►
From YouTube: City Council - June 18, 2019 - Part 2 of 2
Description
City Council, meeting 8, June 18, 2019 - Part 2 of 2
Agenda and background materials:
http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/decisionBodyProfile.do?function=doPrepare&meetingId=15354
Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdv69K6zXj0
Meeting Navigation:
0:12:26 - Meeting resume
B
Where
am
I
well
here,
I.
Am
this
time
speaker
I'd,
just
like
to
introduce
two
great
counselor
for
the
day,
as
you
know,
with
Ross
school
there's
always
every
year
students
come
and
they
are
counselor
for
the
day
and
this
year
we
are
have
the
pleasure
of
having
with
us
councillor,
Lachlan,
curry
and
counselors
aide
Rashid,
and
here
they
are
up
in
the
council
chambers.
B
A
Okay,
members
of
council,
before
the
recess
council,
was
debating
the
mayor's
key
matter.
Item
e
X
6.5
on
a
status
update
on
ontario
transit
responsibilities,
realignment
review.
We
will
return
to
that
item
after
the
release
of
member
holds.
Do
we
have
any
releases?
A
murmur
hold
put
your
name
in
the
middle
requests
to
question.
C
A
C
A
C
C
C
D
A
A
A
D
A
G
A
G
I
I
I
A
I
I
J
J
A
A
C
L
G
N
O
G
P
C
P
K
Q
A
D
Right
with
D
we're
going
back
to
the
TV,
a
transit,
provincial
Tokioka
sure
I
did
I'd
had
some
some
questions,
I'm,
not
sure
who
to
ask
the
questions
of,
but
I
just
wanted
to
go
back
to
the
funding
for
these
projects.
So
the
Scarborough
subway,
the
one-stop
Scarborough
subway.
How
is
that
being
funded.
H
The
speaker
right
now
in
the
budget
there
is
660
million
that
is
assumed
to
be
coming
from
the
federal
funding,
public
transit
infrastructure
fund
phase
2
there
is
and
I
might
need
finance
stuff
to
correct
me.
Approximately
900
million
that's
currently
in
budget,
around
development
charges,
property
tax
increase,
and
then
there
is
a
provincial
contrib,
you
of
1.48
billion
in
2010
dollars,
which
is
escalated
to
one
nine
nine
billion,
which
is
the
previous
contribution
to
the
Scarborough
LRT.
That
was
reallocated
to
discover
assembly.
Okay,.
D
D
H
H
D
So
now
that
the
that
the
province
is
taking
over
the
project
do
the
the
is
the
the
one-stop
Scarborough
funding
arrangement
is
that
still
on
the
table?
Is
that
so
we're
still
all
committed
to
that
in
the
same
way,
money-wise
like
the
the
900
million
that
comes
through
our
development
charges,
our
dedicated
property
tax
increase
all
of
that
stuff,
so
that
just
couldn't
sort
of
goes
from
whatever
we
were
doing
to
I
guess
we
we
cut
a
check
to
to
Metrolinx
for
that.
So.
H
D
D
D
H
R
A
F
Speaker
on
a
point
of
privilege
a
moment
ago,
I
made
a
comment
in
reference
to
councillor
care,
Janis's
attempt
to
withdraw
item
p,
h,
6.1,
to
area
specific
amendment
to
the
sign
by
law
to
9:04
sheppard
avenue
east.
You
asked
me
to
withdraw
my
suggestion
that
councillor
kerryanders
say
hello
to
Chris
corn
Kosinski,
because
I
was
uncertain
of
my
facts.
I'd
agreed
to
withdraw
that,
but
I've
since
gone
and
checked.
My
facts
on
June
said
on
June
13th
councillor
Cara
Janice
was
contacted
by
mr.
F
Corin
Kosinski
on
subject
matter
to
eight
one
four
two,
which
is
the
sine
variance
proposal
for
the
same
address
2904
Sheppard,
Avenue
I,
would
suggest
further
that
you
shouldn't
be
surprised
by
this,
because
mr.
Corin
Kosinski
contacted
you
on
June
12th
2019.
So,
given
that
no
I
am
NOT
withdrawing
my
remark
do
say
hello
to
mr.
corn
Kosinski.
For
me,
counselor
Cara,
Janice.
I
J
S
The
motion
that
I
moved
when
we
first
discussed
venturing
into
these
so-called
consultations
with
the
province,
and
my
motion
is
in
two
part.
One
is
that
we
talk
about
what
we
want
to
talk
about,
which
is
providing
great
transit
for
Torontonians
in
the
region,
but
we
should
not
be,
in
my
view,
suckered
in
to
a
so
called
negotiating
table.
That
has
nothing
to
do
with
improving
our
city
or
really
listening
to
councils
position.
What
it
is
is
that
we
have
a
government
that
unilaterally
made
an
announcement.
They
said
we're
gonna
do
this.
S
They
announced
the
bill,
they
moved
the
bill.
They
approved
the
bill.
They
haven't
consulted
with
us
about
what
they
want
to
do.
They've
already
said:
they're
taking
our
subway
they're
taking
our
assets.
They
want
to
know
the
value,
but
just
because
you
announce
that
you're
going
to
take
over
the
subway
doesn't
mean
that
it's
easy
to
do
it's
really
complex.
They
need
to
understand
not
only
the
values
but
even
how
to
disconnect
all
the
feeder
lines.
S
It's
it's
complex
because
it's
an
interval,
v'n
system
and
what
I'm
concerned
about
is
that
this
is
a
Trojan
horse
that
what
they
want
to
do.
I
mean
they're,
asking
you
heard
earlier
they're
asking
for
even
details
like
like,
like
own
room
annuals
for
some
of
the
cars
they
want
to
understand
every
detail.
They
can
to
be
able
to
implement
what
they've
decided
to
move
forward
with.
They
don't
actually
care
about
our
opinion.
S
If
they
cared
about
our
opinion,
they
would
have
not
only
consulted
with
us
first,
they
would
have
met
with
the
mayor
and
leaders
in
our
in
our
public
service
before
they
moved
the
legislation
in
an
in
a
substantive
and
genuine
way.
They
would
have
said
this
is
where
we'd
like
to
go,
but
we'd
like
to
talk
with
you.
First,
they
didn't
do
that.
They
didn't
do
that.
So
we
also,
as
a
council,
decided
that
we
had
61
questions
really
important
questions.
I
would
submit.
S
We
probably
have
more
than
that-
and
we
heard
from
Tracy
earlier,
ms
koch,
rather
that
we
don't
have
any
real
answers.
Yet
maybe
we'll
get
answers,
we're
hoping
for
answers,
but
we
don't
really
have
answers.
This
is
a
one-sided
discussion,
we're
being
told
what's
gonna
happen,
we're
not
being
asked
what
should
happen.
So
there
are
areas
of
the
plan
that
look
interesting
to
me.
I
mean
the
Ontario
line.
If
it
genuinely
can
be
built
quicker
and
provide
relief
to
our
system.
I,
don't
want
to
block
that
I'm
interested
to
see
where
that
discussion
is
gonna.
S
Go
I
still,
don't
fully
understand
why
it
leads
to
Ontario
place,
but
the
concept
is
supportable.
We
need
to
know
more
about
it.
We
need
to
know
even
more
defined
answers
about
what
the
technology
will
be.
I,
don't
know
all
those
answers
yet,
but
I
want.
There
are
aspects
of
the
plan
that
seemed
to
be
complete
nonsense.
S
Some
of
it
seems
to
be
kind
of
some
of
it
seems
to
be
expert
driven.
Other
parts
of
it
seems
to
be
very
politically
driven,
but
they're
not
working
with
us,
so
I
hope
you
will
support
a
motion
that
supports
councils
position.
Council
said
we
want
to
have
answers
to
our
questions
to
know.
If
we're
going
to
be
there
with
a
good-faith
partner,
I
see
no
evidence
that
they're
good-faith
partners,
I
didn't
see
that
with
our
local
elections,
when
they
unilaterally
ripped
up
our
elections
in
the
middle
of
the
election.
S
Don't
see
that
we've
got
a
pardon
if
I've
seen
any
evidence,
if
I
would
have
seen
any
evidence
that
they
genuinely
want
to
set
the
table
to
actually
create
a
vision
with
us,
then
I'd
want
to
stay
at
the
table,
because
I
think
it's
worth
our
time
to
insert
our
knowledge
and
expertise
and
on-the-ground
experience
to
be
able
to
move
our
city
forward
with
them.
But
that's
not
who
we're
dealing
with,
and
you
know
that
I
mean
you
know
that
this
is
why
Doug
Ford
gets
booed
everywhere.
S
He
goes
because
it's
broken
trust
like
every
sector
is,
is
upset
at
him
now
because
they
don't
feel
like
he.
He
in
this
government
deal
with
them
in
good
faith
by
the
way,
I
would
go
the
same
with
one
of
a
bill:
108
ripping
up
Midtown
and
focus
ripping
up
the
downtown
plan.
They're
not
doing
things
with
us,
they're
doing
things
at
us.
S
What
I'm
concerned
again
is
that
if
we
remain
at
the
table
sort
of
like
you
know,
the
better
poker
player
will
always
win
when
they
just
keep
looking
for
signs
or
we
what
cards
do
we
have?
What
do
they
need
from
us?
Do
they
need
to
understand
how
to
dismantle
the
system
a
little
better?
Maybe
we
will
share
that
information
with
them.
Do
they
need
to
understand
the
values
of
what
they're
gonna
sell
off
yeah?
Thank
you.
Let's
walk
away
from
a
table
that
we
were
not
genuinely
invited
in
in
partnership.
Thank.
A
N
That,
given
the
province
does
not
shared
with
the
city,
Toronto
staff
and
the
Toronto
Transit
Commission,
the
new
technology,
the
province
will
deploy
on
the
proposed
ten
point:
nine
billion
dollar
Ontario
relief
line,
City
Council
request
the
deputy
city
manager,
the
infrastructure
development
services,
the
report
to
the
executive
committee
on
the
possible
delays
and
the
construction
of
the
relief
line
and
the
strategies
and
plans
needs
to
deal
with
it.
Continued
overcrowding
on
the
young
line
that
may
be
caused
by
those
delays.
My
main
concern
here
is
a
very
practical
one,
madam
chair.
N
If
you
try
and
get
on
the
young
line
at
Eggleton
any
morning,
you
have
to
wait.
Five,
six
subway
cars
you're
jammed
right
to
the
walls.
You
cannot
get
on
unless
you
wait.
Four:
five:
six:
seven
cars.
In
fact,
as
I've
said
before
many
residents
are
now
going
to
Yonge
and
Eglinton
at
the
station
to
go
south,
they
must
go
north
towards
Finch
and
then
get
off
at
Lawrence
or
get
off
that
York
then
come
south.
N
That's
how
crazy
is
getting
so
I
am
afraid
that
this
uncertainty,
as
a
result
of
the
new
provincial
plans
for
Toronto,
is
going
to
further
delay
the
building
of
the
much
needed
downtown
relief
line,
because
you
know
when
I
saw
earlier.
One
of
the
staff
members
mentioned
that
we
have
done
15%
of
the
preliminary
engineering
work
on
our
downtown
relief
line
plan
they've
only
done
2%
on
the
mystery
downtown
or
whatever
they
call
the
Ontario
line,
they've
only
done
2%.
N
So
that
means
that
there's
delay
so
I'm
worried
that
we
need
to
start
thinking
about
an
alternative
way
of
dealing
with
the
overcrowding
on
the
young
line.
Before
someone
gets
seriously
hurt,
we
need
to
somehow
find
a
way
of
dealing
with
this
reality,
because
not
only
is
there
uncertainty
as
a
result
of
the
downtown
relief
line
being
pushed
aside
by
the
new
mystery
line
that
goes
from
Eglinton,
the
Science
Center
down
to
Ontario,
Place
and
beyond,
but
we've
also
lost
a
billion
dollars
towards
our
maintenance
and
stayed
a
good
repair
budget.
N
That
compounds
the
problem
because
part
of
that
money
in
the
1
billion
dollars
would
have
gone
towards
enhancing
our
maintenance
yards
to
provide
for
more
trains
to
be
put
on
the
young
line
to
relieve
the
pressure.
Now
we
can't
add
the
new
train
extra
trains,
really
the
pressure,
because
the
province
caught
a
billion
dollars
overstated
good
repaired.
So
we
get
it
two
ways:
we've
got
this
mysterious
line
that
they
refuse
to
talk
about.
N
How
are
you
going
to
plan
to
build
the
new
maintenance
yards
for
the
new
mystery
technology,
how
you
get
interface,
the
new
stations
with
the
existing
stations
on
the
new
LRT
Lionel
Eglinton
on
the
blurred
and
forth
line?
How
is
this
going
to
happen?
We
don't
know
because
they're
hiding
the
mystery
technology
from
TDC
they're,
hiding
it
from
our
chief
general
manager.
N
So
my
motion
here
tries
to
get
us
to
now
deal
with
this
very
critical
situation
of
dealing
with
the
overcrowding
on
the
on
line,
because
it
looks
like
folks
there's
going
to
be
no
relief
in
the
next
10
years,
while
they
keep
playing
games
with
transportation
in
Toronto.
So
we
need
to
start
directing
ourselves
to
the
reality
of
the
delays
that
are
going
to
come
and
how
we
get
people
on
and
off
the
young
line,
especially
in
the
core
of
the
city,
which
is
right
now
at
a
critical
stage
of
being
over
capacity.
G
Pillion,
thank
you
just
want
to
speak
briefly
in
favor
of
both
counselor
Kohl's
and
counselor
mat
lows:
motions
on
counselor,
Kohl's
motion,
I.
Think
it's
pretty
clear
that
the
province
plans
to
build
the
young
line
in
advance
of
the
Ontario
line,
whether
intentionally
or
not.
You
know
the
the
mystery
line
as
councillor
Cole
calls.
It
is,
you
know,
I,
don't
think,
there's
anything
there
yet,
and
you
know
that's
gonna
take
years
and
years
and
the
young
line
North
is
far
more
advanced
and
clearly
that
would
happen
first.
G
If
we
don't
do
something
about
it,
they're
not
gonna,
build
it
and
then
not
open
it.
So
you
know
that
would
be
not
just
uncomfortable
but
unsafe.
If
that
line
were
to
open
first,
and
also
would
you
know,
would
seriously
discourage
people
from
taking
public
transit
because
it
would
be
unsafe
and
uncomfortable.
So
that
is
a
really
serious
possibility
that
we
could
not
allow
to
happen
whatever
we
need
to
do
to
prevent
it
and
on
counselor
mat
Lowe's
motion.
G
G
G
Thanks
very
much
madam
Speaker
I'd
have
a
motion
I'd
like
to
move
just
a
two-parter
I've
had
a
chance
to
speak
with
staff
about
this,
both
our
city
manager
and
the
TTC,
as
well
as
transportation,
planning
and
I
just
want
to
start
by
saying.
We've
been
here
a
few
times
even
early
early
days
in
this
term,
the
first
six
months.
We
continue
to
have
conversations
about
changes
in
our
transit
plan,
our
transit
network
plan
and
that
interface
with
the
province
and
many
of
my
colleagues
here.
G
Admittedly,
the
Ontario
Line
is
just
getting
started
and-
and
that's
that's
a
new
announcement
and
something
that
hasn't
had
a
lot
of
time
to
be
developed,
but
we
have
put
in
the
time
we
have
put
in
the
money
and
the
energy
on
the
relief
line,
and
we
should
be
advancing
that
forward.
So
I
think
the
most
important
transit
priority,
not
only
for
Toronto
and
the
TTC,
but
actually,
in
fact,
the
entire
region
is
that
relief
line,
and
we
need
to
consider
every
option
to
speed
up
that
work.
G
As
we
heard
from
questioning,
there
are
still
many
questions
that
remain
unanswered
from
the
province.
We
don't
have
a
commitment
that
the
province
will
actually
pay
for
the
cost
of
tearing
up
the
plan,
so
we
spent
years
putting
in
place
we've
had
to
put
on
hold
all
of
the
work
that
we've
been
doing
to
accelerate
the
leap
relief
line
for
the
past
two
years.
G
We
have
have
little
indication
on
what
will
happen
to
the
planning
around
the
stations
as
the
province
moves
forward,
with
a
variety
of
other
pieces
of
legislation,
as
it
relates
to
Mt
SAS
and
we're
not
clear
about
how
many
of
the
changes
being
proposed
affect
our
Network
here
at
the
City
of
Toronto,
and
it's
that
last
point.
That
really
is
the
subject
of
the
motion
that
I'm
bringing
forward
to
you.
So
the
first
recommendation
is
pretty
straightforward.
G
We
should
be
asking
the
province
to
move
forward
on
this
central
section
as
identified
in
the
report,
the
central
section
of
the
proposed
Ontario
line
in
so
much
as
it's
effectively
in
alignment
with
what
we're
proposing
for
the
relief
line.
So
we
should
be
making
a
push
on
that.
We've
done
a
significant
amount
of
work
on
that
portion
of
the
project.
We've
found
new
ways
to
shave
two
years
off
that
timeline
and
we
have
any
ei
in
place.
G
So
you
know
I
want
us
to
urge
the
province
at
the
very
least,
to
get
the
shovels
in
the
ground
on
that
section
of
the
line
finding
ways
to
compress
this
schedule
so
that
we
can
move
forward
imperil
parallel.
Rather
than
doing
the
whole
thing.
Sequentially,
that's
only
gonna,
slow
us
down.
The
second
part
of
the
recommendation
does
two
things:
one
we're
giving
staff
direction
to
ensure
that
we're
actually
negotiating
with
the
province
for
a
position
that
gives
priority
to
our
transit
network
plan.
G
As
the
City
of
Toronto,
we
have
a
responsibility
to
advocate
for
our
transit
priorities
and
the
priorities
in
the
plan,
and
the
second
part
asks
for
staff
to
really
quantify
how
any
new
plans
coming
forward
from
the
province
will
actually
affect
the
transit
network
that
we
have
here
in
place
for
Torontonians.
So
the
modelling
should
look
at
how
the
network
is
used
with
respect
to
our
existing
plan
and
compare
that
how
it
would
be
used
under
any
other
changes
made
by
the
province
and
asking
questions
like.
G
Are
we
getting
the
the
biggest
growth
in
ridership
for
Torontonians,
or
are
we
watering
down
our
network
beyond
to
the
region?
So
I?
Don't
think
you
know
any?
We
don't
have
any
decisions
in
front
of
us
here
today.
It's
an
update
report,
but
this
is
the
kind
of
information
that
I
think
as
counselors
as
Torontonians.
G
We
actually
need
to
make
informed
decisions
on
our
transit
planning
going
forward
and,
of
course,
we
need
to
do
everything
we
can
to
speed
up
work
on
the
relief
line
or
the
Ontario
line,
whatever
we
can
do
to
to
make
that
connection
and
provide
some
relief,
though
so
hope
you'll,
consider
supporting
my
motion
and
thank
you
very
much.
Madam
Speaker.
Thank.
B
A
R
Carroll,
yes,
madam
Speaker,
if
you
don't
mind,
I'll,
just
speak
from
here
I'm
putting
my
iPad
on
here.
I,
don't
know
how
well
that
that
shows
to
folks
that
are
streaming.
But
the
reason
I
put
this
on
is
it
speaks
to
councillor
Cole's
motion
and
it
speaks
to
the
questions
that
I
was
asking
earlier
about
vehicle
work
in
the
base
system.
R
R
It
reminds
me
of
the
comments
the
councillor
Cole
made
in
support
of
his
motion,
except
that
the
second
part
of
his
motion
is
that
that
item
in
my
mind,
that
we
adopted
a
TTC
which
is
a
five-year
plan,
and
if
you,
if
you
have
a
look
at
the
TTC's
website,
you'll
find
that
within
that
plan,
then
the
presentation
that
was
given
there
is
a
lot
of
focus
on
our
bus
network,
and
it
really
is
because
of
what
councillor
Cole
has
said.
At
the
rate,
these
conversations
are
going.
R
If
we
look
at
the
catalogue
of
new
lines
that
have
actually
been
had
the
brakes
put
on
them
by
starting
this
ownership
conversation,
you
know
that
we
run
the
risk
of
no
substantial
new
lines
actually
happening
for
ten
years,
which
means
that
this
system
that
exists
today
is
going
to
have
to
do
the
work
of
the
next
decade,
and
so
we've
got
a
max
it
out.
We've
got
to
squeeze
every
bit
of
performance
out
of
the
networks
that
we
do
have
well.
R
This
is
all
being
decided
upon
and
then
the
projects
restarted,
and
even
if
they're
expedited
having
nothing
new
to
ride.
On
for
at
least
a
decade,
unless
we
can
convince
them
in
the
short
term
that
their
best
bet
is
to
pick
up
those
studies
that
we've
already
done
and
work
with
what
we've
already
done
and
move
with
those.
If
you
don't
it's
a
long
time
before
we're
writing
anything
new.
R
What
you
see
on
the
screen,
madam
speaker,
is
taken
from
the
plan
that
we
looked
at
at
budget
time
in
the
TTC
and
what
you're
looking
at,
where
I
say,
say:
vehicle
acquisitions-
that's
just
what's
needed
to
function
normally
for
ten
years
and
deal
with
average
ridership
growth,
average
ridership
growth.
Those
are
the
types
of
things
that
it
takes
to
run
the
system
we
already
own
and
I.
Don't
think
that
this
province
has
wrapped
its
head
around
that
because
they
don't
operate
a
system.
Anything
like
it.
R
That
conversation
should
be
spending
the
lion's
share
of
its
time,
figuring
out
how
we
will
make
these
kinds
of
expenditures
on
a
normal
basis
on
normal
lines.
Every
decade,
every
single
decade
we'll
need
at
least
this
at
a
minimum
to
keep
going
and
to
keep
renewing
what
we
already
have,
and
so
I'm
not
moving
in
emotions,
but
I
know
that
it
counts
in
the
case
of
councilor
Cole's
motion.
R
I
hope
that
we
are
at
least
talking
to
each
other
within
our
silos
and
where
councillor
Cole's
motion
asks
that
our
executive
deputy
city
manager
in
charge
of
in
infrastructure
reports
to
the
executive
committee
I
believe
she
need
only
look
at
the
five
and
10-year
plan.
That's
being
developed
at
the
TTC
and
make
sure
that
our
two
silos
are
demonstrating
that,
in
fact,
that's
what
should
be
having
a
happening
at
the
province.
There
ought
to
be
integration
between
all
the
people
involved
at
their
ministry.
R
B
Thank
You
speaker
I,
just
want
to
refer
to
the
administrative
inquiry
that
the
city
manager
was
so
gracious
to
answer,
and
the
question
was
just
how
long
is
Metro
links
been
working
at
Union
Station
and
how
far
behind
are
they?
And
the
answer
was
if
they
complete,
when
they're
supposed
to
they'll
have
been
nine
years
behind
if
they
complete
when
they're
supposed
to
and
there's
no
guarantee
that
they
will
complete
when
they're
supposed
to
so
somehow
our
transit
system
and
our
TTC
is
being
ashamed
that
they
can't
work
fast
enough.
B
Shame
they
can't
do
things
well
enough.
Well,
here's
the
central
spine,
the
central
spine
of
the
transit
system
for
the
four
one,
six
and
the
905
nine
years,
late
and
Counting
nine
years
late
and
Counting.
So
let's
drop
this
that
somehow
it's
because
the
TTC
doesn't
know
what
they're
doing
they
are
our
experts
on
transit.
They
have
the
track
record
and
things
maybe
late,
but
not
with
three
different
contractors.
B
Over
nine
years,
it's
a
pathetic
case
at
Union
Station,
what's
going
on
with
Metrolink,
so
I'm,
not
jumping
leaving
people
that
I
know
can
do
something
well
and
jumping
over
to
people
that
have
a
track
record
at
the
main
spine
of
nine
years.
Late
and
Counting.
That's
the
first
thing,
I
want
to
say.
Secondly,
there
was
just
a
story
in
the
Toronto
Star
that
outlined
the
terrible,
terrible
consequences
and
councillor
Cole
knows
this
all
too
well
the
terrible
consequences
of
the
Eglinton
crosstown
on
the
businesses
on
Eglinton.
It
is
a
wasteland.
B
People
are
going,
belly-up
they're,
losing
their
businesses
they're,
losing
their
leases
and
as
as,
if
well
transits
happening.
That's
too
bad
I
would
say
that
we've
had
different
times
with
the
TTC,
but
I
know
that
the
TTC
is
much
more
attuned
and
alert
to
the
needs
of
local
businesses
than
Metrolinx
is
proving
to
be
on
Eglinton
and
the
city,
of
course,
we're
waiting
for
a
report
on
how
local
businesses
will
be
treated
with
the
relief
line.
There's
something
else
with
the
Ontario
line
and
the
relief
line
you
all
saw
my
little
chart
there.
B
It's
very
clear.
These
are
late
to
the
party
everything's
going
to
be
late.
This
thing
cannot
be
done
as
quickly
as
they
say,
but
there
is
a
consequence
of
slowing
down
and
stopping
and
that's
a
woman
coming
to
me
when
I
was
at
an
event
north
of
the
Danforth
and
crying
she's
crying.
What's
gonna
happen
to
my
property
under
the
relief
line
as
we
know
it
and
that
EA
her
property
is
being
taken,
we
could
move
and
acquire
that
property
and
make
her
whole.
B
Now
she'd
like
to
move
who's,
gonna
buy
a
house,
who's
gonna
buy
a
house
that
has
a
big
red
mark
on
it.
You
may
be
expropriated
for
the
relief
line
you
may
be
expropriated
for
the
relief
line,
not
you.
Currently,
she
is
being
expropriated
for
the
relief
line,
but
now
this
is
throwing
everybody
into
limbo
with
their
property,
and
let
you
remind
you
that
we're
talking
about
billions
of
dollars
in
transit
property,
but
when
we
are
talking
about
people's
homes,
we're
talking
about
their
equity
and
their
lives.
B
The
single
most
important
thing
that
they
have
for
their
wealth
and
to
have
everybody
in
limbo
because
of
a
flip
of
a
coin
or
a
change
of
a
mind,
is
just
wrong
and
I
think
we
have
to
get
that
sorted
out
sooner
rather
than
later,
because
it's
patently
unfair
that
this
is
happening
in
this
way
to
everybody
who's
seen.
Currently,
what
is
going
to
happen
to
their
property
and,
lastly,
I'm
very
interested
in
where
the
storage
facility
will
go,
how
how
many
trains
there
will
be?
What
happens
on
the
gauge?
B
Are
these
going
to
be
used
anywhere
else,
just
thinking
about
having
I
remember
when
we
were
going
to
get
the
streetcars
and
the
first
3-carbon
barge
I
brought
I
think
had
the
gauge
at
one
four,
three:
five
millimeter,
it's
going
to
run
on
the
same.
The
city
said:
no:
no,
our
street
cars
run
on
a
different
gauge.
They
run
on
a
different
gauge.
You
have
to
build
those
streetcars
for
our
tracks,
so
somehow
we're
having
a
new
line
built
where
none
of
those
trains
can
ever
run
on
anything
else.
B
B
F
It's
happening
exactly
the
way
we
knew
it
would.
We
knew
three
months
ago,
when
the
premier
got
up
and
made
this
announcement
that
there
was
no
substance
behind
it.
We
knew
that
we
would
sit
at
that
table
and
public
employees
from
the
city
of
Toronto,
in
our
planning
staff
and
the
TTC
staff
would
gradually
educate
the
minister
of
Transportation
on
how
to
run
rail
underground
in
an
urban
environment
and
gradually
they're
learning
a
little
bit
more
about
it.
We've
advanced
from
the
back
of
a
napkin
to
a
PowerPoint
and
a
little
bit
of
Correspondence.
F
You
know
some
every
once
in
a
while.
Some
members
of
this
council
get
up
and
admonish
those
of
us
who
have
a
different
view
about
what
to
do
that.
We're
holding
everything
up
that
we
just
keep
instead
of
making
a
decision
in
building
transit,
all
we
ever
do
is
talk
about
transit.
Well,
here
we
are
again
just
talking
about
transit
and
once
again,
a
settled
plan,
a
plan
that
we
have
spent
tens
of
millions
of
dollars
to
advance
a
plan.
We've
consulted
with
Torontonians
on
a
planner.
The
planning
department
has
helped
put
together.
F
F
Ten
years
from
now,
another
group
of
councilors
will
be
standing
around
this,
this
council
chamber
and
somebody
will
get
up
and
say
you
know
we
never
decide
anything.
All
we
ever
do
is
talk
about
it
and
they
will
be
right
because
of
what
is
going
on
right
now,
honestly
I
mean
what's
the
next
step.
Does
the
premier
take
us
up
to
Canada's
Wonderland,
say
no?
F
Actually,
I
want
one
of
those,
the
the
foolishness,
the
complete
waste
of
public
money,
public
time,
public
attention
that
is
going
into
chasing
this
phantom
plan
when
we
have
real
problems,
I
hope
you
all
listen
carefully.
When
councillor
Carroll
was
making
her
presentation
for
years
now,
the
leadership
at
the
TTC
has
been
saying.
We
do
not
get
the
resources
necessary
to
run
the
system.
F
We
have
let
alone
the
system
we're
going
to
need,
as
people
start
taking
transit
more
often
as
our
city
continues
to
develop,
and
yet
the
wise
heads,
the
cool
heads,
continue
to
say:
no,
no,
we
should
go
to
the
table.
We
should
indulge
the
premier,
we
wouldn't
want
him
to
get
mad
at
us.
We
wouldn't
want
governments
to
be
in
conflict
with
each
other,
because
that's
not
professional.
F
F
I
know
that's
not
the
mood
of
this
council,
but
we
are
making
a
deep
strategic
error.
We
are
costing
Torontonians
another
half
decade
or
a
decade
on
the
transit
system
that
they
know
is
already
inadequate
when
the
city
manager
for
the
City
of
Toronto
describes
the
circumstance
at
our
central
transfer
point
as
being
a
health
and
safety
problem,
and
our
staff
are
up
helping
the
premier
transfer
his
drawings
from
a
napkin
to
a
PowerPoint.
F
Instead
of
fixing
what
we
know
needs
to
be
fixed,
we
are
not
doing
our
jobs,
I
put
it
to
all
of
you.
I
put
it
to
you
next
time.
We
talk
about
this,
be
ready
to
walk
away.
If
you
have
not
seen
a
real
transit
plan,
I
can
tell
you
today.
You
won't
I,
know
you're
not
ready
to
make
that
decision
yet.
But
if
it's
not
here
next
time,
walk
away
for
the
good
of
Toronto.
M
You,
madam
Speaker
I,
have
a
motion
I'd
like
to
move.
Don't
have
it
in
front
of
me,
so
I'll
talk
a
little
bit
about
it
and
leave
it
at
that.
So
we
have
a
really
impressive
organization
as
part
of
the
TTC.
It's
a
called
a
cat.
You
may
be
familiar
with
them
if
you're
not,
please
become
familiar
with
them.
M
They're
the
Advisory
Committee
on
accessibility
in
transit
and
they're,
very
informed
they're,
very
really
experienced
in
how
you
make
transit,
more
accessible
and
they're
very
concerned,
obviously
about
what's
happening
and
they'd
like
to
have
a
voice
in
this
process,
so
I'm
moving
these
motions
to
ensure
that
happens
and
that
there's
meetings
that
take
place.
The
boss,
both
the
chair
and
the
vice
chair,
have
noted
numerous
times
that
they
want
to
be
at
a
table
to
discuss
these
issues.
M
We've
actually
made
great
strides
at
the
TTC
on
accessibility
issues,
and
you
know,
there's
been
some
hiccups,
no
doubt
along
the
way,
but
we
have
made
great
strides
and
we
want
to
continue
down
that
path.
So,
if
we're
going
to
be
expanding
and
building,
we
want
to
get
it
right.
The
first
time
and
make
sure
that
it's
fully
accessible,
so
they've
asked
for
a
discussion,
a
connection
meetings
whatever
it
takes
to
make
sure
that
we
get
accessibility
right.
The
first
time
on
these
new
transit
expansion
projects,
I
would
I
think
most
of
it's
been
said.
M
I
have
very
little
to
add,
except
to
say
that
the
bottom
line
is
there
are
still
more
questions
than
answers.
As
always,
I've
been
concerned
about
the
relief
line,
the
delays
with
the
relief
line
and
I
do
support
councillor
Bradford's
motion
I've
moved
a
similar
motion
in
April
and,
let's
not
forget
the
state
of
the
SRT
I'm
gonna,
bring
that
up
every
time
I
speak
and
the
it's
in
its
dying
days,
time
is
ticking
and
what
impacts
does
that
have
so
the
young
blower
station?
M
At
times
we
have
to
bypass
we're
going
to
have
more
of
that
in
the
future
because
of
overcrowding
and
issues
there.
So
all
these
things
are
what
I
would
call
pressing
mounting
problems
and
any
delays
are
not
acceptable
and,
as
I
said
earlier
in
my
questions,
we
actually
had
worked
toward
accelerating
the
relief
line
by
two
to
three
years.
Now
we
have
heard
that
were
one
or
two
percent
the
province
is
that
one
or
two
percent,
whereas
we
are
at
15
percent
plus
also
I,
would
just
like
to
as
I
finish
summarize
here.
M
A
D
Speaker,
I
I,
just
I
would
like
to
introduce
a
group
of
students.
That's
here
today
from
the
senic
at
York
government
relations
program.
These
young
folks
are
are
all
well
studied.
They
many
of
them
have
university
degrees,
but
but
they
are
learning
about
municipal
government
than
they
are
here
this
day
to
see
municipal
government
in
action.
There
they've
been
brought
here
by
their
leader
and
instructor
Andrew,
passkeys
and.
D
I
would
speaker
I
just
got
a
couple
of
things
to
say
on
this
and
and
I
was
sitting
here
musing
on
on
the
our
history
around
around
the
the
building
of
public
transit
and
major
and
major
transit
projects.
Here's
what
I
can
say
today,
verifiably
speaker
that
I
have
no
idea
what
10
15
years
down
the
road
is
going
to
bring
in
terms
of
new
project
and
and
I.
D
Don't
think
that
any
of
us
are
in
a
position
to
be
able
to
say
any
different
speaker,
because
if
you
look
at
our
history,
I
remember
1988
the
Petersons
the
then
peterson
government
made
this
grand
announcement
about
public
transit
and
transit
expansion
and
building
subways
all
over
the
place
and
they
basically
that
basically
never
went
anywhere.
Then
I
remember
the
Ray
government.
They
came
along
and
they
said.
Well,
you
know
what
we're
gonna
build.
D
Subway's
everywhere
and
and
true
out
of
that
announcement
came
a
little
subway
called
the
Sheppard
subway
a
couple
of
kilometers
of
subway
from
young
to-to-to
I
believe
Tom
Mills
for
stations
and
a
small
little
extension
from
Wilson
to
Sheppard
of
the
Spadina
of
the
Spadina
line.
But
but
the
significant
thing
to
remember
about
all
of
that
was
this-
that
they
started
the
Eglinton
project,
Benten
subway
and
the
next
government
came
along
and
basically
cancelled.
It
buried
that
and
hundreds
of
millions
of
dollars
of
wasted
money,
because
that
that
that
project
was
underway.
D
So
in
in
in
in
in
understanding
that
experience,
you
know
the
municipal
councils
then
worked
out.
A
different
kind
of
deal
was
called
transit
City.
You
know
the
the
sort
of
the
LRT
lines
all
across
you
know.
The
City
of
Toronto
I
had
a
deal
from
the
den
provincial
government.
Eight
point:
seven
then
reduce
to
eight
point
four
billion
dollars.
That
was
going
to
do
something
significant.
D
We
got
a
couple
of
projects
out
of
that
we
got
Eglinton,
which
is
you
know,
marshalling,
along
and
and
we're
getting
the
the
Finch
line,
but
the
significant
other
thing
that
happened.
There
was
all
of
the
wasted
money.
We
had
the
Scarborough,
so
somebody
came
along
and
said:
Subway's
mentioned
the
word
subways
and
basically
chucked
a
monkey
wrench
in
the
middle
of
it
all
and
hundreds
of
millions
resolvers
went
up
and
spoke.
D
We
had
started
the
Scarborough
RT
got
cancelled,
we
had
started
Shepherd,
the
extension
of
Shepherd
got
cancelled,
but
what
didn't
get
cancelled
was
the
tab,
the
money
we
spent
on
that
that
became
wasted
money,
hundreds
of
millions
of
dollars
every
time.
One
of
these
things
happens.
You've
got
lots
and
lots
of
waste
of
the
money
we
have
spent
200
million
on
the
one
stop
Scarborough
subway.
D
We
spent
that
we've
wrote
those
checks,
they
were
cashed,
but
now
we're
going
to
go
back
to
square
one
with
something
else,
and
basically
we
don't
have
a
say
in
any
of
that,
so
we
need
to
revisit.
And
quite
frankly,
if
you
look
at
the
funding
model
for
it,
six
hundred
and
sixty
million
dollars
was
committed
by
then
minister
Flaherty,
the
late
minister
Flaherty,
to
been
mayor,
late,
Mayor,
Rob
Ford,
who
said
yeah.
You
want
us
one-stop,
Scarborough,
subway
or
a3
store,
whatever
that
was
we'll
put
some
money
into
that
you've.
D
Never
seen
anything
in
writing
that
says
that
the
Trudeau
Liberal
government
in
Ottawa
is
ever
going
to
honor
a
nickel
of
that
money
to
Doug
Ford,
as
Premier
of
Ontario
probably
never
happened.
So
what
that
means
is
that
to
two
hundred
million
dollars
is
basically
spent
burnt,
gone
money
wasted
money.
D
Just
simply
because
of
how
we
do
transit
planning,
it's
not
any
one
single
Authority,
it's
all
driven
by
the
provincial
government,
they've
always
driven
it.
We
get
to
decide
what
we're
going
to
do
and
we
ask
and
then
usually
you
have
a
government
there.
That
says:
ok,
fine,
we'll
help
you
do
this
one,
but
with
the
government
that's
there
now
all
we
can
do
is
go
into
a
holding
pattern.
Thank
you,
and
hopefully
we
won't
spend
any
more
money
anywhere
because
we
will
be
wasting
it.
Thank.
Q
It
was
approved
by
a
substantial
majority
of
the
council
more
than
once
and
I
would
prefer
that
we
would
be
able
to
proceed
ahead
with
that
and
that
didn't
contemplate
as
a
matter
of
interest.
Any
particular
change
in
ownership
had
just
preceded
it
contemplated
us
building
the
transit
that
was
in
the
plan.
My
main
concern
I'm
concerned
because
and
I
do
support
as
well.
The
council's
clearly
stated
position
that
we
would
prefer
the
status
quo
with
respect
to
the
ownership
of
the
system.
Q
My
biggest
concern
at
this
stage
is
with
respect
to
something
that
a
number
of
members
of
just
referred
to
speaker,
which
is
the
question
delay.
I,
don't
think
it
is
conceivable
that
you
could
have
the
the
extension
of
the
blur
Danforth
subway
in
the
in
the
East
to
Scarborough
done
in
anywhere
near
the
timeframe
that
was
contemplated
after
years
of
discussion
and
debating
and
Revo
ting
and
and
two
solid
mandates
given
to
to
a
mayor
myself,
who
ran
explicitly
on
saying
we
were
gonna
complete
that
project
and
received
an
overwhelming
mandate
across
the
city.
Q
Secondly,
and
these
are
sort
of
disconnected
points
but
they're
all
connected,
this
there's
been
a
the
report.
Deals
with
and
there's
been
mention
made
here
and
I've
heard.
Councillor
perks
often
speak
about
state
of
good
repair,
and
that
is,
you
know
as
crucial
an
issue
facing
the
TTC
in
some
of
the
comments
that
the
councillor
Robinson
made
and
others
who
had
the
long
list
of
different
things
we
have
to
pay
for
and
I
can
only
say
that
to
my
knowledge
at
the
tables
that
we're
meeting
at
with
the
province
right
now.
Q
That
is
a
topic
that
is
under
active
discussion,
namely
the
need
for
them
to
make
some
contribution,
because
no
matter
what
arrangements
are
made
we
can't
possibly
deal
with
nor
were
we
ever
contemplated
to
deal
with
based
on
property
taxes,
the
entire
cost
of
keeping
up
the
current
transit
system
in
a
state
of
good
repair,
let
alone
the
acquisition
of
new
new
vehicles,
and
things
like
that.
So
I
stand
here
today.
Speakers
saying
that
I
think
we
have
to
continue
to
move
forward
with
this
process
and
I
agree.
Q
Q
A
smart
track,
we
forget,
does
offer
the
opportunity
soonest
of
all
of
these
projects
to
have
new
transit
stations
open
in
the
City
of
Toronto.
It
will
provide
not
as
much
relief
as
the
relief
line
will,
but
it
will
provide
a
degree
of
relief
to
the
overstressed
subway
system
right
now
and
I
think
that
it
is
the
best
hope
we
have
and
it
is
moving
forward.
Q
They
have
approved
the
stations
and
all
the
rest
and
I
think
that
gives
us
an
opportunity
to
actually
have
those
stations
open
in
relatively
short
order
compared
to
all
these
other
projects
that
we're
talking
about
I,
believe
and
I
want
to
finish
on
this
note,
I
believe
that
it
is
better
for
us
to
be
at
this
table,
including
in
light
of
the
provisions
of
bill
107
bill.
107
I
find
a
very
onerous
piece
of
legislation.
Q
I
believe
it
is
unnecessarily
onerous
in
terms
of
talking
as
it
does
about
the
ability
to
have
to
take
away
our
subway
paid
for
with,
in
large
measure,
with
Toronto
taxpayers,
property
taxpayers,
money
potentially
without
compensation.
It's
it's
an
incredible
clause
to
have
in
a
piece
of
legislation,
but
we
have
a
choice,
and
this
is
a
choice.
That's
existed
in
front
of
this
council
all
the
way
along.
Q
The
role
of
the
city
and
the
TTC,
including
the
nature
and
governance
of
this
relationship
and
engagement
with
the
province,
is
a
significant
aspect
of
the
work
that
is
continuing
and
that's
work.
That's
referred
to
in
the
discussions
that
councillor
Matt
will
would
have
us
withdraw
from
on
page
10.
A
continued
engagement
with
the
province
remains
critical,
remains
critical
to
ensuring
these
objectives
are
met,
providing
city
and
TCC
staff.
Q
Q
The
legislation
being
passed
is
one
thing
actually
doing
something,
underneath
that
legislation
is
another
and
then
finally,
page
16
city
and
TTC
staff
agreed
that
it
is
imperative
to
remain
engaged
with
the
province
to
finalize
an
assessment
of
the
Ontario
line,
influenced
the
development
of
the
projects
and
advance
the
city's
strategic
objectives,
that's
after
etc.
I
mean
to
me
to
walk
away
from
this
table
and
pass.
Q
S
You,
madam
Speaker
merit,
or
you
you
I.
You
argue
against
the
motion
that
I've
moved
based
on
many
things,
but
including
you
just
cited
staffs
and
my
staff
recommendations.
Would
you
not
agree
with
me,
though,
that
the
decision
that
we
have
to
make
with
respect
to
if
we
want
to
negotiate
and
how
we
want
to
negotiate?
It's
inherently
political,
in
other
words
its
strategic?
It's,
whether
or
not
we
believe
we
have
leverage.
If
we
don't.
Where
do
we
want
to
get,
and
it's
not
just
based
on
a
staff
advice
in
this
context?
Q
But
I
will
say
to
you
respectfully
through
the
speaker
that
when
you
see
here
that
it
isn't
just
the
city
staff,
but
also
the
TTC,
so
these
are
the
two
groups
of
professionals
that
we
rely
on
for
advice
with
respect
to
how
we
are
going
to
best
achieve
our
objectives,
because
that's
what
they're
advising
us
on
here
I
will
have
to
tell
you.
This
is
no
disrespect
to
you
or
anybody
else
who
would
agree
with
you
on
that
motion.
Q
I
will
take
their
professional
advice,
they're
sitting
at
the
table,
we're
not
neither
you
and
our
me
through
you,
speaker
and
they're
sitting
at
the
table.
They
are
in
a
good
position
to
assess
how
we're
going
to
best
try
to
advance
our
objectives
to
the
greatest
extent
possible.
Knowing
and
I
say
this
with
regret
that
the
deck
is
kind
of
stacked
against
us.
Legislatively
and
otherwise
you.
S
Q
Timing
and
leverage
and
all
those
things
and
I've
made
it
very
clear
that
I
support
our
transit
plan.
Even
you
know,
I
know
you
and
I
would
have
a
disagreement
on
parts
of
that,
but
I
support
our
transit
plan
implemented
on
our
terms
with
us,
owning
it
and
them
helping
to
pay
for
it
and
including
paying
for
state
of
good
repair.
Oh
yeah
I
concede.
We
have
the
ultimate
decision
here,
but
I'm
taking
their
advice
because
I
think
it's
the
right
advice,
iiiiii.
S
While
staff
may
be
in
a
position
where
they
are
hearing
specific,
detailed,
whether
it
be
requests
or
or
just
information
that
they
believe
they
have
the
experience
and
knowledge
to
protect
in
that
conversation,
and
they
believe
that
they
can
move
that
conversation,
perhaps
towards
an
end
that
we
want
to
get
to
strategically
and
politically.
They
may
be
in
a
situation
where,
even
without
them,
knowing
the
province
is
from
a
merely
political
and
strategic
place.
S
Trying
to
accrue
information
from
them
to
be
able
to
meet
their
political
goal,
which
is
to
take
over
our
system
in
a
way
that
yeah
they
want
to
do
and
they
want
to
get
to.
But
they
need
our
help
to
do.
And
therefore
we,
as
as
the
governors
of
this
body
we
as
the
elected
representatives,
sometimes
we
need
to
take
staff
advice,
certainly
when
it
comes
to
following
the
facts
and
being
guided
by
evidence.
But
there
are
other
times
like
this
one,
where
it's
not
so
much
a
decision
between
technology
use
or
objections.
A
Q
Would
say
this
I,
don't
think
with
this
group
at
Queen's
Park
that
you
could
say
anything's
impossible.
However,
it
is
my
judgment
as
one
of
those
with
you
and
with
the
other
24
of
us
here
that
we
are
better
at
this
point
in
time,
especially
given
the
impulses
of
this
government,
which
might
be
if
we
walked
away
from
the
table
to
say
five
men.
We
will
do
exactly
what
you
fear
most,
which
is
them
just
saying.
We're
gonna
take
bill
107
and
we're
gonna.
Do
it
in
its
worst
possible.
Q
You
know
connotation
and
take
it
over
without
compensation
and
and
we
will
then
be
left
with
no
ability
to
exercise
any
option.
I
believe
we
are
better
off
at
the
table
and
I
would
point
out
perspective
speaker
to
the
member
through
you
that
that
the
very
people
who
would
have
to
carry
out
the
instructions
are
the
people
we're
sitting
at
the
table
with
they're,
not
politicians,
but
they
are
the
people
who,
if
they
had
so,
they
would
be
sitting
there
in
such
an
extraordinary
bad
faith
as
non
politicians.
Q
Q
I'll
be
the
first
one
or
among
the
first
to
say,
let's
abandon
this
table
and
and
and
enjoying
the
fight
in
a
different
way.
But
for
the
moment
this
actually
appears
to
be.
Maybe
the
only
table
that's
actually
been
set
up
where
I
think
there
actually
are
legitimate
discussions
going
on,
as
opposed
to
are
contrasted
with
the
council
decision,
which
was
entirely
unilateral.
The
budget
attempt
which
was
entirely
unilateral.
Now
we
maybe
do
have
a
table
or
the
planning
decisions
which
were
entirely
unilateral,
so
I
just
still
place
faith
in
the
table.
Okay,.
A
I
A
A
R
Caracal,
yes,
okay.
Thank
you.
I
I
want
to
ask
questions
that
might
clear
up
some
of
the
confusion
that
was
happening
at
executive.
There
was
some
confusion
about
what
I
had
said
in
my
remarks,
so
my
question
there
is,
there
is
still
the
MOU.
That
was
the
original
reason
that
we
we
departed.
Our
membership
from
from
the
association
of
municipalities.
Is
there
not
a.
R
So
it's
still
there,
but
in
fact,
is
it
not
also
true
that
the
the
literal
nature
of
that
MOU,
sorry
I,
just
I,
wish
councillor
Thompson
was
listening
because
he
was
one
of
the
people
who
had
that
confusion?
Is
it
not
also
true
that
the
the
literal
interpretation
we
had
on
that
MOU
has
since
actually
cease
to
be
individual
municipalities
when
they
have
individual
concerns?
There's
a
table
both
at
the
the
events
for
individual
municipalities
to
meet
with
individual
ministers
and
throughout
the
course
of
the
year.
R
K
I
am
just
through
the
speaker,
would
I
understand,
of
the
mo
MOU
is
that
it
does
represent,
and
it's
specifically
under
the
terms
and
conditions
of
the
MOU.
It
sets
out
the
the
subject
matters
on
which
emo
will
endeavour
to
articulate
a
United
municipal
position.
I
would
comment
on
that
specific
municipality
right
and.
R
So
there
are
just
as
we
have
at
the
FCM,
we
have
an
agreement
that
we
might
decide
lobbying
pillars
for
usually
four
pillars,
sometimes
three
sometimes
five
and
we
all
work
together
on
them.
We've
we've
been
very
successful
doing
that
in
the
when
we
did
the
gas
tax,
when
we
do
our
housing,
advocacy,
etc,
but
when
you
have
to
go
and,
for
instance,
we
we
are
the
largest
municipality
in
the
municipality
with
the
subway.
So
when
something
is
unique
to
us,
there
is
still
an
ability
to
go
minister
to
minister
or
premier
to
man
through.
R
R
N
K
A
N
B
A
N
If
I
could
repeat
the
question
again,
yes
trying
to
find
out,
basically
where
a
mole
is
that
and
their
effectiveness,
and
so
the
question
I
had
I,
know
you've
reached
out
our
chief
planner
to
many
municipalities
about
the
changes
than
bill
108
and
the
dramatic
lessening
of
local
planning
powers
that
a
MoU
take
a
position
publicly
on
bill.
108.
G
M
G
G
L
A
O
A
I
You
through
your
mountain
speaker
to
the
city
manager,
so
the
we
have
certain
powers
that
we
were
given
under
the
City
of
Toronto
act.
If
we
really
applied
or
got
a
full
membership
in
a
mall,
wouldn't
what
any
of
those
powers
that
we've
been
given
under
the
City
of
Toronto
act
be
threatened
or
undermined
through.
I
And
you
know
I'm
familiar
with
a
Mon
a
lot
of
the
work
that
they
do.
I
would
think
that
it
would
be
beneficial
to
have
the
City
of
Toronto
that
table
in
some
shape
or
manner.
I
can
think
of
Federation
of
Canadian
Municipalities
Ontario,
good
roads
association.
Where
there's
a
number
of
issues
that
happen
across
the
province.
We're
having
those
organizations
at
the
table,
benefits
of
small,
smaller
municipalities
and
I
would
think
that
a
mo
would
be
the
same
through.
L
The
speaker
I
understand
that
logic
and
I
don't
disagree
with
it.
What
I
can
tell
you
is
it's
not
as
if
we
don't
engage
with
a
moe
on
other
matters.
We
have
I
know
in
the
past,
for
example,
I
know
our
deputy
city
manager,
Tracy
did
discuss
with
them
issues
related
to
uber
I,
believe
we
were
in
contact
with
a
MoU
as
it
related
to
the
legalization
of
marijuana.
So
it's
not
like.
We
don't
engage
with
them
today.
I
L
I
think
that's
the
spirit
of
this
draw
that
we're
recommending
and
and
we'll
obviously,
report
back.
If
there's
any
downside
we'll
be
clear
on
that,
but
you
know
where
the
the
provincial
government
obviously
has
a
relationship
with
a
MoU
and
and
is
in
direct
conversation
with
emo
I
can
understand
the
logic
of
wanting
to
be
part
of
that
conversation
to
gather
more
information
doesn't
preclude
us
from
having
our
own
direct.
You
know
conversations
with
them,
but
just
another
avenue
to
partner
potentially
with
other
municipalities.
Okay,.
A
O
K
K
O
K
O
K
K
K
A
J
J
K
J
Right
I
recall
right,
Roger,
Anderson
and
others
coming
in
convincing
us
that
we
need
to
be
part
of
a
MoU.
Do
you
recall
that
where
you
you
weren't
here
that
time,
you
said?
Okay,
it's
great
I
was
here
to
the
city
manager,
mrs.
city
manager.
We
have
a
relationship
with
amo.
Now
it's
can
you
define
what
that
is
in
a
loose
relationships,
a
relationship
where
we're
able
to
collaborate
and
work
with
without
being
a
registered
member
spending?
A
hundred
in,
what's
one
hundred
thirty
thousand
a
year
correct,
so.
L
J
L
Don't
through
the
speaker,
I,
don't
see
it.
As
you
know,
where
a
meeting
takes
place,
it's
it's
an
entity
that
represents
municipalities
in
Ontario,
which
we
are
obviously
a
significant
part
of
that
that
that
political
fabric-
and
it
does
create
another
avenue
for
us
to
more
than
just
on
an
issue-by-issue
basis
to
be
able
to
throw
our
our
support
and
our
ability
to
move
items
that
are
important
to
municipalities,
to
move
them
forward
in
concert
with
them
in
partnerships
and
I.
J
L
L
The
speaker,
you're
right,
I,
think
there's
we
always
have
the
ability
to
state
our
views
independently
and
then
concur
where
we
want
to
concur
with
a
MoU
without
necessarily
having
to
join
them.
But
again
you
know
there
is
a
I
think
increasingly
what's
going
to
happen
with
municipalities
in
this
province.
Is
that
we're
gonna,
we're
gonna
have
to
find
ways
to
work
together,
formally
and
informally.
Right
and
I
see
this
as
not
withstanding
the
things
that
we
don't
want
to
lose.
J
You've
been
giving
that
authority
now,
but
I
mean
we
have
a
smaller
body,
smaller
member
number
of
council
and
so
on.
Who
would
take
on
this
additional
role
of
responsibilities?
Is
that
your
staff
and
the
resources
so
for
the
next
10
years,
we'll
be
paying
a
million
dollars
to
a
moe,
for
example,
because
or
a
million
plus
I
don't
see
the
benefit,
then.
A
R
Madam
Speaker,
madam
Speaker,
the
the
the
questions
that
were
asked
earlier
about
bill
108
about
public
health,
even
bill
107,
getting
Ontario
moving.
Of
course,
a
motor
positions,
just
as
when
something
affects
every
municipality
in
Canada
FCM
speaks
and
including
us
as
their
member.
They
they
also
speak
when
something
affects
every
municipality
and
provinces.
What
was
misunderstood,
I
took
from
their
remarks
after
I
spoke
at
executive,
because
I
spoke
first
as
a
non-member
from
the
members
that
they
had
completely
misheard.
R
R
There
are
times
when
this
is
just
about
us
in
our
municipality,
it's
not
about
every
municipality
of
Ontario
and
so
just
like
FCM,
just
like
FCM
that
we
enjoy
a
relationship
with
so
well
and
earn
from
it
and
benefit
from
it
just
like
FCM.
What
they
have
is
an
exercise.
They
go
through
every
year
to
decide
what
they
are
going
to
advocate
for
and
lobby
on
together,
and
they
decide
what's
up
to
you
what's
an
individual
thing.
They
decide
when
they
go
through
plenaries.
R
People
move
resolutions,
they're
really
just
about
them,
and
they
say
you
know
it's
not
really.
An
order
here
advocate
on
your
own
ministers
of
the
crown,
come
to
the
functions
and
set
up
sessions
where
you
can
come
one
by
one
and
have
your
one-on-one
conversations
for
remote
municipalities
who
aren't
going
to
go
up
the
hill,
because
it's
just
blocks
away.
R
They
have
those
moments,
they
also
have
webinars
and
seminars,
and
the
premier
and
the
ministers
whomever
is
in
office
at
the
time
have
on
have
ongoing
webinars
and
policy
conferences
and
really
guide
the
conversation
there
and
I
mean
really
guide
it
and
the
fact
that
we
are
not.
There
means
that
not
just
in
size
we're
without
peer
because
of
our
size,
but
we're
really
without
peer
in
Ontario
when
they
start
to
have
a
conversation
with
Minister,
Steve,
Clark
and
and
he's
selling
them
snake
oil
called
bill
108
and
we're
not
in
the
room.
R
We're
not
asking
questions.
We're
not
in
that
room.
Are
you
serious?
You
don't
want
to
be
in
that
room,
it's
possible
that
the
cost
sharing
of
public
health
conversation
started
there
in
some
room
and
we
weren't
there
to
say
wait.
A
second
wait,
a
second
we're
the
city
where
SARS
started
hold
on
a
second
we're,
not
in
that
room
for
very
little
money.
We
could
just
be
in
room
to
be
a
part
of
that
conversation.
We're
not
gonna
get
to
run
it
just
like
FCM
they'll.
R
Never
let
us
run
it,
but
probably
never
let
us
have
a
president,
but
we
ought
to
be
part
of
that
conversation
when
they're
in
that
room
selling,
snake
oil,
we
ought
to
be
there
to
say,
hold
up,
could
I
just
ask
a
few
questions
and
the
other
municipalities
in
Ontario
will
hear
our
question.
Think
hey
wait
now,
I
have
a
question
hold
up
Minister
Clark!
That's
what
I'm
asking
that
we
begin
to
do.
I
think
membership
would
be
a
less
insulting
way
to
do
it.
I
honestly,
do
I
think
that's
where
they
start
to
say.
S
Speaker
I
stand
in
support
of
councilor
Carol's
initiative
and,
while
councillor
Carol
just
said
that
she
would
support
membership,
I
just
want
to
make
it
very
clear
what
I
read
in
the
motion,
it's
just
as
important
as
what
it
isn't
as
what
it
is.
What
it
isn't
is
a
formal
request
at
this
point
to
become
a
member.
S
You
know
with
respect
to
whose
voice
is
is
spoken
for
and
who
who
speaks
for
Toronto
just
because
we
would
have
some
sort
of
whether
it
be
membership
or
some
sort
of
formal
Association
doesn't
mean
that
when
we
have
something
to
say
about
Toronto
and
for
Toronto
that
we
can't
speak
for
Toronto,
we
don't
need
to
be
led
by
anybody.
We
can
lead
in
fact,
and
sometimes
we
can
speak
on
our
own
without
having
any
concert
with
anyone
else
with
respect
to
fees
we
haven't.
Even
mr.
S
Murray
hasn't
even
had
a
discussion
with
them,
never
mind
discussing
fees,
so
he
would
come
back
to
us
and
if
there's
a
fee,
we
can
debate
that.
But
you
know
it's
jumping
the
gun
to
even
suggest
that
we
were
agreeing
to
pay
anything,
and
if
we
do
want
to
pay
anything,
perhaps
it
would
be
a
good
investment.
But
that's
the
next
debate
and
that's
the
next
discussion
based
on
what
what
the
city
manager
would
recommend
coming
out
of
those
discussions.
S
Nonetheless,
you
know
well
and
we've
all
voted
in
support
of
this-
that
I
support
moving
forward,
not
only
with
the
powers
that
we
have
under
the
City
of
Toronto
act.
I
believe
that
we
should
have
a
city
charter,
I
believe
the
Toronto
is
unique
and
I
believe
Toronto
is
exceptional.
We
we
are
in
and
we
you
know
we
are.
S
We
need
them
and
in
fact,
I
would
submit
to
you
that,
at
a
time
where
we
have
a
premier
and
a
government
that
has
a
political
ideology
that
may
reflect
writings
and
areas
of
Ontario
that
their
voices
may
speak
louder
than
ours.
Given
Toronto's
relationship
with
premier
Ford,
we
need
them,
perhaps
sometimes
even
more
than
they
need
us
and
then
sometimes
our
voice
will
be
there
to
support
their
needs
if
they
feel
under
attack
or
when
we
need
to
speak
in
unison.
S
There
are
times
when
we
need
them
to
speak
up
for
us
and
I've
seen
that
already
happen
and
I'd
like
to
be
there
for
them
too.
Last
point
I'll
make
I've
had
experience,
it's
not
so
much
in
Canada,
but
in
the
United
States,
where
I've
been
invited
to
meetings
with
other
municipalities.
Members
of
council
and
I
see
it
as
like.
S
So
I
just
want
to
thank
councillor
Carroll
for
bringing
this
initiative
to
our
attention
and
at
the
very
least-
and
this
is
just
gonna
reiterate
this-
the
ass
today
is
to
allow
mr.
Murray
to
go
and
talk
with
them
and
have
a
conversation
about
where
we
could
go
together
and
then
he
will
come
back
to
us
and
then
we
can
decide
whether
or
not
we
think
that's
reasonable,
so
I
hope
you'll
support.
What
councillor
Carroll
is
asking
us
today.
N
You,
madam
Speaker
I'm,
not
in
support
of
going
down
this
road
I've
been
here
before,
and
my
former
time
at
Council
I
was
a
member
of
a
MOU
and
believe
me.
It's
such
a
hostile
environment
there
that
you
know
you
are
Toronto.
You
know
everything.
It
was
really
difficult.
I
mean
the
only
person
who
kept
me
involved
with
that
was
councillor
Moscow.
N
You
know
if
it
hadn't
have
been
for
the
city
of
Toronto
councillor,
Joe,
Krusty's
leadership
and
Mayor
Tory's
leadership
on
the
public
health
cuts.
We
saved
the
whole
province.
You
know
they
organized
the
counter-attack.
Against
that
cut,
it
wasn't
a
mo,
they
were
yeah.
Did
they
issue
a
statement?
I
know?
N
N
What
do
you
represent
hundred
twenty
thousand
people?
So
what
do
we
get?
One
vote
for
all
of
us?
We
should
have
maybe
25
votes
and
it
would
they
give
us
that
know.
You'll
be
the
same
as
Canora
or
Brockville.
You
know
or
sue
look
out
so
yeah.
So
therefore,
there's
no
appreciation
of
the
fact:
we've
got
2.7
million
people
here,
so
maybe
they
should
give
a
vote
on
mo
to
each
one
of
us
based
on
2.9
million
counts.
Prusa
said
so.
N
You
know
it
is
not
I
think
to
our
advantage
in
representing
our
citizens
to
be
part
of
an
organization
that
traditionally
has
not
really
appreciated
the
challenges
we
have
in
Toronto
and
have
had
in
Toronto.
I
know,
they've
been
very
dismissive
of
what
we've
gone
through
over
the
years.
Maybe
they've
changed
recently,
but,
as
I
said
in
the
recent
attacks
we
108
I
didn't
see
them
or
hear
them
very
loud.
N
They
were
whispering
maybe
to
certain
councillors,
but
they
weren't
speaking
up
and
standing
up
for
what
was
happening
and
108
they're
the
same
with
the
public
health
cuts.
Where
was
a
Milan
that
I
certainly
didn't,
hear
them
or
see,
and
maybe
I
missed
it?
Maybe
they
talked
to
individual
councillors.
Certainly
we
didn't
I
didn't
hear
from
them
or
see
them
visibly
stand
up
and
be
counted
when
there
was
a
time
be
counted
so
I
I.
Don't
support
going
down
this
path?
We
don't
need
to
be
part
of
amyl.
O
Thank
you,
madam
Deputy
Speaker
I,
guess
that
the
schools
of
thought
that
are
in
the
chamber
today,
I
would
lean
more
towards
counselor
call.
I
just
wanted
to
remind
councilors
of
various
situations
over
the
last
few
years
in
which
the
municipalities
outside
of
Toronto
were
no
friend
of
ours.
You
may
recall,
during
the
casino
debate
where
we
had
negotiated
a
hundred
million
dollar
hosting
fee
for
major
casino
in
the
City
of
Toronto.
O
Well,
once
the
mayors
of
Ottawa
Niagara
a
Windsor
caught
wind
of
that
they
went
berserk
saying
they
were
mistreated,
they
were,
they
were,
they
were
marginalized
and
they
went
to
the
premier
and
then
we
will.
The
premier
had
to
make
a
statement
in
which
our
hundred
million
dollar
hosting
fee
then
got
cut
250
million
dollars
in
the
course
the
whole
thing
sorry
20
I
stand
corrected.
20
from
there.
I
should
also
remind
councillors
that
when
this
council
supported
road
tolls
on
the
Don
Valley
Parkway,
yes,.
A
O
The
gardener
to
pay
for
transit
and
and
and
much
of
that
money
would
have
gone
to
extending
the
line
up
to
up
until
on
the
905
went
into
a
lather,
about
Toronto
and
and
and
our
nerve
of
charging
charging.
This
money
was
starting
off
as
a
$2
Road
tool.
Well,
I
can
tell
you
I've,
driven
to
New
York
enough
times
to
know
that
to
get
over
the
George
Washington
Bridge
is
15
us
and
to
get
over
a
smaller
bridge.
O
Other
the
Robert
Kennedy
bridge
before
that
is
850,
and
here
the
905
money
dedicated
to
transit,
to
bring
them
into
Toronto
easier
was
fought.
You
may
also
call
recall
more
recently
when,
when
we
were
looking
at
the
Eglinton
West
LRT
that
was
going
to
go
out
to
Pearson,
there
was
a
staff
report
which
recommended
that
the
City
of
Mississauga
contribute
about
six
million
dollars
to
that
project.
Well,
the
firestorm
that
that
happened
in
Mississauga,
City
Council,
how
dare
Toronto
assumed
we're
gonna
pay,
we're
never
gonna
pay
for
this.
O
How
dare
they
try
and
dictate
to
us?
What's
going
on?
Need
I
go
into
the
TRC
a
where
the
City
of
Toronto
is
the
major
contributor.
Yet
we
get
a
very
little
voice
at
that
body.
We
don't
get
the
we
don't
get
the
positions
of
authority,
the
chair
and
so
forth,
and
we
have
in
the
past
I'm
not
gonna,
say
we
never
got
it,
but
basically
we're
the
biggest
contributor
and
we
get
the
least
out
of
it.
O
Go
Transit
we
are
the
biggest
contributor
to
the
operational
cost
of
GO
Transit,
yet
the
residents
of
Toronto
rarely
take
GO
Transit,
because
it's
really
for
regional
transit
of
people
coming
in
and
out
of
of
Toronto
I
think
this
is
going
to
be
another
organization
in
which
we
pay
the
lion's
share.
We
pay
big
fees,
we
commit
the
time
the
value
time
of
a
shrunken
council
and
that,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
we'll
get
we'll
get
very
little
out
of
it.
Now.
O
That
being
said,
the
motions
before
us
do
not
look
us
to
vote
formally
to
to
join
the
organization,
we're
all
only
directing
the
city
manager
to
come
back
and
look
at
a
more
formal
participation
and
to
continue
to
look
for
opportunities
with
the
City
of
Toronto.
Canton
can
work
with
mo
to
to
collaborate
on
Barry
issues.
O
F
You
speaker,
I've
learned
a
quite
a
number
of
things
in
this
debate,
probably
most
importantly,
that
if
we
do
join
a
MoU
I'm,
not
sending
councillor
Cole,
but
the
reason
why
we
wouldn't
send
councillor
Cole
I
think
is
kind
of
important
councillor.
Cole
talked
about
how
the
city
of
Toronto
stopped.
These
cuts
from
province
wide
complete
revisionism.
Complete
revisionism
asked
councillor
cressie
when
we
got
the
news
about
the
cuts
to
public
health,
who
were
the
first
calls
to
it
was
to
alpha
the
association
of
public
health
units.
What
did
the
medical
officer
help?
F
Do
she
called
all
the
other
medical
officers
of
health
when
we
were
faced
with
the
larger
budget
cut
problem,
and
we
were
faced
similarly
with
the
attack
on
our
planning?
What
tipped
the
balance
well?
Some
of
it
is
all
the
doors
that
the
mayor
knocked
on,
but
I
think
that
actually
having
Lum
killed
a
large
urban
mayor's
caucus
of
Ontario
step
forward
was
actually
the
straw
that
broke
the
camel's
back,
we're
in
an
era
where
the
hierarchical
relationships
between
government
no
longer
work
to
our
benefit.
In
fact,
they
work
quite
to
our
disk
benefit.
The.
F
If
you
watch
the
trend
over
a
generation,
the
infrastructure
spending
which
used
to
be
prevented
primarily
federal
and
provincial,
is
now
primarily
on
the
property
tax
base.
The
interests
of
municipalities
have
been
swamped,
not
just
by
this
most
recent
government,
but
by
a
series
of
federal
and
provincial
governments,
downloading
costs
and
programs
and
responsibilities
and
duties
onto
municipalities
where
we
have
been
successful
in
these
last
six
months
are
not
those
vertical
relationships,
but
the
horizontal
relationships.
F
Until
we
have
access
to
those
broader
taxation
powers,
we
can't
carry
the
load
of
responsibilities
that
they're
dumping
on
us
and
we're
not
going
to
get
either
of
those
solutions,
broader
taxation
powers
or
uploading.
Instead
of
downloading.
Without
those
horizontal
relationships
across
municipalities
all
over
Ontario,
it
is
absolutely
essential
that
if
we
plan
to
be
able
to
meet
our
ambitious
targets
for
a
public
transit
or
have
real
control
over
planning
or
even
talk
about
being
a
charter,
City
we're
going
to
have
to
behave
differently
than
we
have
in
the
last
bunch
of
years.
F
Councillor
Pasternak
gave
a
very
compelling
and
persuasive
list
of
a
number
of
times
in
the
last
five
or
ten
years,
where
other
municipalities
have
not
had
our
back
well
small
surprised,
we
haven't
been
talking
to
them.
We
haven't
been
building
the
relationships
we
haven't
been
building
the
case.
We
haven't
been
pointing
out
that
when
we
win
the
fight
about
the
relationship
between
the
provincial
and
municipal
governments
in
the
province
of
Ontario,
everybody
benefits.
P
I,
thank
you,
madam.
As
the
first
term
Council
on
this
council
I've
heard
a
lot
of
the
history
about
this
whole
thing
and
and
I
just
wanted
to
share
with
you.
My
personal
story
about
from
my
previous
life.
I
belong
to
an
association
that
have
a
tripartite
agreement
that
if
you
belong
to
the
city
Association,
then
you
automatically
have
to
join
the
provincial
arm,
and
then
you
automatically
have
to
be
in
the
federal
arm,
which
is
represented
federally
and
I.
I.
P
Don't
think
that
will
be
a
good
idea
to
there's
not
in
the
value
for
the
money
that
especially
I
heard,
that
is
131
thousand
dollars.
It's
not
really
worth
being
sitting
there,
because
you
know
a
lot
of
times.
The
issues
of
Toronto
is
different
from
the
issues
of
different
parts
of
the
of
the
province
and
especially
I
tend
to
agree.
P
My
colleagues
here,
past
counselor
passed
net
and
councillor
Cole,
saying
that
what
they,
what
have
they
done,
we'll
have
a
mo
done
on
bill
108
or
the
provincial
health
cut
and
I
think
we've
done
our
own
job
and
I.
Don't
think.
There's
really
value
for
the
money,
especially
at
a
time
that
we
have
to
have
efficiencies
in
the
in
our
budget.
I,
don't
think
it's
money
well
spent,
so
I
would
be
I.
P
D
Guess,
to
some
degree,
I
could
be
of
two
minds
on
that
on
this
issue.
I
I
liked
councillor
Cole's
position,
for
example,
like
I,
said
here
and
I-
listened
that
I
and
I
thought:
oh
wow
yeah.
That's
that
rings
true,
but
I,
remember
I,
I,
remember
the
the
mayor
of
what
was
that
city
again:
oh
that's
right
and
marveled.
That
was
her
name.
D
Yes,
yes,
I,
remember,
I,
remember,
I,
remember
my
time
at
the
at
the
province,
we
were
in
the
middle
of
a
recession
and
and
they
were
having
all
kinds
of
issues
you
know
we
need
to
eliminate
red
tape.
We
need
to
get
development
going,
we
need
to
create
jobs,
we
need
better
transit
integration,
you
know
across
the
region
and
the
rest
of
it
and
the
minister
at
the
time
of
the
time
at
the
time
set
up
this.
C
D
The
the
point
is
that
it's
true
that
outside
of
Toronto
people
love
to
hate
tronto,
they
do
I,
can't
imagine
them
watching
that
parade
yesterday
and
Nathan
Phillips,
Square,
full
of
people
and
and
and
basically
reaffirming
why
it
is
that
they
live
in
wah-wah,
right
and
and
and
and
all
those
people
down
there
look
at
them
all
right,
so
you
can't
imagine
for
sure.
But
but
the
important
thing
is
that
you
need
they're,
not
gonna
hate
you
any
less.
If
you're
not
talking
to
them
all
right.
D
Well,
that's
something!
Now
we
have
in
common
with
the
rest
of
the
the
cities
across
across
the
province.
We
have.
We
have
some
people
who,
just
you,
love
to
knock
us
around
a
bit
and
but
I
think
it's
what
I
learned
from
those
round
table
conversations
with
those
folks
is
that,
even
though
you
may
not
agree
often,
and
even
though
you
may,
your
disagreements
will
continue.
D
What's
important
is
to
be
there
to
be
able
to
share
information
because
the
because
that
went
a
long
way
to
you
know
further
in
our
relationship
and
at
the
end
of
the
day
we
sat
on
a
course
where
we
worked
out
a
number
of
issues.
You
know
buses,
then
weren't,
stopping
500
meters,
north
of
steals
from
the
region,
dropping
their
people
off
and
they'd
have
to
walk
out
four
kilometer
to
the
city,
town
line
and
TTC
buses,
weren't
stopping
any
more
five
hundred
meters,
south
of
steals.
D
J
Thank
you
very
much
speaker,
Speaker
I
rise
to
speak
on
this
issue
and
let
me
first
of
all
be
very
clear.
You
know
I'd
like
to
move
the
motions
that
are
here
because
that's
pretty
clear
what
we
need
to
do.
My
issue
is
that
this
notion
of
a
membership,
a
full
membership
with
with
a
MoU
I,
have
nothing
to
gain
say
no.
In
fact,
I
have
nothing
against
any
of
the
municipalities
across
this
country.
K
J
Okay,
okay,
Thank
You,
speaker
I'm,
actually
not
against
a
mo
I,
think
that
a
mo
for
what
they
do
for
their
members.
It's
fantastic
having
been
around
here
for
some
time
when
Roger,
Anderson
and
others
came
in
to
tell
us
at
the
executive
committee
that
Toronto
needed
to
ensure
that
they
were
part
of
a
MoU
because
they
were
going
to
speak
for
us.
I
was
offended
then,
and
I'm
offended
to
this
day.
Quite
frankly,
I
have
a
mayor.
We
have
a
mayor
who
speaks
for
us.
J
As
a
member
of
council,
we
have
a
City
of
Toronto
that
over
the
last
15
years,
we've
saved
a
1
million
nine
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars
by
not
being
an
mo.
We
in
fact
can
use
that
we've
used
supportive
housing
daycare
spots,
fixing
potholes.
Oh
maybe
we
should
use
that
to
put
some
new
hubs
in
place,
and
so
because
these
are
resources
that
we
can
fully
expend.
J
I.
Think
that
the
report
that
we
have
in
front
of
us
had
asked
for
a
opportunity
to
talk
and
figure
out
how
we
can
work
with
them.
I
think
that's
fine,
but
to
become
a
full-fledged
member.
I,
don't
think
that's
a
good
thing,
quite
frankly,
I
believe
that
we
can
go
on
our
own
I
think
that
councillor
Pasternak
made
the
arguments
and
there
were
solid
arguments
quite
frankly,
because
when
we
had
an
opportunity
to
be
a
member
of
a
mall,
they
actually
didn't
have
her
back.
J
And
so
that's
why
we
laugh,
and
so
the
points
that
you've
made
about
the
casino,
a
negotiation,
100
million
dollars
and
the
other
mayor's
from
across
the
region
said
no.
They
didn't
want
Toronto
to
have
that.
It's
been
made
mention
here
speaker
about
this
notion
that
you
know
the
conversation
with
medical
officers
of
health
across
the
municipality.
Clearly
without
being
members
of
a
MoU,
we
work
with
them
and
we
got
good
results.
J
So
I'm
not
quite
sure
what
would
really
change
if
we
were
to
expend
a
hundred
and
thirty
thousand
dollars
to
become
a
member
of
this
organization
that
we've
worked
with.
In
fact,
I
recall
in
2004
we
talk
with
staff,
we've
done
a
lot
of
work
and
I
think
we
continue
to
do
work
to
help
a
mo
in
areas
where
they
actually
are
not.
They
do
not
have
some
of
the
skill
sets,
and
so
we
do
that
today
and
I
think
that
should
continue
in
terms
of
that
relationship.
J
So
I
don't
really
see
the
benefits
and
I
know
that
a
MoU
comes
to
FCM
and
facilitates
us
through
the
interior
caucus
with
information
and
by
the
way
speaker,
we
actually
had
a
member
of
Toronto
City
Council,
who
was
actually
the
president
of
FCM.
His
name
was
Jack
Layton,
and
so
we've
actually
had
that
so
I
think
it's
been
said
here
that
Toronto
hasn't
actually
had
that
particular
position.
J
We
have
we've
actually
had
that
and
so
speaker
it
isn't
that
I'm
against
a
MoU,
it's
just
and
I,
can
see
the
realize
benefits
in
terms
of
our
full-fledged
members.
But
in
our
association
we
have
a
population
going
on
2.9
million
people
when
Steve,
Clarke
and
others,
and
so
on,
want
to
speak
to
Toronto.
They
can
call
the
mayor
and
his
staff
can
call
the
city
manager
to
have
discussions
about
things
that
the
province
want
to
implement.
J
Obviously,
we
know
that
some
of
those
discussions
have
not
really
taken
place
and
that's
what
we're
trying
to
reset
but
press
that
reset
button
to
make
some
changes.
So
we
can
actually
have
dialogue
with
the
province
to
address
some
of
the
fundamental
things
that
we
need
to
do,
but
I
don't
believe
that
a
membership
for
this
city
of
Toronto
in
a
moe
so
that
someone
else
can
speak
for
us
and
when
we
talk
about
some
of
the
perhaps
things
that
other
municipalities
may
have
as
their
you
know,
specific
criteria
that
helps
their
communities.
J
While
we
may
have
similar,
it
is
quite
the
same,
and
it's
quite
distant.
This
similar
in
terms
of
Toronto's
propensity
in
terms
of
our
size
I,
think
that
we
have
an
opportunity
to
continue
government-to-government
relationship
with
the
province.
I
mean
I'd
love
to
have
it
fully
with
the
federal
government
as
well.
We
don't
but
I,
don't
believe
that
we
need
other
sort
of
this
relationship
with
mo2
to
advance
our
interests.
We
can
do
that
quite
well.
We
do
it
quite
well
now,
I,
don't
want
to
encourage
us
to
continue,
but
I
think
time.
J
A
O
A
I
F
You
have
questions
for
the
clerk,
or
maybe
someone
else
can
take
this
as
I
understand
it.
What's
in
front
of
us
is
a
request
from
T
alive
to
be
able
to
have
meetings
where
people
face
time
in
or
call
in
or
just
aren't
physically
present,
but
are
rather
present
through
some
electronic
means
is
that
correct.
F
F
O
F
H
This
is
a
decision-making
body,
that's
appointed
by
counsel
and
really
stands
instead
of
counsel.
So
it's
important
that
it
has
the
same
ability
for
the
public
to
hear
and
see
the
decisions
that
are
being
made
and
and
the
discussion
around
those
decisions,
as
any
other
council
meeting
or
other
meeting
of
a
body
appointed
by
counsel.
So.
F
F
F
They
can
know
that
you
know
we're
not
having
a
secondary
conversation
offline
outside
the
room
by
a
second
cellphone
or
some
there
means,
in
other
words,
the
stuff
of
democracy,
happens
in
front
of
human
eyes
in
a
room,
and
you
know
as
exciting
as
new
technology
often
is
to
all
of
us.
We
have
to
remember
that
that
foundational
rock
that
foundational
rock
legitimizes
the
work
we
do
now
I
know
there
aren't
that
many
people
here,
hello,
mister
ahi,
but
nevertheless
somebody
can
somebody
can
phone
up,
Jonathan
and
say
hey?
Were
they
passing
secret
notes?
F
Did
they
you
know
all
run
behind
just
before
they
voted
and
agree
on
what
they
were.
Gonna
do
and
Jonathan
can
say
to
them.
No
I
was
watching.
They
were
all
in
the
room.
They
all
knew.
What
that,
like,
it's
transparent,
your
government
served
you
that
day,
I
think
they
made
the
wrong
decision,
but
nevertheless,
I
was
able
to
observe
how
they
did
it
and
without
that
foundational
rock
Weah
road.
F
Further,
the
already
very
precarious
trust
that
people
have
in
government
from
time
to
time
people
say
to
me:
well,
you
know
why
don't
you
run
for
some
other
different
level
of
government,
different
order
of
government,
the
federal
or
provincial
one
and
I
always
tell
them.
My
answer
is
always
no,
although
it's
unlikely
I
would
ever
be
in
a
cabinet,
I
would
never
serve
in
a
government
where
decisions
were
made
behind
closed
doors.
I
would
never
serve
in
such
a
government
I
think
it's
fundamentally
an
undemocratic
this
forum.
The
way
we
operate.
F
A
convenience
argument
troubles
me
deeply
now
remember
in
addition,
that
if
you
want
to
serve
on
one
of
the
Corporations
or
boards
or
agencies
that
the
City
of
Toronto
has
we
have
civic
appointments
process
and
many
times
more
people
apply
to
be
on
those
boat,
then
actually
get
to
serve.
Many
many
Torontonians
are
eager
to
serve
this
city
to
volunteer
their
time
to
serve
on
a
board
or
agency.
If
we
added
a
simple
question
to
the
application
process,
would
you
be
willing
to
attend
meetings
in
person?
F
F
So
I
put
it
to
you.
Why
shouldn't
we
simply
tell
people
if
you
want
to
serve
the
public
in
this
form
of
government?
One
of
the
things
we
require
of
you
is
that
you
make
the
meeting
you
actually
show
up
and
you
let
people
see
you
do
the
work.
That's
why
I
encourage
you
all
to
receive
this
request.
I
think
that
it
would
be
unhealthy
and
I
think
once
it
happens
here,
there's
going
to
be
an
avalanche
of
requests
and
democracy
will
take
a
hit
here
in
the
City
of
Toronto.
B
We
do
phonons
phone-in
for
committees
and
we
phone
in
for
the
board,
which
I
also
find
a
little
difficult,
not
to
have
everybody
in
the
same
room,
but
that's
the
operation
there
and
then
realize
that
the
true
TRC,
a
which
used
to
allow
phonons
no
longer
allows
phonons.
That's
not
a
model
that
is
supported
and
apparently
it's
in
the
Articles
somewhere
of
operation
that
they
changed
it.
B
So
you
have
to
be
there
in
person
in
order
to
deliberate
and
I
did
think
about
this
committee,
which
is
this
tÃo
life
and
in
the
past
it
had
not
been
a
clerked
committee
prior
to
all
the
troubles
and
putting
the
three
Civic
theatres
together.
It
had
just
been
a
board
and
I
think
that
was
allowed
to
phone
in
at
that
point.
But
the
fact
that
it's
actually
a
clerked
committee,
it's
an
official,
the
clerk
is
there
another
secretary
is
there
all
of
the
business
is
done
in
that
way.
I
You
madam
chair
I,
was
at
the
meeting
when
we
had
this
discussion
at
tea
alive
and
and
I
think
the
board
gets
it.
Democracy
is
not
in
jeopardy
here.
Thank
you,
I'm,
a
councillor
perks
for
that.
What
this
board
wants
to
do.
First
of
all,
they
recognize
the
rules
that
we
are
under.
They
recognize
that
if
they're
doing
gonna
be
somewhere
else
and
they're
they're
phoning
in
or
they're
on,
video
that
they
can't
vote,
they
recognize
that
in
private
they
can't
participate.
I
think
really.
I
What
they
were
doing
is
saying
that
at
some
point
in
the
future
that
when
we
look
at
technology
and
we
decide
that
it
can
work
and
where
we
can
potentially
have
that
that
they
would
maybe
be
in
position
for
that.
This
wasn't
a
big
debate
there.
This
was
not.
You
know
something
that
they
were
absolutely
saying
they
want
to
have.
It
was
just
one
of
these.
You
know
it
would
make
it
easier.
A
lot
of
these
people
are
in
the
entertainment
industry.
They
do
travel.
I
I
I
You
madam
Speaker
I've,
grappled
with
this
decision
before
and
a
board
that
I
participated
on
and
I'm
going
to
take
the
same
view
as
councillor
Fletcher
and
councillor
perks.
I
have
some
concerns
about
where
this
will
lead
if
we
begin
to
open
this
box
up
further
and
for
that
reason,
I
will
be
supporting
the
motion
to
receive
the
report.
Thank
you.
Q
Of
grappling,
madam
Speaker,
with
whether
to
speak
or
nod
and
I
just
because
I
would
offer
a
slightly
different
reason.
I
mean
I,
wouldn't
feel
right
if
I
didn't
put
it
forward,
I
think
on
most
of
the
Corporations
on
whose
boards
I
served
before
I
came
to
public
life,
they
permitted
telephone
board
meetings
and
they
permitted
them
for
emergency,
sir.
They
were
meant
to
be
for
emergency
circumstances
where,
for
example,
there'd
be
a
transaction
that
was
just
getting
finalized.
Q
You
needed
to
have
a
relatively
quick
board
meeting,
just
to
say
yes
to
something
that
had
been
thoroughly
presented
at
a
prior
meeting,
so
it
was.
It
was
nonsensical
not
to
have
the
ability
to
have
that
kind
of
an
urgent
meeting,
especially
when
you
had
directors
who
were
coming
in
in
those
cases
from
across
the
country,
even
from
across
the
continent.
I
I
was,
and
I
quietly
just
said
to
councillor
Crawford,
because
I
so
much
respect
the
work
that
is
being
done
by
all
these
boards,
including
by
the
TOI
board.
Q
Think
we
as
politicians
I'll
include
myself,
because
I
am
one
are
inclined
when
we
have
these
board
meetings
and
sit
on
these
boards
to
help
these
people
more
than
they
need
help
to
do
their
job.
I've
often
said
you
know,
when
I
was
in
business
and
I,
don't
think
it's
it's
any
different
in
public
life
that,
if
you
don't
like
the
job
management,
is
doing
don't
do
their
job
for
them.
Q
They
do
and
again
I
understand
the
concept
of
public
service
very
well,
but
we
end
up
having
more
of
these
board
meetings
and
I
think
that
if
we
actually
said
to
people,
look
we're
gonna
have
a
reasonable
number
of
armies
mean
to
a
year.
It
means
you
have
less
than
sort
of
one
a
month,
which
is
what
often
times
these
boards
do.
Let
the
management
run.
The
company
got
good
management,
had
the
board
service
role,
which
is
as
an
oversight
body
and
not
as
a
ball.
Q
The
body
that's
supposed
to
be
getting
into
the
operations
up
to
their
elbows.
We
wouldn't
have
people,
then
saying
I
need
to
use
the
phone,
because
I
think
if
you're
on
these
boards.
Quite
frankly,
you
have
a
pretty
strong
obligation
to
show
up
I
used
to
say
that
actually
I
thought
that
directors
on
private
sector
companies
not
was
saying
that
there
are
quite
big
liabilities
involved
there.
Q
As
there
are
I
guess
in
the
public
sector,
all
they
had
to
do
was
two
things:
one
read
the
material
and
to
show
up,
and
if
you
remove
the
showing
up
part,
you
know
so
that
they
just
have
to
read
the
materials
I,
just
think
that
it
is
not
sort
of
commensurate
with
the
sort
of
degree
of
I'll
call
it.
Prestige
I
think
it's
prestigious
to
be
on
the
board
of
tio
live
or
to
be
on
the
board
of
any
of
these
different
organizations
that
we
oversee
and
I
hope.
Q
You're
gonna
get
the
very
best
people
to
apply
and
I
think.
As
someone
said
a
moment
or
two
ago,
if
they
apply,
then
they
should
understand
that
they're
going
to
have
to
come
to
a
certain
number
of
board
meetings
and
I.
Think
if
they're
discouraged
from
that
because
they
like
to
they
travel
and
business
for
example,
then
we
should
probably
look
at
whether
we're
having
too
many
board
meetings
as
opposed
to
looking
at
the
possibility
of
people
phoning
it
in
so
I
will
vote
with
councilor
perks
to
receive
this.
Q
F
A
F
R
So
that
I
asked
the
question,
because
the
the
flight
path
or
is
we're
talking
about
actually
makes
its
way
to
my
ward.
But
it's
it's
an
issue
that
has
that
has
been
confounding
counsel.
Since
councillor
Matt
Lowe
first
became
a
counselor.
I
was
about
the
time
they
changed
the
flight
path
so
that
they
really
spend
a
lot
of
time
in
that
in
the
heart
of
the
city.
R
A
R
Answer
to
the
question
than
way
yeah
would
it
be
helpful
if
what
we
had
because
we
seem
to
keep,
we
seem
to
keep
moving
motions.
Then
we
make
then
we
make
small
adjustments
and
then
it's
the
problem.
Just
crops
up
somewhere
else
is
there.
Is
there
already
a
place
where
we
could
have
a
regular
check
in
with
the
GTAA
or
or
is
that
the
motion?
We
need
to
move
that
we
find
a
solution,
but
then
we
continue
to
meet
so
that
if
the
solution
just
causes
a
problem
somewhere
else,
we
can
continue
to
adapt
right.
T
In
terms
of
official
channels,
there's
always
the
local
councillors,
especially
around
the
airport,
sit
on
a
number
of
advisory
committees.
Also,
the
GTA
comes
in
to
the
economic
and
Community
Development
Committee
every
year
they
were
at
the
last
meeting
and
gave
a
presentation,
and
they
usually
address
some
of
the
noise
issues
and
the
working
groups
that
they
have
around
those
noise
issues,
but
in
terms
of
a
detailed
discussion
on
napkins
routes,
planning
and
changes.
As
far
as
I
know,
the
city's,
never
any
official
conversation
with
navcon
about
it.
So.
R
T
R
You
for
for
coming
to
the
floor
cuz,
madam
Speaker.
The
next
thing
I
was
going
to
ask
is:
if
I
could
ask
a
question
having
to
do
with
economic
development.
We
have
the
concern.
I
get
the
name
of
the
motion
tonight
and
I
feel
for
my
residents
I'm
in
the
same
flight
path
as
them.
Even
though
I
live
a
little
south
of
my
ward,
so
I
actually
feel
it,
but
we
also
have
an
economic
imperative.
Don't
we
to
be
a
crossroads
for
air
travel
globally?
Our
goal
is
to
actually
have
a
busy
airport
at
Pearson.
T
So
I
mean
the
economic
impact
and
they
went
through
the
a
very
thorough
discussion
about
that
is
huge
one
of
the
largest,
if
not
the
largest
economic
impact,
probably
outside
of
the
financial
industry
here
in
Toronto,
in
terms
of
both
in
the
area.
Second
largest
employment
zone
from
the
city's
perspective
right
a
little
own
from
the
gtas
perspective,
those.
S
S
Could
the
city
manager
provide
an
undertaking,
given
that
those
motions
have
been
moved
and
approved
relentlessly
and
over
and
over
again
to
engage
NAV
can
and
the
federal
government
in
this
discussion
about
the
impacts
of
the
noise
that
are
created
by
the
flight
paths
and
and
and
and
and
the
the
air
noise
over
our
cities
and
our
neighborhoods
and
then
report
back
this
year
on
where
that
discussion
is
at
and
what
Toronto
can
do
to
advocate?
In
other
words,
can
you
follow
through
with
emotions
through.
L
So,
of
course,
through
the
speaker,
I
mean
it's:
it's
the
direction
that
you've
given
the
city
manager
I,
will
reflect
that
direction
to
the
parties
that
I'll
be
talking
to,
which
will
guide
our
conversation
and,
on
the
basis
of
that
I'm
sure
they'll
have
some
kind
of
response
and
I'll
report
back
on
that
response.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
O
Yes,
thank
you,
madam
Speaker,
through
you
to
staff
I,
to
receive
a
fair
volume
of
complaints
about
air
traffic
noise
and
it's,
it
seems
to
be
symbolic
of
major
change,
of
not
just
flight
paths,
but
elevation
is
that
something
is
that
something
you've
heard?
Are
they
coming
in
lower
over
a
longer
period
of
their
flight
time?
So.
T
Noise
is
a
function
obviously
of
location
above
you
and
the
and
the
steepness
of
the
decline
and
thus
and
the
slope
so
sometimes
they,
depending
upon
conditions
as
I,
understand,
I'm,
not
an
expert
on
this.
This
is
just
what
I've
been
told
is
on
takeoff,
especially
on
takeoffs,
how
steep
it
is
and
I'm
on
an
approach
how
shallow
it
is
over
a
long
period
of
time
and
those
those
rules
change
depending
upon
volume
of
flights
and
operational
necessities.
T
I
mean
one
of
the
problems
here
is
they've
got
to
get
into
the
airport
somewhere
and
now
that
the
area's
built-up
everywhere,
it's
always
going
to
be
over
a
built-up
area,
there's
no
way
of
coming
into
our
Airport
with
a
east-west
wind
pattern,
except
over
built-up
areas.
So
they
are
very
well
aware
of
it.
I
you
know,
but
in
the
conversations
I
I
just
came
back
from
London
England,
where
their
huge
debate
about
a
fourth
runway
and
a
third
runway,
east-west
runway
and
all
of
this
discussion
is
very
timely.
There.
O
Okay,
no
fair
enough
fair
enough:
the
complaints
were
getting
are
not
people
who
you
know
moved
to
the
airport
and
then
are
complaining
about
runway
noise.
These
are
these.
Are
people
who
have
been
living
in
the
area
for
decades
and
and
the
flights
never
bothered
them
at
all.
They
never
really
noticed
them,
they've,
never
really
heard
them,
and
and
and
things
things
have
changed
and
generally
speaking,
that
change
has
caused
this
problem.
Now
I've
mentioned
flight
paths.
O
I
T
O
T
O
T
T
O
O
C
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I
grass
in
it
for
a
moment
and
talk
about
these
reports
that
were
asked
for,
and
you
didn't
get
them
I
remember
back
in
2007
when
surely
how
I
killed
the
Waterfront
Toronto
reference
group,
she
promised
to
report
back
in
12
years
later,
I'm
still
waiting
in
fact
last
year
or
when
Peter
Wallace
was
it
was
the
city
manager.
I
asked
him
about
it
and
moved
to
motion
for
them
to
report
back
and
I'm
still
waiting
for
it,
so
I
feel
your
pain.
Councillor
mallow
for
not
getting
these
reports.
C
I'm
I
will
say:
I'm
I'm
glad
that
people
are
kind
of
this.
This
my
request
for
a
report
has
caught
the
imagination
of
council
I.
Think
we
do
need
one
and
I
think
we
need
ours,
because
I
think
that
the
GTA
have
their
own
interests
and
they're
trying
to
protect.
You
know
what
they're
doing
and
so
so
I
think
we
need
our
own
report.
Let
me
say
this:
I'm,
not
I'm,
not
you
know.
The
motion
was
structured
because
my
residents
and
Don
Mills
raised
these
concerns.
The
people
and
Don
Mills
are
not
of
nature.
C
Well,
actually,
some
of
them
are,
but
most
of
them
aren't
NIMBY
in
nature.
We're
prepared
to
absorb
our
fair
share
of
airplanes
flying
over
our
neighborhoods,
but
the
information
that's
been
presented
to
me.
Is
it
it's
disproportionate?
The
disproportionate
number
of
flights
are
coming
over
my
community
and
a
certain
number
of
communities
and
certain
other
communities
are
not
getting
their
fair
share,
so
so
I
think
their
issues
with
regard
to
the
the
the
flight
paths
and
I
think
there
are
also
issues
with
regard
to
the
height
of
the
planes.
I
take
what
mr.
C
C
I
am
looking
for
a
report
that
gives
us
an
unbiased
analysis
of
where
those
flights
are
coming
and
going
to
make
sure
that
no
one
community
or
communities
are
taking
a
significant
and
disproportionate
amount
of
airplane
traffic
over
their
neighborhoods
and
I'll
also
say
that
councilor
Holliday,
who
has
a
motion
that
he
then
I'm
supportive
of
this.
We
just
need
to
get
to
the
truth
and
then
I
think
that
we
can't
have
an
impact
on
influencing
Pearson
Airport.
C
If
we
speak
as
one
voice
and
if
counsel
says
that
we're
not
happy
with
it,
I,
don't
believe
and
I
stand
to
be
corrected,
but
I
don't
believe.
The
city
has
spoken
with
one
voice
on
this
particular
issue,
and
maybe
the
GTA
has
taken
advantage
of
this.
But
the
time
has
come
to
do
proper
research
and
speak
as
one
voice
on
what's
fair
for
the
residents
of
the
city.
I
The
mark-
la
nuit,
homeowners,
association,
I,
think
of
being
engaged
in
this
I.
This
particular
subject
matter
for
decades,
there's
a
new
group,
the
Community
Alliance
for
safety,
also
in
the
West
End.
That
has
a
lot
of
knowledge
in
the
history
and
some
of
the
changes
that
are
happening
in
and
around
the
airport
and
I
think
it
would
be
a
value
to
speak
to
those
groups
because
they
could
help
inform
the
report.
I
will
not
understate,
though
the
importance
of
the
airport
and
the
complexity
of
this
issue.
I
The
importance
of
the
airport
I
can
say
there
are
many
many
constituents
in
my
area
that
are
well
employed
because
of
the
airport
and
whose
businesses
rely
on
the
airport
and
whose
secondary
business
rely
on
the
airport.
So
it
is
an
important
economic
center
in
the
West
End
of
the
city
and
profoundly
affects
the
the
constituents
that
I
serve,
but
also
the
sound
that
comes
from
the
aircraft
and
the
operations
of
such
a
large
place
obviously
have
impacts
on
our
way
of
life
and
I.
I
A
R
Just
just
briefly,
madam
Speaker
I
just
wanted
to
give
a
little
bit
of
comfort
to
the
councillors
who
actually
are
from
the
West
End
and
closer
to
the
airport
and
and
and
think,
my
goodness,
we're
making
a
fuss.
But
I
just
want
to
say
this.
We're
we're.
This
did
become
an
issue
in
my
community
and
it
was
it
took
a
while
for
it
to
take
hold.
R
It
was
a
couple
of
days
a
couple
of
years,
I
should
say
after
the
flight
path
changed
in
2012,
there
was
a
very
concentrated
flight
path,
change
whereby
planes
coming
up
from
the
US
and
sometimes
in
Montreal.
They
literally
come
along
the
waterfront
fly
up
above
Yonge
Street
and
as
they
get
to
Midtown,
they
do
a
big
circle.
So
they're
going
they're
going
past
us
in
John
Mills
over
I
can
tell
you
they
get
as
far
as
birch
Mount
cuz,
my
father.
R
R
If
you
look
at
their
actual
map
that
they
keep
and
they
track
it,
it's
not
the
exact
same
spot,
they
widen
the
circle
and
then
they
bring
it
back
in
so
they're,
not
flying
over
the
same
house,
the
same
number
of
times
every
single
day,
and
that
seems
to
have
have
an
impact
and
I
appreciate
their
efforts.
In
doing
that,
the
other
thing
is:
they
have
been
very
responsive
to
my
community
in
terms
of
coming
up
and
actually
meeting
with
the
community.
R
You
may
or
may
not
have
noticed
them
in
the
corner
of
your
environment
days
Pearson.
Is
there
reminding
people
that
well,
we
know
it's
not
great,
to
have
a
spying
over
you
all
the
time,
we're
a
big
part
of
the
economy
that
employs
you
and
that's
a
great
message
to
be
sending
people
when
they're,
when
you're
dealing
with
the
most
community
minded
people
in
an
environment
day
that
happens
in
all
of
our
environment
days
and
so
I
think
it's
a
great
addition
to
them.
R
They
generally
get
high
traffic
at
their
at
their
booth,
and
it's
an
extra
information
point
at
which,
when
someone
complains,
they
can
tell
them
about
the
efforts
that
they
are
making.
If
people
will
find
that
out
in
the
in
the
form
of
a
report
and
if,
at
the
very
least,
that
report
reminds
people
how
frequently
they're
willing
to
come
out
and
how
you
go
about
organizing
a
community
meeting
and
that
they
will
come
out
and
do
it
that
will
go
a
long
way
if
we
add
to
that
a
check-in
on
a
regular
basis.
R
Maybe
it's
a
three
or
four
year
review
of
some
sort
with
napkin
so
that
they
know
that
we're
doing
all
we
can
to
mitigate
it,
but
guys
if
this
is
gonna,
be
the
number
two
Airport
in
North
America.
We
got
a.
We
got
to
have
a
partnership
that
works
together.
Then
I
think
we
can
be
number
two
and
then
stay
there.
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
Those
are
my
comments.
Thank
You.
G
Thank
you
very
much
for
them.
Speaker.
I,
won't
be
brief
on
this,
but
I
I
must
say:
I
sympathize
with
all
my
colleagues,
a
councillor
Carroll
and
Councilman
the
Wong
I
to
represent
a
ward.
That
means
actually
right
next
to
the
airport
and
actually
runway
23,
which
is
actually
the
largest
runway
in
the
country
which
brings
in
me
kind
of
heaviest
and
largest
planes
actually
comes
right
over
my
community
as
well,
and
I
just
want
you
that
this
is
actually
conversations.
G
I've
had
with
my
community
with
the
airport
on
a
number
of
different
occasions
and
and
myself
being
a
pilot,
I
I,
wouldn't
mind
just
putting
in
a
minute
my
two
cents
worth
on.
It
look
I
think
it's
a
very
complex
issue
when
we
are
talking
about
flight
paths,
because
there's
a
number
of
factors
that
determine
them
from
I.
Think
starting
off
is
the
different
airports
in
the
region
actually
affect
the
flight
paths,
because
you
know
Billy,
Bishop
Airport
has
their
own
flight
paths
into
the
city.
Ottawa
Airport
has
their
own
flight
paths.
G
Hamilton
has
their
flight
paths
so
Pearson,
being
the
largest
airport
in
the
country
is
navigating
all
men
as
well
as
we
can't
predict
certain
traffic
patterns
on
any
given
day,
because
a
wind
and
weather
and
visibility
and
and
almost
factors
that
kind
of
play
into
it,
and
especially
on
their
planes.
You
have
to
get
more
space
for
their
plane,
so
they
go.
Why
they're
in
kind
and
all
that
stuff,
so
I
think
you
know.
Needless
to
say,
I
I
understand
me
the
challenges
of
grappling
with
this
issue
and
and
I
sympathize.
G
G
But
how
many
conversations
on
this
is
I
believe
better
directed,
as
our
general
manager
said,
to
NAV
CANADA
and
to
the
federal
government,
because
they
fall
under
the
Ministry
of
Transportation,
so
I
think
any
change
really
is
driven
through
our
federal
colleagues
and
through
the
Ministry
of
Transportation.
So
that
is
what
I
would
submit.
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
Thank.
A
M
You,
madam
Speaker
I'll,
be
brief.
I'm
happy
to
hear
all
these
comments
are
really
pleased
because
I
don't
know
if
anybody
remembers
this
moment
two
terms
ago,
when
councillor
Matt,
Lo
and
I
moved
this
issue,
and
we
still
haven't
got
the
report
back,
but
there
was
a
paper
plane
created
and
flown
in
the
chamber
and
too
much
laughter,
so
I'm
happy
to
see.
There's
been
a
real
shift
over
the
years
in
the
thinking
and
and
the
impacts
are
greater
on
our
neighborhoods
than
ever
before.
I
worked
on
this
issue
before
I
was
a
city
councilor.
M
It
had
a
huge
impact
on
my
ward
and
they
the
flight
path
that
goes
over
Don
Mills
is
a
trombone
in
effect
heading
over
my
ward
and
then
into
the
da
mills
area.
So
we
always
wanted
to
get
t-shirts
that
said
low
and
loud,
and
people
are
just
getting
more
and
more
fed
up
with
this.
So
even
before
I
was
the
city
councillors.
I
did
City
Councilor
I
did
deputations
at
navcom
to
talk
to
them
about
the
concerns
from
our
neighborhoods,
so
I
really
hope
that.
M
M
A
A
A
A
J
A
M
To
ask
staff
a
couple
questions
on
this,
so
the
the
concept
here
is
to
review
I
understand
you're
moving
another
motion.
A
similar
motion
is
that
correct
similar
to
the
last
item.
Okay,
so
that's
what
I'll
ask
questions
about,
even
though
the
motion
hasn't
been
placed,
we
know
what
it
looks
like.
So
thank
you
for
that
councillor,
Thompson!
That's
what
I
just
said.
Yes,
thank
you.
So
my
question
is:
does
this
ultimately
change
the
funding
allotment
for
these
organizations
or
what
exactly
is
the
objective
here?
M
T
T
So
now,
with
changing
funding
to
province
and
the
federal
governments
now
with
a
much
bigger
basket
of
items
now
with
a
lot
more
history
for
the
Toronto
Arts
Council,
it's
timely
that
we
take
a
look
at
what
organization
should
be
in
the
same
basket
together
and
what
organizations
should
be
put
in
different
baskets.
So
it's.
M
T
M
And
so
I
guess
my
concern
is
the
a
lot
of
these
institutions
are
dependent
on
this
funding.
So
my
concern
is
to
be
brutally
honest,
is
altering
not
those
of
those
numbers,
because
a
lot
of
these
institutions
would
like
to
see
that
money
go
up
that
may
not
be
likely,
but
I
know
certainly
they'd
like
it
to
be
stabilized.
So
what?
What
is?
How
what?
How
may
not
be
impacted
through
this.
T
Well,
first
of
all,
we
will
embark
on
a
process,
that's
fully
inclusive
of
conversations
with
both
the
boards
and
senior
staffs
of
all
the
organisation.
Our
organization's
will
take
a
look
at
council
priorities
that
have
been
set.
Take
a
look
at
the
pattern.
I've
already
mentioned,
what's
happening
from
grants
by
other
orders
of
government
and
what
the
highest
priorities
are
for
the
city
and
whose
best
to
administer
and
make
those
recommendations
to
Council.
Okay,.
J
Wait
for
my
mic:
oh
there
we
are
South.
Speaker
I
have
a
similar
motion
that
I
as
I
had
for
EC
5.8,
and
you
heard
through
the
questions
that
councillor
Robinson
has
asked
the
general
manager
and
I
fully
agree
with
the
general
manager
and
the
discussions
we've
been
having
for
some
time.
There's
a
lot
of
pressure
actually
on
economic
development.
I
think
the
Jarrell
mentor
had,
for
example,
last
year,
a
motion
in
front
of
the
budget
committee
looking
for
funding,
for
example,
for
the
major
festivals
and
what
heavy
that
was
not
granted.
J
Nonetheless,
I
think
it's
important
for
us
to
be
able
to
review
any
organisations
that
we
provide
resources
to
to
ensure
that
those
organizations
are
meeting
the
city's
intended
objective
and
so
on.
We
have
a
lot
of
different
organisations
that
are
coming
forward
now,
to
ask
for
resources
and
so
on,
I
think
it's
a
perfect
time
to
review
and
assess
how
we
fund
these
particular
arts
organisations.
I,
don't
know
whether
or
not
the
funding
will
be
reduced
or
whether
not
they
all
remain
the
same
or
whether
or
not
they
will
be
increase
in
Swan.
J
The
the
item-
that's
in
front
of
us
but
I-
think
it's
important
for
us
to
review
everything
that
we
do
and
I
don't
believe
that
in
any
of
our
funding
formulation,
that
there
is
a
specific
aspect
that
would
suggest
or
that
denotes
that
organization
will
get
funding
in
perpetuity.
I
think
it's
important
for
us
to
assess
these
things
and
what
the
impacts
are
and
so
on.
This
leads
to
that
opportunity
of
our
staff
being
able
to
do
so.
J
Staff
spoke
about
the
Arts
Council
and
the
funding
that
they
do
I
think
the
numbers
went
up
to
fifty
million
dollars
that
they
get
to
distribute
funding
throughout
different
organizations
and
so
on,
and
so
I
think
it's
important
for
us
to
be
able
to
assess
all
of
these
things.
So
this
is
the
intended
purpose
of
the
this
particular
motion.
In
addition
to
the
previous
one.
Thank
you
thank.
A
M
T
T
Feasibility
and
structure
and
design
of
the
item
of
story
of
the
event
their
events
morphed
considerably,
since
it
was
first
raised
I,
think
four
or
five
years
ago
and
they've
now
got
a
an
appropriate
staff.
They've
developed
relationships
with
sponsors
and
with
other
orders
of
government
so
that
the
budget
has
grown
more
significantly,
I'm
sorry,
the
budget
has
become
more
more
noticeably
reasonable.
The
original
budgets
were
in
the
five
to
ten
million
range.
Now
it's
been
the
two
million
range
and.
M
T
Have
a
we
have
a
program
called
Toronto
special
events,
incentive
program
jiseop,
which
is
for
the
various
express
purpose
of
helping
startup
festival,
one
of
the
outcomes
from
the
mayor's
task
force
after
the
Pan
Am
Games
that
was
led
by
Saad
Rafi
Savannah.
That
CNN
mr.
Nixon
was
to
take
a
look
at
what
should
happen
and
one
of
their
answers
was.
We
need
more
grown
in
Toronto
major
events.
T
We
shouldn't
be
relying
on
one-offs
continually
coming
here,
and
so,
as
a
result
of
that,
we
set
up
an
incentive
plan
program
and
we've
been
using
that
on
a
number
of
cases,
and
so
it
does
very
much
fit
the
divisions
recommendations
to
Council
that
we
do.
This
other
are
so,
for
instance,
to
your
point.
Toronto
Arts
Council
does
not
fund
startup
organizations,
so
they
would
not.
M
T
M
T
M
T
R
So
there's
now
sort
of
a
cooperative
amongst
them,
so
you
have
to
get
on
a
plane
and
go
to
all
these
places.
There's
a
sort
of
cooperative
conversation
amongst
them.
Is
there
a
feeling
that
there's
there's
you
know
as
we
embark
upon
this
there'll
be
some
form
of
mentorship
from
that
community?
We're.
T
R
A
A
You
okay.
So
our
next
item
is
the
clothing
boxes
now
counselor,
as
he
held
the
item
down,
then,
is
that
that
guy
would
really
appreciate
it
if
counselors
are
leaving
the
council
meetings
and
they
have
an
item
that
they
pail
down,
they
at
least
tell
us
that
they're
leaving
because
now
I
mean
we're
at
the
items.
A
B
A
F
Like
to
begin
I
guess
with
some
salt
questions
to
the
solid
waste
staff,
so
with
these
drop
boxes,
do
we
have
any
procedure
process
or
anything
like
that
to
ensure
that
materials
going
into
these
boxes
are
reused,
recycled
or
down
cycled
to
the
highest
possible
extent?
Do
we
manage
your
audit
in
any
way.
E
F
F
E
A
R
There
Carol-
well,
yes,
man,
speaker,
it's
I,
think
it's
a
special
themed
Council
session,
where
we
bring
up
items
that
we've
brought
up
many
times
about
every
five
years.
The
provisions
that
the
the
committee
is
recommending
gobsmacked
me,
because
I
thought
we
went
through
this
debate
and
many
years
ago
began
a
process
of
verifying
that
that
these
charitable
Dropbox's
were
in
fact,
charities.
Councillor
howard,
moscow
hasn't
been
a
counselor
here
for
a
couple
of
terms
now
went
through
a
process
to
make
that
our
normal
follow-up
process
did
he
not.
E
You're
correct
this:
this
item
has
been
before
us,
I
believe
in
2013
or
2014.
What
we
do
is
we
allow
charities
and
businesses
who
operate
and
use
clothing
to
participate
in
this
space.
If
you
are
a
charity,
you
need
to
Claire
you
our
charity.
You
need
to
put
that
on
your
box
and
you
say
you
need
to
say
that
these
funds
are
going
towards
charity
and
this
they
are
required
to
have
a
permit
on
them.
So.
R
R
It
within
our
power
to
do
that
rather
than
saying
today
that
you
have
to
have
a
little
sign
on
your
box.
I
can
just
imagine
how
comically
fine
print
it
will
be.
Is
it
within
our
legislative
possibilities,
isn't
within
our
toolbox
that
we
could
make
it
impossible
to
put
one
of
these
things
on
the
public
realm
when
you're,
not
a
charity,.
H
E
R
E
It's
up
to
council
to
determine
what
how
strict
they
want
to
be
on
these
we're
really
on
where
they
could
be
located
to
property.
Have
the
authorization
of
the
properties
do
have
them?
There
is
really
what
we're
about
and
what
we
want
to
really
ensure
is
that
they're
cleaned
up
they
can
become
quite
an
eyesore
with
with
waste
it's
not
cleaned
up
regularly.
So
that's
the
kind
of
the
largest
number
of
complaints
that
we
receive
on
these
and
then
there's
also
there's
a
number
of
illegal
boxes
in
this
space.
E
A
E
So
again,
that's
a
challenge
where
municipal
licensing
and
standards
are
our
teams
do
do
inspections
of
these.
We
would
have
to
partner
with
a
third
party
group
to
to
remove
them
again
you're
talking
about
someone
else's
property,
so
that
makes
it
a
challenge.
You're
correct,
they're
not
meant
to
be
on
the
public
realm,
so
they
shouldn't
be
there.
We
like
to
work
with
the
operator
and
the
owner
to
have
them
moved
into
the
appropriate
location.
E
But
again
these
these
fly-by-night
ones
that
are
just
dropped
in
the
middle
of
the
night
are
more
challenging
and
then
the
challenge
is
to
remove
them.
It's
costly
to
remove
them.
Then
we
need
to
store
them
because
we've
taken
someone
else's
property,
even
though
it's
not
supposed
to
be
there
and
then
then,
what
do
we
do
with
these
and
the
contents
yeah.
N
E
It's
the
responsibility
of
the
Box
operator,
but
people
are
supposed
to
be
putting
in
those
boxes
what
can
fit
in
them,
which
is
typically
the
size
of
a
garbage
bag
that
would
fit
in
the
chute.
These
lend
themselves
to
illegal
dumping
with
people
doing
mattresses.
Some
of
the
safety
pieces
we
put
in
here
is
to
put
it
under
a
light
so
that
hopefully
people
are
less
likely
to
do
that.
People
are
always
going
to
be.
You
know,
potentially
looking
for
ways
to
illegally
dump.
E
E
A
sticker
that's
about
11
by
17
that
has
a
permit
number
on
it,
which
allows
us
to
identify
the
ones
that
are
permitted
and
those
that
aren't.
They
also
helped
with
enforcement.
Yes
and
they're
it's
$100
per
permit
and
it's
gone
up
by
inflation
every
year.
So
it's
around
a
hundred
and
thirteen
or
115
per
box
right
now.
Okay,.
E
F
A
F
B
K
Yes,
that's
correct,
madam
Speaker.
The
first
one
is
specifically
building
strength
upon
strength
after
the
blue
tube
of
the
Blue
Jays,
but
the
Toronto
Raptors
won
the
NBA
championship.
We
thought
it'd
be
more
than
time
appropriate
to
put
together
a
plaque
initiated
by
heritage
Toronto
to
to
signify
Canada's
history
of
basketball,
excellence
and.
K
I
R
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I'm
gonna
try
this
again
page
8
striking
committee
meeting
number
2,
st
2.2
council
member
appointments
to
councillor
advisory
bodies,
I
think
we've
made
some
changes.
Sorry,
what
no
it's
held
under
my
name,
I.
Think
the
speaker.
I,
madam
chair,
I
believe
when
I
spoke
to
the
clerk
councillor
cressie,
we
released
the
item
to
me
and
I
actually
checked
with
the
desk
and
it's
being
held
under
my
name.
P
You
madam
Speaker,
indeed
I,
was
coming
to
see
you
to
ask
for
a
point
of
privilege,
I'd
like
to
recognize
that
we've
been
joined
by
Professor
Barbara
Sher
with
Lawler,
who
is
the
Canadian
research
chair
at
the
University
of
Toronto,
and
she
has
just
been
awarded
the
answer.
Kurtzberg
gold
medal,
which
is
Canada's
top
science
award,
and
this
is
building
on
an
already
good
year.
P
She's
had
for
twenty
nineteen,
including
awards
such
as
being
appointed
to
a
fellow
to
the
Royal
Society
of
London,
and
being
granted
the
Patterson
Award
in
environmental
geochemistry
from
the
geochemistry
Society,
as
well
as
many
other
awards,
and
we're
only
halfway
through
the
year.
Building
upon
previous
honours,
she's
also
received
a
companion
in
the
Order
of
Canada
in
a
former
winner
of
the
insert'
Kalyani
Prize.
P
Her
scientific
research
has
implications
for
the
understanding
of
nutrient
and
energy
sources
in
the
deep
subsurface
and
has
implications
for
understanding
the
investigation
of
life
not
just
in
our
planet
but
also
on
others,
including
Mars,
and
the
technique.
She's
developed
have
allowed
us
to
understand
the
timeframes
under
which
water
has
been
isolated
from
the
deep
subsurface
and
includes
discovering
water
more
than
1
billion
years
old
in
the
Canadian
Shield
in
Canada.