
scarlet
roll
from
four
to
two,
where
people
were
driving
80
90
miles
an
hour
account
support.
You
know
that,
because
you
drive
there
all
the
time
right,
but
not
80
or
90,
no
okay.
A
So
what
we
did
is
we
reduce
the
lane
to
two
lanes
and
we
put
bicycle
lanes
and
people
were
complaining,
but
you
know
now:
it's
been
a
few
weeks
since
everything's
been
completed
and
people
are
happy.
We
do
see
cyclists
and
you
know
people
just
have
to
just
do
it
and
so
I
I
think
we
have
to
do
whatever
it
takes
to
reduce
speed
of
traffic
and
make
it
safe
for
pedestrians,
cyclists
and
motorists
on
the
street.
So
council
I'm
sorry
can't
support
your
motion.
F
N
Your
clock,
Deputy
Speaker
and
Thank
You
councillor
peru's
for
volunteering
to
step
in
for
me
to
speak
and
Thank
You
councillor
grimes
for
all
the
advice,
you've
offered
to
me
all
day,
long,
there's
not
a
lot
to
add
to
the
conversation.
A
lot
of
what
has
to
be
said
has
been
said.
The
number
one
issue
that
is
coming
to
many
of
our
offices
is
traffic
control,
traffic,
calming
traffic
safety,
protecting
protecting
pedestrians,
protecting
property
damage,
preventing
injuries
preventing
deaths.
N
The
gap
time
between
adopted
city
policy
for
a
specific
traffic
calming
strategy
and
that
and
the
time
of
implementation
I
had
a
crosswalk
in
the
Bathurst
manner
at
the
corner
of
Searle
and
Wilmington
approved
before
the
last
election,
and
it
is
yet
to
go
in
and
whether
this
is
a
staffing
issue
or
whether
it's
a
logistic
issue,
whether
it's
done
in-house
or
whether
it's
done
to
a
third
party.
It's
taking
far
too
long
to
implement
many
of
these
strategies
that
were
adopting
here
regarding
the
local
councillor
and
and
lowering
speed
limits.
N
It
is
true
that
I
often
rely
on
the
council
and
the
advice
of
a
local
councillor
for
for
a
local
issue,
because
they
know
their
communities
very
well.
But
at
the
same
time,
I've
spoken
to
other
members
of
council
here
and
it's
very
important
that
we
sent
a
unified
signal
that
we
are
determined
to
get
everybody
to
take
a
deep
breath.
Put
down.
Their
cell
phones
take
away
some
of
the
distractions
and
make
sure
that
they
slow
down.
N
Because
when
people
are
driving
slower,
they
could
react
to
unexpected
persons
trying
to
cross
across
major
arterial
roads.
Whether
it's
mid
block
or
other
react
to
seniors
and
walkers
who
are
trying
to
cross
major
secondary
roads
and,
at
the
same
time,
being
able
to
react
to
any
kind
of
incident
or
oncoming
vehicle
or
other
pedestrian
that
comes.
N
If
the
faster
you
go,
the
more
likely
you
are
to
get
into
an
accident
to
hurt
someone
or
to
kill
someone,
so
I
think
we
have
to
speak
as
United
bow
voice,
I
deeply
respect
the
wishes
of
the
local
council.
At
the
same
time,
we
have
to
make
a
firm,
united
statement
that
speed
limits
in
the
city
must
come
down
that
drivers
must
take
a
deep
breath.
We
must
emphasize
safety,
we
must
be
alert
behind
the
wheel
and
we
must
make
sure
that
everybody
gets
home
safely
at
the
end
of
each
day.
R
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker,
so
managed
speaker.
My
family
has
a
nickname
for
me.
Leadfoot
I
have
a
lead,
foot
I,
Drive
too
fast
and
I
Drive
a
lot
I
Drive,
mostly
in
the
suburbs
on
wider
roads,
with
lots
and
lots
of
lanes
and
I
started
driving
a
little
later
on.
I
didn't
I,
didn't
actually
have
my
driver's
license
until
I
was
33
when
I
had
two
children,
I
thought.
Okay,
this
is
not
workable
and
I
fell
in
love
with
it.
R
R
We
just
keep
driving
and
keep
going,
and
the
lucky
part
about
that
drop-off
is
then
I
can
rationalize,
taking
the
407
back
where
I
really
get
to
speed,
but
madam
Speaker
I
realized
I
had
to
take
speed
to
heart
when
the
numbers
started
going
up
and
I
don't
like
to
turn
on
the
morning
news
anymore,
cuz
we're
gonna
find
out
who
got
hit
yesterday
and
who
got
hit
this
morning
before
the
Sun.
Even
came
up.
R
That's
what
happened
to
me
yesterday,
at
Don,
Mills
and
Eglinton
I
turned
on
Metro
morning
to
find
out
that
Eglinton
was
shut
down
because
of
what
was
going
on
if
Don,
Mills
and
Eglinton
this
morning,
one
in
Mississauga
and
do
in
Toronto
I,
don't
like
to
even
listen
to
the
news
anymore.
So
what
I've
done
is
realized.
Oh
dang
I'm.
The
problem
I've
had
to
start
to
pay
attention.
I
realized,
I
have
to
live
by
example.
I
have
to
be
the
person
who
gets
my
own
residents
to
stop
killing
people.
R
R
Madam
Speaker
I
hope
you
won't
mind.
My
saying
you
just
made
comments
that
twelve
years
ago,
you
might
never
have
made
actually
putting
a
road
on
a
road
diet
made
your
neighborhood
safer,
and
it
would
have
been
hard
to
weather
that
controversy
a
decade
ago,
but
your
residents
sound
like
they're
there.
Now
they
want
this
safety,
not
all
of
them.
R
You
have
to
weather
a
little
bit
of
people
objecting,
but
by
and
large
people
just
want
to
stop
having
to
turn
on
the
radio
in
the
morning
and
hear
who's
dead
today
because
of
a
pedestrian
fatality.
They
really
don't
want
to
hear
it
anymore,
and
so,
if
we
really
ask
them,
is
it
okay
with
you
that
the
number
is
going
up
every
year
when
it
should
be
going
down?
Most
people
will
say:
well,
no,
that's
not
good,
and
this
is
the
way
to
get
there.
R
There's
no
other
way
around
it,
and,
and
so
we've
got
to
get
people
to
put
away
their
lead
feet
and
start
to
pay
attention
to
how
they
drive
anywhere
anywhere
in
this
city,
because
the
map
shows
us,
the
fatalities
are
happening
everywhere
and
we
need
to
change
behavior
everywhere.
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker
Thank
You.
J
Thank
You
speaker
a
speaker,
I,
don't
know
what
the
answer
is
to
making
our
well
I
kind
of
do,
but
I'm
not
sure
that
this
is
the
way
you
get
to
safer
roads
and
you
get
to
you
know
you
get
to
a
place
where
fewer
people
get
hit
by
cars.
You
get
hit
at
20
kilometres
an
hour
or
30
or
50
or
60
you're
in
big
trouble.
Like
really
big
trouble,
doesn't
matter
what
speed
you
get
data
right,
but
I'll
tell
you
something
else.
That's
very,
very
interesting!
J
So
I
Drive
down
from
the
outer
limits
of
North
York
I
Drive
down
to
City
Hall
average
speed.
You
know
you
got
that
average
speed
thing
now
on
the
cars
most
people.
Have
it
right.
Average
speed
is
around
19
20
21
kilometers
an
hour.
That's
how
fast
I
get
down
here
by
car
right
ear
respective
of
the
speed
limit,
irrespective
of
everything
else.
It's
just
the
way
our
city
is
is
designed
right.
You
know,
with
traffic
lights,
lots
of
traffic
lots
of
people
moving
around,
so
not
very
fast.
J
J
J
This
summer,
I
happened
to
be
in
Rome
on
my
own
dime
line,
which
should
say
that
first
right
took
the
kids
there
and
it
counts
for
Carol,
pulled
up
a
statistics
for
me
a
little
while
ago
and
talked
about
of
Rome
as
the
same
population
as
as
Toronto
yeah
the
tourists
right.
But
then,
when
you
add
in
the
tourists
I
don't
know
it
goes
up
exponentially
right,
I,
don't
know
they
got
like
120
million
visitors
or
something
right.
J
J
E
J
J
C
Madam
Speaker
I
listening
the
debate
will
be
really
quick.
I
just
think
this
is
a
representation
of
how
we
get
it
wrong.
This
council,
you
know:
we've
sparred
at
community
council
before
I'm
over
the
firm
belief
that
politics
and
road
engineering
don't
mix
well
at
the
end
of
the
day.
These
are
these
are
systems.
These
are
cars.
These
are
people.
These
are.
These
are
engineering
principles
that
govern
the
way
that
these
roads
operate.
C
I
know
I,
look
to
the
advice
of
the
staff
on
this,
because
their
advice
is
neutral,
it's
not
swayed
by
the
users
or
the
the
locals,
the
local
residents,
who
all
have
different
viewpoints.
You
know
case
in
point
Markham.
If
you're
gonna
consult
Markham
erode.
If
you're
gonna
consult
the
community,
who
do
you
consult?
Do
you
consult
the
twenty
thousand
cars
that
probably
use
the
road
because
they're
a
stakeholder?
Do
you
consult
the
people
that
live
near
there?
Do
you
consult
the
people
that
might
use
the
the
sidewalk
Lee?
How
do
you?
C
How
do
you
weigh
all
that
out?
What
I've
learned
in
in
my
time
here
is
I
can
rely
on
neutral
advice
from
the
staff
in
the
city,
so
I'm
not
going
to
support
the
amendment
to
change
it
much
in
the
same
way,
I.
Don't
support
amendments
to
install
a
stop
sign
or
a
traffic
light
or
a
speed
bump
where
the
transportation
staff
have
said
it
doesn't
belong
there,
because
at
the
end
of
the
day,
sometimes
these
controls
are
controversial
and
even
worse,
sometimes
these
controls
can
make
it
worse.
C
You
know
if
there's
an
accident
on
this
street
a
collision
actually
is
using
the
correct
language.
You
know
it
matters.
What
the
speed
limit
is,
if
it's
too
high
or
too
low
it
can
cause
that
collision
to
occur
so
I
think
we
just
need
to
be
transparent
and
how
we
reach
these
decisions,
and
we
can
rely
on
people
that
they
don't
bring
politics
into
the
mix
and
that's
the
staff,
and
so
for
that
reason,
no
I
think
we
should
think
carefully
about
supporting
a
change
to
a
recommendation.