►
Description
City Council, meeting 36, January 31, 2018 - Part 3 of 3 - Evening Session
Agenda and background materials:
http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/decisionBodyProfile.do?function=doPrepare&meetingId=13088
Part 1 of 3 - Morning Session: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EmA6mYmI8I#t=7m22s
Part 2 of 3 - Afternoon Session: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOnuxq4fpKU#t=11m31s
Meeting Navigation:
0:06:49 - Meeting resume
A
B
A
A
A
D
Had
a
chance
over
our
supper
break
to
have
a
great
conversation
with
MS
Romanoff
and
mr.
Robbins
about
ax
30.7
financial
impacts
resulting
from
high
water
leak
levels
and
understand
all
the
inspection
work.
That's
underway
this
year,
all
along
the
waterfront
from
the
Rouge
to
Murray,
Curtis,
Park
and
I'd
like
to
release
that
okay.
B
So
this
is
the
motion
that
I
was
going
to
move
on
the
report
that
had
to
do
with
reserve
funds,
and
it
has
to
do
with
the
City
School
Board
surplus
property
acquisition
policy
and
the
fact
that
that
reserve
is
now
emptied
and
there
was
supposed
to
be
a
report
back
on
it
in
2016,
and
this
is
a
motion
that
asked
them
to
do
it.
As
requested
in
2016.
A
report
on.
C
E
A
H
G
B
G
C
G
It
is
your
intent
and
hope
that
the
staff
will
put
a
clause
in
the
procurement
agreement
which
really
specify
and
get
companies
to
start
thinking
about
diversity
and
clearly
with
respect
to
gender
diversity.
Clearly,
we
want
other
forms
of
diversity
in
the
diverse
city,
with
the
motto:
diversity
is
our
strength,
absolutely.
C
G
G
So
this
is
a
bit
of
a
flag,
red
or
otherwise
that
you
wish
to
utilize
to
get
us
to
realize
that
as
we
talk
about
diversity,
we
have
to
live
up
to
that
and
we
have
to
put
in
place
the
opportunity
where
we
start
to
see
this
reflected
change
in
our
procurement.
So
those
opportunities
created
for
others
absolutely.
C
C
B
B
We
have
seen
over
the
years
a
commitment
to
it,
but
not
so
much
have
we
seen
the
results
to
achieve
those
outcomes,
so
this
report
says
and
this
amendment
what
it
does
it
does
it
eliminates
work
with
and
support
the
provincial
committee.
It
says
monitor
it,
because
we
want
to
learn
from
what
the
province
is
doing
and,
secondly,
it
asks
to
look
at
collecting
the
data
on
gender
composition
of
boards
as
part
of
the
whole
procurement
transformation
project.
B
So
it
doesn't
mean
we
would
have
to
go
out
and
set
up
separate
databases
or
do
some
kind
of
work.
That
would
add
any
particularly
onerous
work
on
to
our
procurement
staff.
It
will
be
part
of
the
transformation
that
we
are
about
to
undertake,
there's
an
RFP
that
is
going
to
scope
the
changes
that
we're
looking
for
in
our
procurement
process-
and
this
could
be
part
of
that
and
I
think
that
probably
addresses
some
of
the
concerns
that
staff
expressed
in
their
report.
B
Corporations
have
gender
balance
on
their
boards,
but
it
also
asks
them
how
they
are
actively
striving
to
achieve
it,
and
what
we're
doing
is
nothing
close
to
that.
What
this
recommendation
does
that
counts
are
hall
and
tabled,
but
simply
say:
let's
collect
the
data
and,
let's
understand
what
the
corporate
world
looks
like
in
Toronto
in
terms
of
the
businesses
that
we
do
business
with.
So
that's
what
this
is
about
and
I'm
quite
happy
to
support
with
those
amendments,
the
recommendations
that
are
before
us.
Thank
you.
J
Thank
you.
Madam
Speaker
I
had
two
concerns
with
this
motion.
One
was
the
concern
around
work
with
and
support
the
particular
process
in
the
provincial
government,
which
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
clarity
on
so
I
understand
the
motion
to
kind
of
modify
that
councillor
Davis
motion
so
I'll
be
supporting
that
the
other
part
is.
It
doesn't
go
enough
to
explicitly
mention
the
intersectionality
that
needs
to
be
considered
within
gender
diversity,
but
I'm
hearing
that
there
might
be
a
motion
coming
forward.
J
What
I
have
to
say
is
that
I'm,
more
than
convinced,
if
I
wasn't
convinced
earlier
enough
by
some
of
the
questions
that
were
being
asked
and
more
than
convinced
that
this
is
something
that
we
need
to
do
as
a
council
when
this
came
through
the
government
management
committee
I
heard
from
the
staff.
This
is
too
much
to
do
at
this
point
of
time,
which
was
somewhat
not
satisfactory
for
me,
but
I
understood
the
practical
difficulties,
but
we
cannot
come
back
after
five
years
and
say
the
same
thing.
J
So
that
statement
itself,
even
though
it
doesn't
currently
impede
or
influence
the
current
procurement
possibilities,
but
it
will
actually
shape
what
comes
up
five
years
down
the
road,
and
when
we
have
this
discussion
and
maybe
three
years
five
years
down
the
road
we
would
have
given
that
notice
to
many
of
the
business.
The
second
thing
is,
if
you
don't
commit
to
measuring,
if
you
don't
commit
to
looking
at
data,
we
are
not
going
to
be
able
to
find
solutions
to
this.
J
So
when
the
staff
told
us
at
the
government
management
committee
meeting
that
the
some
of
these
things
are
nuanced
and
difficult,
and
so
on.
This
motion
itself
is
asking
for
some
steps
to
kind
of
clarify
that
when
we
come
back,
we
don't
have
the
same
level
of
confusedness
or
a
kind
of
the
helplessness
around
implementing
this.
So
I
think
this
is
a
step
in
the
right
direction.
J
H
Very
much
madam
Speaker
I'd
like
to
just
move
a
motion.
My
motion
is
largely
asking
staff
to
put
an
intersectional
analysis
over
the
work
that
they're
gonna
do
around
gender
diversity
and,
of
course,
this
is
all
about
making
sure
that
we
don't
look
at
just
diversity
from
one
particular
perspective,
but
that
all
women
all
52%
of
the
population
have
very
are
come
from
very,
very
different
places,
we're
different
by
race,
we're
different
by
ethnicity,
we're
different
by
ability
and
sexual
orientation
and
sexual
gender
expression
and
and
so
forth.
H
So
this
gets
us
to
the
to
the
widest
range
of
analysis
when
it
comes
to
taking
a
look
at
gender-
and
this
is
not
anything
revolutionary
folks
and
it's
actually
happening
all
around
the
world
in
in
far
more
robust
and
ambitious
ways,
and
we
are
proceeding
today,
I
want
to
thank
counselor
Holland
for
taking
this
particular
initiative.
I
do
recognize
that,
based
on
the
comments
by
other
questions
by
some
of
our
colleagues,
that
they
have
some
concerns
about
whether
or
not
this
is
going
to
disadvantage
other
people.
H
And
it's
always
very
interesting
to
me
when,
when
I
hear
about
the
concerns
around
equity
and
the
implementations
of
and
the
tools
to
implement
equity,
they
oftentimes
are
seen
as
a
burden
to
those
who
are
already
in
positions
of
privilege
and
power
and
I.
Think
we
need
to
be
honest
about.
That
is
that
we
are
going
to
build
a
more
just
and
more
inclusive
and
more
respectful
society
than
we
are
going
to
have
to
do
this
work.
H
And
this
work
is
really
about
setting
values
and
being
very
clear
about
what
type
of
corporation
people
are
to
build,
how
they
need
to
reflect
the
diversity
of
the
workforce,
as
well
as
diversity
of
the
clients
that
they're
trying
to
serve.
It
generally
makes
good
business
sense,
which
is
why
we
see
fortune
500
companies
all
rushing
to
embrace
diversity
and
doing
far
more
in
some
cases
in
the
City
of
Toronto.
H
And
there
are
some
sectors
that
we
see
women
that
are
very
much
disadvantaged
and
underrepresented,
and
that's
why
we
have
the
science
technology
and
engineering
and
math
that
that
comes
about
when
we
talk
about
stem
and
how
do
we
actually
increase
women's
participation
and
leadership
in
those
sectors
where
they
have
been
oftentimes
underrepresented?
Today
there
were
some
conversation
about
whether
or
not
the
TDSB
would
eliminate
streaming.
That
is
just
one
form
of
discrimination
based
on
gender
based
on
race,
based
on
class
assumptions.
H
H
E
Speaker
and
I'll
be
pretty
quick.
I
just
wanted
to
make
the
comments,
my
colleagues,
that
they
should
pay
very
close
attention
to
this
in
use.
Extreme
caution,
I
appreciate
the
arguments
levelled
by
my
colleagues
at
Council,
but
I
would
like
to
take
the
the
view
that
we
have
a
report
in
front
of
us
from
the
supply
chain.
E
Folks
who
have
urged
us
not
to
do
this
and
they've
laid
out
a
bunch
of
reasons
and
the
motions
before
us
really
are
kind
of
a
circular
way
to
implement
a
policy
that
they
told
us
not
to
do
you
know
if
you
understand
anything
about
privacy,
law
and
requirements.
When
you
go
and
collect
personal
information,
you
have
to
have
a
reason
that
you
collect
it
and
I.
Don't
know
what
will
tell
the
corporations
as
to
why
we're
collecting
it.
E
We
are
either
developing
a
policy
and
not
staying
and
saying
it
about
how
we
feel
the
composition
of
their
board
should
be
or
we're
not,
and
if
we're
not,
then
why
are
we
collecting
this
information?
There's
a
lot
there's
a
lot
of
caution
in
doing
that.
I
also
worry
about.
You
know
any
experience
anyone's
had
on
a
panel
where
you've
interviewed
candidates
and
the
the
there's
those
questions
there
about
diversity
background,
and
when
you
see
someone,
that's
declined
to
answer
those.
You
kind
of
wonder
why
or
you
know
what
has
happened.
E
Well,
what's
going
to
happen
when
a
vendor
declines
to
answer
that
question,
are
they
going
to
be
disqualified?
Maybe
they
feel
that
they
don't
want
to
give
that
statement,
because
it's
personal
information,
I,
don't
know
I
think
we're
just
heading
down
a
road
which
is
contrary
to
the
advice
we
were
given
by
our
experts
on
this.
H
Of
privilege,
madam
Speaker,
in
a
privilege,
I'd
like
to
share
with
members
of
council
that
we
have
some
good
news
coming
out
of
Ottawa
today
that
bill
c2
10,
which
is
the
making
our
national
anthem,
gender
inclusive,
has
just
passed
the
words
thy
sons
command
will
now
become
of
all
of
us
command.
So
I
hope
that
madam
Speaker,
that
the
next
time
we
rise
for
the
national
anthem
that
we
will
also
be
able
to
reflect
the
national
anthem
as
gender
inclusive.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
The
hotel
and
short-term
rental
tax
accounts
to
care
Janice
you
held
the
item
down.
Do
we
have
questions
for
staff?
Is
that
questions
for
staff?
The
names
I
see
up
there?
Councillor
Fletcher
I
see
okay,
counselor
Pasternak.
Your
name
is
up
there
for
what
okay
questions
to
staff
counselor,
Pasternak
Oh.
K
L
K
L
K
K
They
would
collect
the
first
eighteen
million
and
then
over
and
above
that,
the
City
of
Toronto
would
yes
now
based
on
our
shelter
strategy.
I
think
it
might
be
safe
to
say
that
the
City
of
Toronto
is
probably
the
biggest
buyer
of
hotel
rooms
in
the
city.
Unless
it's
a
major
convention,
how
would
it
work
in
that
regard?
K
L
K
L
M
Yes,
a
quick
question
and
I'm
gonna
flip,
because
I
think
councillor
Pasternak
was
asking
questions
about
the
h.o.t
portion
and
collections
just
want
to
ask
on
the
short-term
rental
side
about
how
will
be
collecting
there
because
throughout
the
debate,
because
it's
sort
of
it's
it's,
it's
almost
like
using
the
word
Kleenex.
Oh
we're
talking
about
tissues.
This
whole
short
term
rental
debate
took
place
and
we
always
talked
about
air
B&B
and
they
came
and
made
a
deputation
and
said.
Yes,
we
will
collect
this
tax,
but
what
about
the
others?
M
L
Yes,
counselor
threw
the
chair
under
the
proposed
tax,
the
obligation
to
collect
and
remit.
The
tax
is
with
the
host,
so
the
property
owner
the
principal
residence
owner.
However,
most
if
all
make
arrangements
through
internet
platforms
right,
Airbnb
being
the
predominant
player
in
that
space,
and
they
have
indicated
they
would
agree,
sign
an
agreement
with
the
city
to
collect
and
remit
to
us.
So,
and
we
expect
other
players
in
that
space
to
to
follow
their
lead
to.
L
M
They're
there
anytime,
we
introduce
a
new
tax
or
a
fee
like
this.
We
have
that
reporting
back
is
there?
Is
there
already
an
agreement
that
that
you'll
be
endeavoring
to
really
now
that
you
know
you
can
collect
a
tax
to
really
know
as
much
as
you
possibly
can
the
short-term
rental
market
so
that
when
we
get
a
review
back
of
this
policy,
we'll
know
to
the
best
of
your
ability,
whether
or
not
you're
successful
in
remitting?
Or
will
we
just
simply
get
a
report
that
says
Expedia
gave
us
some
money.
M
B
Thank
You
speaker
I,
wanted
to
ask
some
questions
about
the
kind
of
information
we've
been
able
to
review
to
date
about
how
the
GTHA
has
actually
administered
their
existing
program.
Do
we
know
about
their
collections?
Do
we
know
about
their
refunds?
Do
we
know
about
errors?
Do
we
know
about
data,
how
they
secure
their
data,
these
the
kinds
of
things
that
we've
had
a
chance
to
look
at
yet.
I
Through
you,
madam
Speaker,
at
present
counselor,
we
do
not
have
a
relationship
with
Greater
Toronto
hotel
Association.
We
have
engaged
them
in
discussions
to
provide
a
service
on
a
fee
basis
and
we
have
requested
certain
information
from
the
Greater
Toronto
Hotel
Association
as
to
their
effectiveness
in
collection,
they're,
auditing
protocols
and
frequencies
and
how
they
measure
compliance.
So
we
have
an
understanding
of
how
they
operate
so.
B
I
Again
through
you,
madam
Speaker,
yes,
we
would
want
to
understand
how
they
do
business.
The
terms
of
their
collection
on
behalf
of
the
City
of
Toronto,
however,
will
be
dictated
by
our
contract
with
them.
So
what
they
have,
how
they
have
administered
themselves
in
the
past
is
less
relevant
than
what
we
will
build
into
our
contract
as
what
they
will
be
required
to
do
future.
B
B
I
B
B
You
the
second
part.
This
is
now
going
to
be
a
program
where
they
will
get
20
million
dollars
of
our
tax
money,
and
currently
we
have
no
voice
and
no
involvement
in
tourism
Toronto
any
longer.
Do
you
think
it
might
be
reasonable
to
have
a
report
back
on
how
we
could
what
governance
changes
might
be
necessary
to
ensure
that
we
are
having
an
effective
voice
to
represent
the
city's
interests,
and
maybe
that's
a
governance
question
I
should
ask
mr.
frag,
certainly.
C
B
C
B
B
B
B
I
N
N
C
N
N
C
N
N
L
N
Thank
you,
mr.
speaker,
I
have
a
I,
have
a
motion,
and
really
it's
just
it's
its.
You
know
bump
up
the
rate
of
it.
So
you
know
4%
is
most
my.
You
know
this.
Unfortunately,
this
is
anecdotal.
You
know
evidence,
but
my
assumption
is
that
most
of
the
most
of
the
occupancy
or
a
lot
of
the
occupancy
is
business
travel.
The
the
4%
rate
on
a
$200
a
night
hotel
room
is
all
of
$8,
boosting
it
to
$6.
Six
six
percent
increases
it
by
$4
to
$12.
N
So
my
motion
proposes
that
we
increase
the
rate
from
4%
to
6%
and
this
is
not
uncommon.
Uncommon
rate
from
my
understanding
of
cities
and
other
jurisdictions
south
of
the
border,
I,
don't
think
it's
necessary
to
compare
us
to
I.
Don't
think
it's
necessary
to
compare
us
to
Mississauga,
because
people
will
opt
for
Toronto
for
other
reasons,
and
yes,
councilor
Aames
I
am
on
the
budget
committee.
N
I've
sat
through
many,
you
know
deputations
and
a
lot
of
consternation
about
what
to
put
in
the
budget
and
what
to
put
out
of
the
budget,
and
the
one
thing
that
I
know
is
that
City
Council
is
very
grateful
for
the
land
transfer
tax
that
was
bought
brought
in
a
couple
of
regimes
ago.
If
it
wasn't
for
that,
you
know,
800
million
dollar
windfall
that
we're
realizing.
Now
7
I
mean
it's
so
it's
gone
so
high
I
forgot
about
it.
N
You
know
we
I,
don't
know
I,
don't
know
where
the
city
would
be
in
terms
of
in
terms
of
tax
tax.
You
know
avoidance
or
what-have-you.
So,
although
I'm
I'm,
typically
you
know
Mike,
my
concern
at
City
Council
is
always
with
putting
City
Council
on
a
sound
footing
and
I
like
to
say
I,
don't
have
any
trouble
spending
money,
I
just
don't
want
to
spend
any
more
money,
but
I
think
the
one.
If
we
don't
look
at
raising
the
rate
now
to
6%,
we'll
be
looking
at
raising
it
in
subsequent
years.
A
N
N
E
E
N
To
Campbell,
you
said
that
this
is
not
unusual
and
in
other
cities
they
have.
Would
you
be
able
to
provide
an
example
of
one
or
two
cities
that
have
it
at
6%?
Well,
so
I
know
having
having
stated
a
couple
of
times
in
the
last
in
the
last
year
that
they
have
I
was
surprised
to
see
that
they
have
many
layers
of
Taxation,
which
includes
us,
include
a
city
tax.
D
N
M
Both
sectors,
what
we
learn
from
staff
in
committee,
I,
can't
remember
how
how
deeply
this
is
in
writing.
But
what
we
learn
from
staff,
both
and
committee
and
somewhat
in
writing-
is
that
part
of
the
consideration
for
staff
when
they're
developing
proposal
bring
in
to
us
for
new
fees
is
to
make
sure
that
you
are
striking
the
right
notes.
You
have
equity
between
sectors
and
you
have
have
set
the
rate
at
such
a
point
that,
rather
than
take
us
to
court
and
go
nuts
for
three
years
they'll
comply.
K
K
A
A
K
You
thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
Yes,
so
I
have
two
motions
and
we
discussed
this
at
length
in
executive
committee
and
and
it
is
a
peculiar
situation
in
which
we
are
required
under
an
agreement
under
the
law
to
revert
a
portion
of
attacks
more
than
half
this
tours
and
drones
could
take
more
than
us
under
2018
revenue
streams,
where
we're
obligated
to
give
the
first
18
million
dollars
to
an
organization
on
on
a
government
collected
tax
and
I
realized.
That
was
the
price
I.
K
K
One
is
to
look
at
the
tours
of
Toronto
and
their
governance
structure
and
that,
if
we're
going
to
be
reverting
these
kinds
of
monies
to
a
third
party,
we
should
have
a
say
in
how
how
they're
operating
and
secondly,
although
the
scenario
is
unlikely,
we
have
to
protect
ourselves
against
the
situation
in
which
the
tax
revenue
itself
falls
below
18
million
dollars.
And
then
we
are
in
a
net
loss
position
on
a
municipal
municipal,
II
collected
tax.
K
I'm
also
concerned
that
we're
giving
a
subsidy
to
multinational
hotel
organizations
through
tourism,
Toronto
and,
in
fact,
organizations
that
are
charging
three
to
five
hundred
dollars
per
night
per
room
should
be
paying
their
own
freight
when
it
comes
to
marketing
when
it
comes
to
building
their
base,
and
certainly
they
have
the
money
through
international
parent
companies
to
pay
that
to
work,
and
this
is
basically
turning
into
corporate
welfare.
But
that
being
said,
it
was
part
of
the
agreement.
K
This
is
a
good,
a
good
tool
to
have
as
far
as
a
revenue
tool,
it's
disconcerting,
that
we're
losing
hotel
rooms,
but
we're
we're
gaining
short-term
rentals,
so
that's
not
quite
an
offset,
but
that
that
market
variance
is
certainly
there.
So
I
would
actually
support
the
motions
to
protect
the
City
of
Toronto
to
give
us
a
say
in
how
these
funds
are
being
spent
and
to
make
sure
that
this
fair,
this
tax
is
as
fair
as
possible.
B
So
the
first
motion
asks
our
CFO
to
undertake
a
further
review
of
the
Greater
Toronto
hotel
associations
current
program.
What
their
experience
has
been,
what
are
their
business
practices,
their
collection
experience?
There
were
rears
there,
data
security
and
other
operational
practices
prior
to
entering
into
an
agreement,
not
to
report
back
simply
to
identify.
Are
there
any
other
provisions
that
ought
to
be
in
that
agreement
we
have
with
them
to
ensure
that
we
reduce
reduce
our
risks,
increase
accountability
and
protect
the
public
interest.
B
The
second
is
to
ask
our
staff
to
report
back
to
the
Executive
Committee
prior
to
exercising
the
option
to
extend
the
contract.
It
is
a
two
year
contract
so
that
we
can
have
a
better
understanding
of
how
well
this
has
worked
and
whether
or
not
this
is
the
direction
we
want
to
continue
with.
Thirdly,
this
asked
to
review
and
a
report
with
recommendations
for
governance
changes
to
ensure
the
city's
interests
are
represented
and
the
financial
contributions
are
utilized
effectively
at
tourism
Toronto's.
B
They
have
the
data
and
based
on
the
recommendations
or
the
information
in
the
supplementary
report.
They
would
do
it
at
a
lower
cost.
I
still
am
not
convinced
that
this
is
the
model
we
should
be
using.
I
believe
that
this
is
a
public
function
and
we
have
public
accountabilities
and
we
should
be
protecting
the
public
interests,
but
I
will
be
supporting
because
I
know,
which
way
it's
going
to
go
and
I.
Think
it's
just
important
that
we
are
going
to
build
in
as
many
protections
as
we
can.
B
I
could
be
completely
wrong
and
I
can
see
the
mayor
laughing
at
my
speech
because
it
I
know
what
is
going
to
happen
here.
I
suspect
that,
as
a
result
of
this,
we
will
find
some
issues
from
an
implementation
perspective
and
I
hope
that,
when
we
report,
when
the
staff
report
back
at
the
end
of
this,
we
will
have
a
better
understanding
of
the
actual
costs.
If
you
read
the
report,
there
are
many
functions
that
still
remain
at
the
city
as
City
responsibility.
B
We
are
going
to
be
responsible
for
making
sure
that
the
there
is
compliance
and
enforcement.
We
are
going
to
be
responsible
for
refunds.
We
will
be
responsible
for
still
a
number
of
administrative
functions,
and
these
costs
that
we've
estimated
so
far
are
pretty
significant
in
terms
of
our
remaining
administrative
functions.
So
I
will
support
it.
B
And
finally,
though,
I
do
absolutely
agree
that
if
we
are
now
going
to
be
giving
giving
tours
in
Toronto
20
million
dollars
that
we
should
have
a
say
about
how
the
money
is
spent,
what
programs
they
are
undertaking
on
our
city's
behalf
and
we
should
have
a
voice
at
the
table
as
well.
So
that's
the
purpose
of
recommendation,
3
and
I.
Guess
I'll
just
leave
it
that
Thank
You.
K
Campbell
for
his
wisdom
and
his
leadership
he's
a
big
believer
in
consultation,
research
gathering
of
all
the
facts
and
I've
listened
for
three
years.
I've
listened
to
him
bristle
when
councillors
come
up
with
moe,
based
on
a
belief
and
nothing
more
I'm.
Gonna
go
for
I'm
gonna
put
my
faith
in
the
original
John
Campbell
that
I
know
and
love
and
I
will
actually
go
with
the
4%.
I
will
not
be
supporting
his
motion.
M
Madam
Speaker
I
am
pleased,
however,
to
hear
that
councilor
Campbell
was
looking
at
a
cash
register,
tape
from
New,
York,
City
and
I'm,
hoping
that
the
next
time
we
get
the
chance
to
have
a
conversation
between
ourselves
and
the
province
about
a
municipal
sales
tax
and
might
go
differently,
I'm
sure
that
he'll
be
talking
to
his
friends.
That's
where
you
want
to
go,
adding
a
point
here
and
there
and
going
all
in
this
is
not
an
all
in
tax,
it's
actually
low
in
the
rating.
M
It's
it's
always
gonna
earn
us
less
than
50
million,
but
I
had
to
rise
to
speak.
Madam
Speaker,
even
though
I
think
councilor
Burnside
covered
why
we
really
ought
to
stick
with
the
staff
recommendation
that
they
developed
with
the
help
of
a
study
from
KPMG
of
what
would
be
a
rate
that
would
keep
the
dynamic
tension
between
short-term
rental
and
hotel
would
in
fact
bring
in
compliance
some
of
those
platforms
that
we
don't
know
as
well.
As
we
know,
Airbnb,
expedient
and
and
some
of
the
other
leaders
we've
got
to
get
them
in.
M
So
you
have
to
set
a
rate
initially
when
you're
starting
a
tax.
That
is
the
best
road
to
compliance,
because
here's
the
thing,
if
you
get
that
first
tax
rate
wrong
and
you
don't
get
compliance
you're,
a
36
million
or
50
million
you've
got
bupkis.
You've
got
legal
challenges,
non-equity
between
sectors
and
a
rate
so
high
that
you
get
no
money.
No
one
complies
everyone's
doing
an
end,
run
around
a
rate
that
you
got
wrong
in
the
first
place,
so
you
won't
have
the
36
million.
M
The
only
other
thing
that
I
want
to
speak
to
matters
speaker
because
I
hear
my
good
friend
councillor,
Pasternak
is
concerned
that
we're
giving
money
to
tourism
Toronto,
but
your
Pasternak
join
Council
a
considerable
amount
of
time
after
that
period
of
time
where
we
had
much
more
of
a
fiduciary
responsibility
in
a
role
in
tourism
Toronto,
we
don't
want
to
run
tourism.
Toronto
we're
happy
to
pay
them.
They
managed
to
drag
in.
M
As
we
know
from
this
very
week,
nine
billion
dollars
in
tourism,
our
events
and
their
partnership
with
them
gave
us
the
best
tourism
year
we've
ever
had.
That's
why
we
like
them
running
it.
We
can
carry
on
the
business
of
politics
here.
We've
got
advocates
of
this
sector
in
that
sector,
jumping
on
airplanes
from
time
to
time,
Elster
Thompson's.
M
If
we
were
to
run
it
ourselves,
the
level
at
which
they're
working
now
the
amount
of
energy
that
they're
putting
into
that
operation
is
a
ridiculous
amount
beyond
what
we
used
to
do
when
we
were
shortchanging
them
and
trying
to
run
them
in
the
sum
of
two
million
dollars.
That's
not
the
way
you
run
a
business
that
brings
in
nine
billion
dollars
worth
of
hotel
and
convention
business
better.
We
should
share
this
revenue
with
them
and
have
them
do
that
work
for
us.
M
It
is
their
core
business
they're
distracted
by
nothing
else,
and
so
you
want
them
to
have
the
resources
to
do
it,
but
to
this
tax
and
any
other
tax,
we
have
the
power
to
do
councillor.
Burnside
is
right,
that's
the
point
at
which
we
should
get
down
to
being
extremely
disciplined.
Every
time
we
ask
Taft
to
go
away
and
introduce
a
new
rate.
M
Where
is
the
elasticity
what's
going
to
bring
in
maximum
compliance,
maxximum
remittance
for
the
least
amount
of
expenditure
on
our
part
and
every
time
they
have
come
back
to
us
with
a
rate
they
always
say
every
consultant,
whether
it's
KPMG
once
was
Henson,
don't
say
the
same
thing
find
a
rate
that
brings
in
enough
compliance.
Keeps
you
in
the
market
that
you
want
to
be
in,
but
also
is
a
rate
that
you
could.
M
You
could
stick
with
for
a
good
five
years,
because
if
you
introduce
a
new
tax
than
you,
then
you
proceed
to
raise
at
the
very
next
year.
Again,
compliance
falls
off
and
you
got
a
whole
bunch
of
new
worries,
and
so
all
of
that
research
went
into
this
magic
rate
of
4%
and
so
I
would
say
the
while
counselor
Davis
has
moved
emotion.
That's
really
about
making
sure
that
the
collectors
of
the
tax
are
accountable.
She
shared
it
with
staff.
She
shared
it
with
the
mayor,
we're
all
fine
with
that.
M
A
E
Had
a
very,
very
quick
point
of
privilege:
I
wanted
to
recognize
a
special
guest
in
the
council
chamber.
I
want
to
welcome
Alex
Silva
Alex
is
here
with
his
mum.
Pyrrha
gray,
alex
is
from
the
topical
School
of
the
Arts
and
I
think
you
wrote
your
exam
today
in
science.
We
know
you
did
very
well
I'm
sure
and
I
want
to
commend
Alex
for
coming
down
to
watch
democracy
in
action
and
making
it
through
all
the
evolving
zuv.
The
evening.
F
F
You
know
over
the
years
we
all
know
every
time
we
have
a
festival
or
a
big
event.
They
pump
up
these
stories
that
say
that
the
following
festival,
the
following
sports
event,
brought
in
a
hundred
million
dollars
to
the
city,
and
we
all
know
we
don't
get
one
red
cent
of
that,
and
now
we
actually
will
have
some
skin
in
that
game
and
we'll
get
some
some
of
these
funds
for
the
very
valid
purposes,
including
keeping
the
city
a
very
livable
place
to
visit.
F
You
know,
because
we
spend
a
lot
of
money
making
sure
this
is
an
attractive
place
for
people
to
come
and
visit
I
want
you
to
know.
I
will
be
supporting
as
one
voter
here
all
of
councillor.
Davis's
amendments
I,
think
they're,
all
reasonable
I
don't
share
the
same
level
of
concern
with
respect
to
the
hotel
association
collecting
this
as
a
matter
of
principle
or
just
as
a
matter
of
sort
of
practicality
going
in.
They
have
been
collecting
this
other
levy,
but
she's
proposing.
F
We
take
a
look
at
how
they
did
that
and
how
well
they
did
that
and
I
think
that's
fair,
because
we
are
going
to
entrust
them
as
we
entrust
many
private
sector
entities
collect
tax
for
us.
I
think
her
her
proposal
through
you,
madam
speaker,
to
suggest
that
before
we
extend
this
contract,
cuz
I
think
it
goes
for
one
year,
and
then
we
have
the
option
to
extend
it
longer
that
we
should
take
a
serious
look
at
all.
This
I
think
it's
very
fair
and
then
finally,
the
one
I
agree
most
strongly
with
is
I.
F
I
was
astonished,
I
guess
wasn't
the
first
priority.
I
had
to
sort
of
figure
out
where
tourism
trying
to
fit
in
around
here
and
at
the
time
we
weren't
sending
them
a
check.
We've
gone
from
the
old
days
where
we
sent
them
a
check
to
the
new
days
where
they
were
collecting
this
voluntary
a
fee
and,
in
the
meantime,
I
didn't
even
know
who
to
call,
quite
frankly
when
they
were
sort
of
changing
slogans
and
doing
all
kinds
of
things.
F
That
I
think
have
some
material
effect
on
the
city's
decisions
about
how
it
sells
itself
and
so
I.
Even
to
this
day,
I
found
that
the
met
the
amount
and
the
amount
of
liaison
of
any
meaningful
kind
that
I
have
is
the
mayor
with
them
is
virtually
zilch,
so
I
think
we
have
to
look
at
that,
and
all
the
councillor
Davis
again
is
asking
through
madam
Speaker
is
that
we
look
at
the
governance
and
figure
out
how
we
can
make
sure
we're
properly
represented,
given
that
we
are
now
collecting
and
remitting
to
them.
F
Eighteen
million
dollars.
I
would
just
point
out
one
more
thing,
which
is
that
you
know
we
have
a
lot
of
talk
and
a
lot
of
discussion
about
how
our
taxes
are
so
much
lower
than
other
places
and
so
on
the
amount
this
will
bring
in
to
us
net
up
the
amount
we
send
off
to
to
a
tourist
in
Toronto
will
be
almost
and
probably
will
soon
reach
the
equivalent
of
one
point
of
property,
taxation
and
I.
F
Think
we
don't
look
at
things
that
we
have,
that
other
places
don't
have
other
places
could
now
have
a
hotel
tax
other
places,
don't
have
a
land
transfer
tax
other
places,
don't
have
the
burdens
we
have
in
terms
of
the
services
we're
expected
to
provide,
but
I
think
when
we
talk
about
how
low
our
taxes
are
and
I.
Certainly,
you
know
I,
don't
believe
overall
that
that
the
burden
is
that
much
less
than
in
other
parts
of
the
GTA,
especially
given
the
burdens
we
face.
F
But
I
think
you
have
to
look
at
the
whole
picture,
and
this
adds
one
more
way
in
which
we
can
provide
services
to
people
without
raising
property
taxes
which
I
don't
think
in
in
the
final
analysis,
are
as
fair
as
they
might
be
to
the
people
who
pay
them.
You
know,
including
especially
seniors
and
young
people
who
are
on
often
very
fixed
housing
budgets
nowadays
when
they
can
buy
a
house
at
all.
F
So
I
think
this
is
a
step
forward
for
us
and
I
will
support
I
will
not
support
councillor
Campbell's
amendment
only
because
I
think
you
just
can't
go
about
setting
rates
on
things
like
this
on
a
kind
of
willy-nilly
basis
where
you
just
decided
to
change
the
number
and
and-
and
you
know
pick
it
out
of
a
hat.
I-
do
have
the
list
here
of
other
cities,
and
there
are
other
cities
that
charge
more,
but
I
think
the
point
made
by
mr.
Williams
earlier.
F
I
think
it
was
him
where
you
have
to
look
at
the
whole
tax
picture
is
the
relevant
one,
and
if
we
choose
to
change
this
some
day,
then
we'll
choose
to
change
it.
But
I
think
this
number
at
four
percent
was
carefully
considered
in
terms
of
not
damaging
the
hotel
business
being
a
fair
kind
of
levy
to
put
on
to
our
visitors
and
on
to
the
hotel
industry
indirectly.
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
A
A
C
C
O
So
that
recommendation
makes
no
sense
anymore,
so
instead
they
had
promised
that
if
they
sold
it
they
that
they
made
a
commitment
that
they
would
put
something
in
place
so
that
whoever
bought
it
could
not
just
run
off
to
the
OMB
and
and-
and
you
know,
try
to
get
higher
density.
So
this
is
asking
the
city
manager
and
chief
planner
to
look
into
whether
or
not
that
has
in
fact
happened
and
report
back
to
us.
Okay,
I'll.