►
Description
City Council, meeting 36, January 31, 2018 - Part 2 of 3 - Afternoon 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 3 of 3 - Evening Session: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqoY7EeFNKE#t=6m49s
Meeting Navigation:
0:11:31 - Meeting resume
A
A
A
B
A
A
A
A
C
D
A
E
A
A
F
Speaker
for
quick
releases
on
page
10
and
there's
one
on
page
11.
These
are
the
two
tree
planting
items
clerks
have
my
motion.
So
on
page
10,
North,
York,
27,
point
31
application
to
remove
a
city
tree
on
or
clothed
Lee
Avenue
I'll
just
move
the
staff
recommendation,
which
is
on
the
screen
where's
the
cash.
C
A
G
A
J
C
J
I
K
K
K
K
L
M
A
C
O
They
closed
it
and
sold
the
church
and
we
spent
a
long
time
moving
it
to
councilor
Kohl's
Ward
a
lot
of
carrion,
a
lot
of
angst,
a
lot
of
work
with
that
when
that
perhaps
could
have
been
nipped
in
the
bud.
If
we
looked
at
that
church
site
and
the
Red
Door,
which
are
all
very
well
aware
of
where
we
had
a
chance
for
that
site,
acre
site
and
didn't
do
that.
Instead,
it
went
to
a
large
developer.
For
many
reasons.
O
O
There's
18
out
of
the
cold
programs
and
I
just
want
to
take
a
moment
during
this
conversation
that
we're,
having
today
speaker
through
you
to
thank
every
single
one
of
the
volunteers
that
work
in
their
out
of
the
coal
program,
to
set
it
up
to
make
a
comfortable
bed
to
make
food
to
to
look
after
people
that
need
that
that
say
secure
place
during
the
cold,
winters
and
I'm,
not
sure
we
actually
thanked
them
enough.
They
also
know
their
communities
very
well.
They
can
be
our
ambassadors.
O
O
Fifteen
hundred
beds,
whatever
that
is
I,
know
we're
working
at
the
institutional
level,
but
I
always
think
we
have
to
work
with
our
friends
in
the
community
who
know
sites
who
have
ideas
who
want
to
help,
because
if
there
was
anything
that
came
through
in
this
very
difficult
Christmas
period,
it's
that
Torontonians
felt,
my
goodness.
We
need
to
step
up.
O
We
need
to
step
up
and
look
after
these
folks
who
are
on
the
street
in
the
coldest
days
of
the
year
and
having
said
that,
I
want
a
segue
to
the
issue
of
supportive
housing
and
the
mayor,
Councillor
McMahon
and
myself
were
at
the
new
hope,
Leslie
ville,
which
is
its
name
part
of
the
new
looking
at
shelters.
It's
not
a
shelter,
it's
a
new
hope
site.
It's
a
bridge
to
other
things.
In
your
life,
there
is
a
housing
worker
there.
There
is
a
health
worker
there.
O
That's
we
went
to
announce
and
there's
also
counseling
there
there's
a
lot
that
goes
on
in
that
site
that
doesn't
necessarily
go
on
in
other
other
locations.
Other
hospice,
other
shelters
of
this
nature,
that's
our
new
model
and
the
next
step
from
that
is
to
bridge
these
folks
who
live
there
into
some
kind
of
supportive
housing.
They
could
not
go
from
that
site
into
a
direct
apartment.
O
I
think
that
would
be
very
hard,
so
our
supportive
housing
requirements
are
very,
very
great
for
everybody,
who's
leaving
a
shelter
who
needs
that
environment
of
total
support,
so
I
do
think.
There's
a
continuum
and
I
want
to
thank
councilor
by
law
for
her
remarks
because
she
placed
this
on
the
longer
continuum.
Why
are
we
opening
shelters
because
people
are
losing
their
homes?
They
can't
pay
the
rent,
there's
many
many
many
different
reasons,
but
we
need
to
put
housing
on
that
continuum
as
well
and
to
only
speak
about
shelters.
We
shouldn't
do
that.
O
We
have
a
bigger
picture
and
I
really
commend
her
for
bringing
that
forward
to
us.
So
these
are.
We
are
always
in
a
learning
situation
here,
and
this
was
a
very
difficult
winter.
I
know
our
staff
we're
working
very
hard.
We
don't
have
all
the
tools
that
we
need
in
order
to
be
successful
and
I
look
forward
to
all
of
the
next
steps
that
we
can
put
into
effect
in
order
to
be
the
caring
and
open
city
that
we
I
know.
We
are.
G
You
speaker
and
if
I
could
ask
the
clerk's
to
put
it
up
just
so,
I've
got
it
in
front
of
me.
Thank
you
through
you
to
the
member.
If
I
understand
can
I
paraphrase
that
this
says
to
send
the
deputy
city
manager
to
go
and
acquire
properties
such
as
churches
and
water
and
other
faith-based
places
to
go
by
churches.
Well,.
O
I
suppose
it
is
closed
or
those
churches
that
are
for
sale
in
particular
ones
that
already
have
programs
and
if
I
could
just
spend
a
second
on
the
Red
Door,
which
was
a
large
site
that
was
for
sale.
We
missed
that
at
four
million
dollars
and
now
putting
a
small
shelter
inside
a
large
condo
is
double
or
more
in
order.
G
We
would
we
would
sort
of
tamper
what
the
process
is
there,
whatever
they
are
to
get
the
best
deal
on
the
best
property
for
the
right
fit
and
we're
going
to
sort
of
go
to
a
particular
class
of
property
or
a
particular
thing.
Why
would
we
want
to
do
that?
Why
would
we
want
to
kind
of
tamper
and
squeeze
and
change
the
outcome?
Why
wouldn't
we
just
let
the
real
estate
people
what
we
need,
because.
O
Counselor
this
should
be
on
their
radar.
I
know
it
is
possibly
on
the
radar.
I
think,
counsel,
cans
underscore
what
is
already
on
the
radar,
and
we
do
have
a
report
from
2014
which
very
clearly
talks
about
city
services
and
important
social
services
out
of
faith-based
institutions,
many
of
which
are
now
finding
themselves
in
crisis,
and
perhaps
we
don't
even
know
about
that.
So
this
is
just
going
down
a
different
road
for
meeting
those
types
of
needs
that
we're
having
this
conversation
will.
O
In
a
comment
back,
a
staff
are
quite
happy
to
work
with
this
process
to
have
that
introduced.
In
that
way
to
say
we
really
have
to
look
at
these
types
of
situations
and
I
don't
want
to
see
another
cornerstone.
I,
don't
want
to
see
another
red
door.
I
don't
want
to
see
another
missed
opportunity
because
once
you've
miss
it
relocating,
it
is
very,
very,
very
difficult
and
we
have
a
big
job
in
front
of
us
counselor
in
order
to
satisfy
at
least
a
thousand
shelter
beds
and
know
where
to
put
them.
F
O
Of
this
is
working
outside
of
the
Toronto
real
estate
agents,
or
this
is
working
in
tandem
with
the
real
estate
agency
not
going
outside
of
their
jurisdiction.
They
I
guess
they
would.
They
would
execute
a
number
of
those
things
or
that
would
come
into
their
portfolio.
But
thank
you
for
that
question
because
it
really
has
to
do
with
what
services
currently
exist
in
churches.
A
number
of
them
are
what
we'll
call
closed.
O
Churches
I'll,
give
you
another
example
at
Riverdale
United,
which
was
closed
and
which
would
green,
bought
and
now
is
put
in
housing
for
thirty
six
seniors
rent
geared
to
income.
So
it's
making
sure
we
don't
miss
these
opportunities
for
faith-based
institutions
that
have
really
played
an
important
role
in
the
community
as
service
providers.
So.
N
O
O
A
C
O
That
right,
my
motion
is
clear,
that
if
we
were
be
looking,
if
we
were
looking
to
acquire
something
that
building
a
one-story
shelter
or
only
having
a
shelter,
there
may
be
other
uses
that
could
be
in
that
site.
But
this
is
very
much
tailored
through
this
conversation
we're
having
today
and
the
urgency
that
I
feel
being
on
CDR
with
the
need
to
relocate
all
of
George
Street
and
to
open
a
number
of
new
shelters.
So
it's
quite
aggressive
in
the
shelters,
but
there
would
probably
be
other
services
that
could
Cole
locate
right.
C
O
N
Thank
You,
speaker
and
good
afternoon
I
have
a
motion.
I
move
that
in
order
to
address
the
shelter
crisis
that,
as
a
result
of
the
lack
of
affordable
housing
across
the
city
city
council
requests
the
chief
planner,
an
executive
director,
City
Planning,
to
report
to
the
planning
and
growth
management
committee
at
its
April
5th
2018
meeting
on
proposed
amendments
to
the
city,
zoning
bylaw
to
make
rooming
houses
a
permitted
use,
citywide
councillor
by
Lao
I
think
gave
what
is
the
most
important
speech
we've
had
on
this
item.
N
She
pointed
out
very
simply
and
very
straightforwardly
that
the
reason,
among
the
key
reasons,
that
people
wind
up
in
our
shelter
system
is
that
there
aren't
any
housing
options
available
to
them.
There
are
many
different
populations
who
wind
up
homeless
in
the
city
of
Toronto,
but
a
key
population
or
two
key
populations
that
are
there
are
people
who
simply
cannot
afford
to
find
anywhere
in
the
city
of
Toronto
that
they
can
rent
and
there's
another
population
which
I
will
talk
about
more
in
a
moment
for
whom
it
is
challenging
to
maintain
an
apartment.
N
The
rooming
house
is
the
solution
to
each
of
those
problems.
The
rents
charged
in
rooming
houses
are
lower
than
that
are
charged
for
full
apartments.
I
know
this
very
well
because
I
have
something
approaching
100
rooming
houses
in
in
Parkdale,
but
I
want
to
tell
you
we
are
losing
them,
they're,
being
purchased
and
converted
to
single-family
dwellings
or
in
some
cases
220
units
become
four
and
they're
sold
off
as
luxury
apartments.
N
The
we
talk
about
affordability
in
many
times,
affordable
housing.
In
this
council.
We
talk
about
affordable
housing
for
young
families.
We
talk
about
affordable
housing
for
people
who
are
leaving
the
family
home,
but
sometimes
in
trying
to
provide
housing
for
those
populations.
The
people
who
can
least
afford
to
live
in
the
City
of
Toronto
are
moved
out.
N
N
It's
the
only
thing
that
we
as
a
council
were
unprepared
to
deal
with
and
there's
a
relationship
between
that
decision
then,
and
this
crisis
now
for
a
large
part
of
the
population
who
are
living
on
the
street.
The
mayor's
pointed
out
that
there's
a
relationship
between
housing
and
mental
health.
Some
people
think
that
it's
causal,
if
you
have
a
mental
health
problem,
that's
why
you
wind
up
on
the
street,
but
there's
also
there's
a
secondary
thing.
That
happens,
which
is,
if
you
wind
up
on
the
street,
the
stress,
the
unimaginable
stress
of
being
homeless.
N
Starts
to
put
make
it
difficult
for
you
to
imagine
ever
being
housed
again
and
starts
to
reduce
your
resiliency
and
capacity
to
deal
with
the
challenges
of
meeting
rent
every
month
and
managing
a
household
many
jurisdictions.
Montreal,
for
example,
recognize
that
rooming
house,
because
it
has
shared
washrooms
or
shared
kitchens,
are
a
form
of
congregate
living
where
people
with
similar
experiences
can
support
each
other,
it's
a
form
of
natural,
supportive
housing.
A
P
You
very
much
madam
Speaker,
and
if
I
can
ask
the
clerk's
that
put
the
motion
onto
the
screen,
please.
Essentially,
the
motion
is
asking
the
staff
to
review
the
report
that
is
placed
on
every
single
desk
right
now:
an
evaluation
of
Toronto's
warming
center
and
winter
response
to
homelessness.
This
was
authored
by
the
health
providers
against
poverty
and
I
would
ask
that
the
general
manager
report
back
to
CDR
in
their
just
their
February
28
meeting
that
the
data
is
missing
from
that
as
a
report
back
on
the
feasibility
of
implementing
some
of
the
recommendations.
P
So,
if
I
can
ask
the
clerk's
to
make
sure
that
there's
a
report
back
on
the
date
of
this
motion,
which
is
February
28th,
the
next
meeting
of
CDR
I,
would
appreciate
that.
So,
madam
Speaker,
this
has
been
a
very
difficult
two
months
at
least
three
months
now
for
myself
personally,
and
it's
largely
even
difficult,
because
we
have
25%
of
the
shelter's
of
the
entire
city,
Toronto
shelter
inventory
in
word,
27.
If
I
take
a
look
at
my
neighbor
in
Ward
28
between
were
24
27.
We
have
32%
of
the
shelters
in
our
vicinity.
P
It's
been
very
challenging
because
we
have
seen
these
issues
as
they
emerge
in
terms
of
the
fraying
and
the
cracking
and
the
shelter
system
for
some
time.
It's
also
been
largely
frustrating
around
this,
because
the
issues
that
have
been
raised
by
the
community
advocates
and
the
frontline
workers
and
everybody
who
is
actually
providing
some
supports
to
those
individuals
in
the
shelter's
have
been
raising
the
concerns
that
the
system
is
overburden.
P
Taking
into
consideration.
The
lived
experiences
of
those
who
appear
for
before
the
committee
telling
us
what
they
need
in
order
for
them
to
be
successful,
to
provide
supports
and
care
for
people
who
are
vulnerable
in
street
involved
and,
unfortunately,
what
I
think
I
have
been
seeing
is
that
it
hasn't
always
been
driven
from
from
staff
side,
and
this
is
not
to
say
that
staff
are
not
doing
a
good
job.
P
I
want
to
be
really
clear
is
that
they
do
what
we
tell
them
to
do,
and
we
empower
them
to
do
it
by
making
sure
there's
allocations
in
the
funding
so
that
they
can
do
a
good
job.
What
we
have
been
doing
is
not
giving
them
the
direction
to
do
the
work
that
they
need
to
do
to
actually
fix
the
system
and
so
they're
doing
the
very
best
that
they
can
given
the
fact
that
we
haven't
given
them
as
much
resources
as
we
need
to
so.
P
This
is
why
the
advocates
keep
coming
back
to
City
Hall
time
and
time
again
to
try
to
raise
the
alarm
bill
and
I.
Think
they've
been
very
patient.
To
be
quite
honest,
they've
been
very
respectful,
just
trying
to
say:
please
can
you
give
us
a
hand?
We
can't
do
this
by
ourselves.
So
who
are
the
authors
of
this
report?
Nurses,
nurse,
practitioners,
physicians,
psychiatrists,
social
workers.
What
did
they
do
to
give
you
the
result
of
this
report
today?
P
That
I
think
are
very,
very
straightforward,
but
they're
not
just
asking
the
City
of
Toronto
to
take
action.
They're
also
saying
the
province
and
the
federal
government
have
to
do
their
part.
So
let
the
staff
take
the
findings,
evaluate
what
they
see
and
then
come
back
to
us
at
CDR
in
February,
with
some
implementation
plans.
P
They
have
also
this.
The
they've
also
described
this
situation
that
we're
in
as
an
undeclared
emergency
and
I
know
that
there's
reluctance
in
in
this
chamber
and
among
staff
to
call
it
a
crisis
or
an
emergency,
but
let's
be
really
clear.
The
better
living
center
was
not
on
the
table
in
December
of
when
we
voted
at
in
a
city,
council
and
I
think
neither
was
the
army.
Neither
was
there
housing
beds.
Thank
you.
Thank
You.
E
E
Thank
you
very
much.
I
madam
Speaker
I
thought
that
I
would
just
add.
There's
been
a
lot
of
good
comments
made
from
a
variety
of
folks,
I
thought
I
would
add.
Just
some
contextualization
to
this.
We've
had,
of
course,
a
very
interesting
and
and
conflictual
month,
and
I
think
what
we're
really
debating
right
now
is
a
piece
of
what
the
diagram
is
before
us.
Now.
It
is
worth
reflecting
in
one's
analysis
on
the
problem,
really
instructs
one
on
the
solutions
as
to
how
to
get
out
of
the
problem.
E
I
think
it's
important
for
us
to
remember
that.
The
reason
why
we
are
in
this
crisis,
emergency
dire
situation
is
really
because
of
twenty
years
ago
the
federal
government
made
a
decision
that
they
were
going
to
get
out
of
the
social
housing
business.
It's
because
Toronto
has
become
a
very,
very
expensive
City,
with
its
with
its
rents.
I
think
I
read
a
report
recently
that,
just
in
the
last
year,
rents
have
gone
up
11%
when
things
like
that
happen,
people
are
pushed
in
a
downward
direction.
E
The
people
who
have
very
good
housing
get
pushed
to
good
housing
pushed
other
people
to
fair
housing,
other
people
to
poor
housing.
Eventually,
somebody
gets
pushed
to
the
street
for
us
as
a
city.
Today's
debate
really
is
part
of
a
much
larger
debate
on
how
we
rebuild
the
housing
fabric
that
allows
housing
opportunities
for
everyone.
Today,
our
focus
is
on.
E
These
two
steps
in
the
process,
I,
think
counselor
by
lousy.
Excellent
comments
really
challenged
us
to
think
of
the
other
steps
in
the
process
as
well
and
I.
Don't
think
we
should
forget
that,
even
as
we
vote
for
these
motions
here,
our
job
today
is
to
yes
vote
for
these
motions.
But
it's
also
to
remember
that
it
is
one
step
in
a
process
that
is
going
to
engage,
not
just
us
for
this
term
of
council,
but
for
the
next
term
of
council.
We
will
need
to,
as
a
council
from
all
sides
come
together.
E
The
way
we
have
around
pub,
we
had
around
public
transit
and
shape
the
provincial
and
federal
governments
to
their
core
asking
not
for
millions
of
dollars
not
for
tens
of
millions
of
dollars,
not
even
for
hundreds
of
millions
of
dollars,
but
for
billions
of
doll
to
basically
push
this
push
the
direction
that
we
need
to
be
going
on
going
in
to
up
the
steps
rather
than
down
the
steps.
That
I
think
is
the
challenge
for
anyone
seeking
election
or
re-election
to
the
next
term
of
this
council
or
for
any
other
order
of
government.
E
A
F
You,
madam
chair,
I,
have
a
motion.
The
motion
reads
that
City
Council
direct,
the
general
manager,
shelter,
support
and
Housing
Administration
to
investigate
the
feasibility
of
expanding
the
respite
Center
at
705,
progress
Avenue
from
49
beds
to
100
beds,
including
ensuring
social
service
and
mental
health,
supports,
are
available
at
the
site
and
madam
Speaker
I,
certainly
I,
think
all
of
us
I
think
have
I'll
call
it
common
cause.
None
of
us
wants
to
see
any
of
our
own
family
members
or
our
friends
or
our
loved
ones
or
neighbors.
To
have
to
use
these
services.
F
We
have
to
have
a
very
big
toolbox
of
tools
to
help
people
better
their
lives
and
to
give
them
the
services
and
support
that
they
need,
and
they
deserve
I
happen
to
be
the
counselor
for
Scarborough
Center.
A
year
ago,
when
these
issues
were
coming
forward,
I
had
discussions
with
staff,
saying
I
will
be
a
willing
host
in
terms
of
helping
locate
a
respite
center
in
Scarborough.
They
are.
They
are
difficult
to
locate.
F
There
are
very
many
complications
if
you
put
them
next,
to
store
into
a
daycare
center
or
to
a
school
or
to
residential
homes.
You'll
often
get
do
you'll
get
pushback,
fortunately,
for
me
and
for
the
city
we
happen
to
own
a
piece
of
property
in
my
ward,
that
was
I
think
an
ideal
place.
In
fact,
my
concern
when
I
talked
to
staff
was
you
know
this
is
so
far
away.
F
I,
don't
even
think
the
homeless
will
want
to
come
here,
because
it's
far
away,
it's
a
sleepy,
suburban
industrial
area
and,
to
my
Asli
pleasant,
surprise
the
people
who
have
come
out
to
our
shelter
and
Scarborough
liked
it
and
one
of
the
reasons
they
liked.
It
is
because
many
of
them
are
from
Scarborough
when
the
mayor
and
I
and
I've
been
there
on
other
times
when
the
mayor
and
I
walked
through
that
site
and
chatted
with
people
and
again
without
poking
or
prodding
people,
but
just
as
human
being
to
human
being.
F
The
mayor
sat
down
and
was
breaking
bread
with
people
and
chatting
with
people,
and
we
were
just
saying
conversation,
oh
and
where
are
you
from
and
a
strong
majority
of
them?
Not
every
single
one,
but
a
large
number
of
them
said
I'm
from
Scarborough
and
I
want
to
stay
in
Scarborough
and
I.
Don't
want
to
go
downtown.
F
So
I'm
simply
asking
that
the
staff
investigate
the
feasibility
of
increasing
the
shelter
in
Scarborough
Center
from
49
beds
to
100
beds
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that
the
appropriate
social
services
and
mental
health
support
services
are
there.
As
well,
because
again
many
of
the
people
who
are
there
they're,
not
new
I'll,
call
it
to
the
system
they
have
lost
their
housing
or
they've,
been
evicted
or
there's
a
whole
long
list
of
reasons.
Why
they're
there?
F
But
we
need
to
make
sure
that,
when
they're
way
out
there
in
Scarborough
in
that
isolated,
sleepy
industrial
area
that
they
actually
are
able
to
get
connected
up
with
social
supports,
with
housing
with
job
counseling
and
certainly
with
mental
health
services,
I
think
this
staff
when
I
were
there
said
we
really
need
people
here
who
have
experience
and
confidence
with
mental
health
health
services.
So
madam
Speaker
I
know
none
of
us
would
want
to
see
ourselves
or
our
family
members
using
these
services.
It
is
a
respite.
Centers
are
a
place
of
last
resort.
F
We
have
to
provide
them.
We
should
provide
them
with
a
decent,
decent
standard
of
living
and
service
and
support
for
the
people
who
are
in
them
and
I,
look
forward
to
working
with
everyone
on
this
council
to
adopt
and
support
and
implement
everything.
That's
been
said
earlier
today,
so
that
we
help
our
brothers
and
sisters
living
in
the
city.
Thank
you.
Thank.
C
You
I'm
glad
to
support
all
almost
all
of
the
great
work.
That's
that's
being
done
here
today.
The
one
motion
that
I
have
trouble
with
is
councillor
perks
on
the
rooming
houses,
I
think
its
first
of
all.
It's
a
major
policy
decision,
that's
currently
part
of
a
process,
and
it
should
not
just
be
slid
into
a
report
like
this
and,
secondly,
I
think
that
rooming
houses
are
not
appropriate
housing
by
by
definition,
they
do
not
cannot
have
both
the
kitchen
in
a
washroom,
and
this
is
not
code
for
I.
C
In
fact,
if
you
took
the
the
size
of
a
rooming
house
unit
and
and
made
it
much
larger,
put
both
a
washroom
and
a
kitchenette
in
it
and
told
every
developer
in
my
ward
that
they
had
to
build
that
into
every
condo
they
built
and
made
the
rent
similar
to
that
of
rooming
houses
and
provided
some
permanency
and
stability
with
with
very
low
cost
housing.
I
would
vote
for
that
in
a
minute.
I
would
be
glad
to
be
part
of
that
initiative,
but
this.
C
A
D
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Madam
Speaker
I
thought
I
knew.
I
have
I,
have
two
motions:
one
is
it's
broken
into
four
parts
that
City
Council
thank
management,
frontline
staff,
partnering
agencies
and
all
support
workers
for
their
excellent
work
and
supporting
sheltering
and
helping
the
homeless
during
a
very
trying
time,
we'd
like
the
general
manager
to
go
back
and
take
a
look
at
the
publication
guide
to
services
for
people
who
are
homeless.
I
can
furnish
them
a
copy
that
hasn't
been
updated
in
four
years.
D
D
If
you're
wondering
what
koay
teow
is
that
it
is,
is
it
a
new
real
estate
agency
and
one
of
the
reasons,
if
you
have
a
problem
with
the
name,
you'll
have
to
go
speak
to
the
deputy
city
manager,
but
one
of
the
reasons
we
created
centralized
real-estate
entity
was
to
make
sure
that
our
divisions
were
not
flying
off
it
to
all
different,
separate
directions
and
doing
their
own
real-estate
bidding
and
I.
Think
that's
the
risk
councillor
Fletcher's
original
motion.
So
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we've
we've
made
it
clear.
D
D
Imagine
if
you
will
6,000
people
needing
some
kind
of
shelter
on
a
nightly
basis
in
our
extreme
weather
conditions
and
the
and
this
population
being
the
most
vulnerable
displaced
and
challenged
in
our
city,
and
it
actually
is
a
testament
to
the
staff
and
the
work
that
they're
doing
that.
We've
been
able
to
succeed
in
in
this
kind
of
environment
and
the
many
of
the
comments
that
I've
seen
in
the
media
from
various
councillors
that
our
system
is
failing,
is
really
not
a
fair
reflection
of
the
hard
work
that
is
being
done
across
the
city.
D
We
are
sheltering
more
people
than
ever
before.
We
are
saving
more
lives
than
ever
before,
we're
providing
more
supports
than
ever
before,
and
it
is
important
to
understand
that,
while
our
show
the
pressure
on
our
shelters
is
a
housing
issue,
I,
don't
think
there's
any
disagreement.
That's
also
a
health
issue.
Mental
wellness
substance
abuse
medical
complications.
D
In
December
of
2017
Council
passed
a
series
of
motions,
I,
think
26
motions,
there's
another
series
of
motions
coming
today
and
of
course,
Community
Development
and
Recreation
has
been
most
robust
in
sending
directions
to
staff
based
on
what's
passed
today,
based
on
what's
passed
in
Council
from
December
and
of
course,
what's
been
done
in
the
committee
work
earlier
this
month.
I
think
that
staff
have
their
marching
orders.
D
B
You,
madam
Speaker,
really
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
join
in
this
debate.
Certainly
we
do
have
a
problem
across
the
city
and
the
problem
is
immense
and
some
people
say
that
we
dropped
the
ball
on
it
back
in
December.
However,
we're
making
great
strides
to
to
make
sure
that
in
the
Oly
aspects
of
the
homelessness
and
the
people
that
live
in
the
city
with
problems
is
addressed,
however,
I
cannot
put
help
but
speak
about
the
motion.
B
At
one
point,
there
was
a
matter
of
fact:
almost
a
fistfight
people
do
not
want
room
in
houses
in
Scarborough.
That's
been
clearly
demonstrated
and
spoken
about
and
I'm
asking
my
colleagues
not
to
support
this
motion
as
it's
something
that,
although
in
some
areas,
might
be
useful
in
the
older
City
of
Toronto,
but
certainly
in
North
York
Scarborough
in
Etobicoke.
This
councilors
asking
their
constituents
we'll
find
out
that
our
constituents
are
adamant
against
this.
B
I
did
a
survey
in
my
ward
house
to
house,
and
we
asked
people
to
respond
and
sent
comments
in
and
over
98%
of
the
people
in
my
area
do
not
want
rooming
houses.
So,
although
I
I
listen
to
what
the
counselor
is
trying
to
do
by
making
sure
that
rooming
houses
in
his
part
of
the
world
are
there
to
serve
his
constituents,
certainly
rooming
houses
in
my
part
of
the
world.
J
The
issue
in,
in
some
words
in
my
own
ward,
no
punches
were
thrown,
but
the
the
issue
around
rooming
houses
is
not
that
there
should
never
be
any
outside
of
the
already
approved
very
specific
zones,
but
that
the
pilot
method
under
which
we
intended
to
introduce
them
was
really
not
fully
baked.
Yet
it
was
that
it
was
a
solution
to
our
problem.
That
I
think
that
the
head
of
ML,
NS
would
freely
admit,
was
about
three
quarters
bait.
J
There
are
some
controversy
controversies
about
how
we
proceed
with
rooming
houses
when
we
get
out
into
the
suburban
post-secondary
campus
areas
where
they're
needed
by
students
have
a
nose
but
where
they
can
also
serve
those
looking
for
the
type
of
types
of
housing
that
counselor
perks
describes.
So
as
much
as
we
want
to
see
it,
the
issue
really
is
that
we
need
to
let
miss
Cooke.
Do
that
work.
J
R
Madam
Speaker,
thank
you
and
I
want
to
say
thank
you
to
the
members
of
council
for
what
I
think
has
been
a
very
thoughtful
debate.
You
know
we
have
some
that
are
more
thoughtful
than
others,
I'll,
say
and
I
think
this
one
has
been
and
I
want
to
in
particular,
say-
and
it's
gonna
be.
The
theme
of
my
own
brief
remarks
that
I'm
glad
that
a
number
of
the
speeches
have
turned
their
minds
to
what
goes
beyond
this.
This
plan
here,
you
know
I,
said
earlier
today
to
the
media.
R
You
have
to
be
honest
about
these
things,
and
this
has
been
probably
of
all
the
issues
that
you
face
in
the
job
that
I
have,
which
it's
not
that
dissimilar
to
the
jobs
that
all
of
us
have
in
this
room,
but
mine
I
have
citywide
responsibilities,
and
this
has
been
the
most
difficult
and
complex
issue
that
I
have
faced
among
many.
That
often
seem
difficult
and
complex,
and
that
has
nothing
to
do
with
the
political
complexity
of
it.
R
It's
politically
complex
in
some
respects
to,
but
rather
the
frustration
and
sometimes
even
the
helpless
feeling
that
you
have
in
trying
to
you
know
to
to
here.
In
this
place,
with
the
resources
we
have
or
don't
have
craft
some
kind
of
solution,
that
is
sensitive,
that
is
effective
and
that
is
permanent
because
in
the
end
we're
spending
time.
Even
today.
R
R
We
ended
up
in
a
situation
where,
notwithstanding
best
efforts
in
good
faith
intentions,
the
bottom
line
was
pretty
straightforward.
What
we
had
planned
and
what
we
did,
because
in
fact
you
know
the
proof
on
these
things
is
really
that
you
actually
implemented
the
plan
you
had,
and
we
actually
did.
The
plan
that
was
approved
here
was
implemented
and
I
should
say
just
as
a
sidebar
in
a
number
of
other
people
have
mentioned.
R
It
I
think
that,
while
you
might
argue
about
the
adequacy
of
the
plan
and
clearly
the
fact
we're
here
supplementing,
it
is
an
indication
that
it
turned
out
not
to
be
adequate,
our
staff
in
being
nimble
and
being
able
to
respond
to
a
demand
that
increased
in
some
respects.
You
know
in
at
a
pace
and
in
a
way
that
was
different
than
some
people
expected
because
of
the
weather
and
because
of
other
factors,
we've
discussed
did
a
terrific
job
and
they
worked
hard
and
they
worked
every
day.
R
So
we
have
a
series
of
next
steps
encompassed
in
this
motion
based
in
part
on
a
letter
signed
by
a
number
of
counselors
who,
let's
say,
have
a
keen
focus
for
a
number
of
different
reasons
on
housing
and
homeless
related
issues
and
their
next
steps
intended
to
leave
us
in
a
situation
where
we're
better
resourced,
with
better
quality,
shelter,
accommodation
because
I've
been
around
as
a
counselor.
A
counsellor,
the
Bear
Maker
deputy
mayor,
DeBary
maker,
was
saying.
R
I
was
at
his
shelter
as
recently
as
last
week,
and
that's
one
of
many
visits
that
I've
made
and
have
spent
my
time
talking
to
people
and
seeing
what
you
see
when
you
get
there
and
I'm
not
satisfied
with
the
adequacy
of
that
accommodation.
We
put
things
in
place
that
were
meant
to
be
for
an
urgent
situation
which
more
than
arose
beyond
our
expectations
and
I'm,
not
satisfied
myself
with
the
adequacy
of
those
accommodations.
R
But
the
point
that
I
wanted
to
emphasize,
which
others
have
said
as
well,
is
that
we
will
I
hope,
approved
these
measures
today
and
get
on
with
the
job
of
implementing
these
things,
but
that
they
mustn't.
Take
our
attention
off
the
the
longer-term
bigger
issue,
which
is
the
the
absolute
lack
of
affordable
and
supportive
housing
and
one
thing
again
to
repeat
what
others
have
made
reference
to
that
when
I've
been
in
these
shelters
and
I
have
been
in
many
numerous
visits
over
the
course
of
this
winter.
Let
alone
before
there
are
a
great
many
people.
R
I
would
argue.
The
majority
who
will
on
a
voluntary
basis
indicate
that
they
have
or
had
experienced
a
mental
health
and
addiction
or
both
issue
and
that
they
are
not
getting
the
support
they
need
in
shelter.
Shelters
were
not
never
intended,
at
least
in
their
current
format,
and
I
was
heartened
as
I
said
earlier
on
by
the
announcement
we
made
with
the
Minister
of
Health
made
it
really.
We
were
there
just
to
support
what
he
was
doing
to
finally
embed
some
medical
people,
medical
resources
in
shelters,
but
it's
nowhere
near
enough.
R
A
A
I
Thanks,
madam
Speaker,
on
page
ten
of
the
report,
it
notes
that
it's
further
recommended
that
council
discontinue
the
policy
of
removing
properties
from
the
capping
and
clawback
system
once
they
have
reached
their
full
CVA
level
of
Taxation,
such
that
the
2018
capping
limit
applied
to
any
property
that
has
experienced
a
property
tax
increase
of
greater
than
ten
percent
over
2017
annualized
taxes,
regardless
of
whether
the
property
had
reached
its
full
cv,
a
level
of
Taxation
in
a
prior
year.
This
ensures
that
the
same
level
of
protection
against
large
tax
increases
is
avoided
to
all
properties.
I
K
K
I
K
K
I
K
B
K
B
B
B
K
B
E
Thank
you,
I'm
wondering.
Are
these
tax
adjustments
within
the
class
of
commercial
and
therefore
revenue
neutral
or
are
they
being?
Are
they
going
to
be
at
the
end
of
the
day,
a
hit
on
the
amount
of
revenue
that
we
take
in?
In
which
case
you
are
kind
of
treating
it
as
an
Inc
as
not
taking
an
increase
in
assessment
through
the
speaker?
Get
my
meaning?
Yes,.
P
Very
much
madam
Speaker,
two
through
you
to
staff
with
respect
to
the
current
value
assessments
that
properties
the
property
owners
received.
Do
you
know
if,
if
they
were
timely,
passed
along
to
the
tenants
that
may
be
responsible
for
the
the
property
taxes,
because
the
bill
would
normally
go
to
the
property
owner
correct.
K
P
And
so
when,
when
that
happens
in
the
end,
the
tenants
are
not
prepared
for
the
significant
hikes
and
property
taxes
or
even
the
property
owner,
the
selves
oftentimes
they
are,
they
they
may
miss
the
opportunity
to
file
for
the
reconsideration,
which
is
in
essence,
to
to
reassess
the
property
again
by
impact.
Is
that
correct?
Sometimes
they
miss
the
period.
Certainly.
P
A
P
P
When
property
owners
feel
like
they
need
to
fight
the
assessment
value,
even
after
the
request
for
reconsideration,
they
want
it.
They
want
to
be
able
to
sort
of
challenge
it
once
again
often
times
are
they
able
to
do
it
on
their
own
as
individuals
or
do
they
generally
need
to
hire
some
tax
experts,
some
some
auditor
types
of
financial
professionals
to
give
them
assistance?
How
many
of
these
property
owners
are
doing
it
on
their
own
or
how
many
of
them
are
hiring
some
costly
professionals
so.
K
P
K
P
So
if,
if
the,
if
the
report
was
not
before
us
today
and
the
findings
and
your
recommendation
was
not
adopted
by
City
Council
today,
what
do
you
think
would
be
the
impact
of
property
to
the
property
owners
who
don't
get
a
10%
cap
who
qualify?
You
know
well
what
would
happen
to
those
5,000
property
owners
yeah
well,.
K
P
P
I
I
I
I
K
The
speaker,
of
course,
that
will
happen.
However,
what
we're
doing
here
is
introducing
this
as
an
interim
measure
for
2018
and
pending
an
exploration
of
more
a
more
targeted
approach
to
providing
relief,
and
so
this
is
not
a
long-term
measure.
It's
simply
provided
just
to
cushion
the
impact
in
2018.
Okay,
thank
you.
So.
K
L
I
I'm
just
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
this-
is
this:
the
is
this
the
clappy
at
the
capping
and
clawback.
That's
that
it's
you
know,
sort
of
was
imposed
when,
when
we
moved
to
to
the
new
assessment
system
market
value
assessment,
and
is
that
still,
if
that
still
hasn't
fully
worked
its
way
through?
K
So,
yes,
this
is
an
enhancement
of
what
we
had
previously
adopted
in
the
form
of
capping.
So
previously,
what
we
have
done
is
capped
properties
of
until
they've
reached
CV,
a
full
CVA,
and
then
they
they
weren't
afforded
the
same
protections
once
a
property
reaches
full
CVA.
What
this
does,
what
the
recommendations
before
you
do
is
enhance
that
capping
to
also
include
properties
that
have
reached
full
CVA.
L
Okay,
so
just
explain
that
to
me
one
more
time,
so
all
the
properties
are
windy.
When
we
move
to
okay,
they
call
it
current
value
assessment
right
CVA.
So
when
we
moved
to
when,
when
the
Harris
government
changed
our
assessment
system
from
whenever
to
current
value
assessment,
they
they
basically
imposed
a
copying
and
clawback
system
that
so
that
the
properties
that
were
spiking
wouldn't
get.
Those
big
increases
all
at
once,
and
the
properties
that
were
getting
off
was
supposed
to
get
those
big
reductions
didn't
get
them
all
at
once.
L
K
L
So
you
still
have
20
percent
of
the
commercial
industrial
properties
out
there
that
are
not
at
their
at
their
100
percent
of
their
current
value
assessment.
So
for
those
properties
you're
suggesting
that
now
we
we
limit
the
increases
for
those
that
would
otherwise
be
going
up
to
a
10
percent
correct
and
so
that
that
limits
that
then,
who
pays
the
freight?
The
residential,
no.
K
L
So
so,
oh
so
I
understand
so
20
percent
of
the
of
the
the
of
the
properties
out
there
that
are
not
at
current
at
their
full
CVA.
That
would
include
a
number
of
properties
that
would
otherwise
be
receiving
or
should
have
been
receiving
reductions
20
years
ago,
they're
still
basically
picking
up
some
of
the
freight,
because
we're
we're
basically
reducing
the
spike
for
those
people
that
would
otherwise
be
getting
the
increases
through
the
speaker.
Yes,
in
a
nutshell
that
that.
L
K
It's
it's
very
difficult
to
assess
that,
and
the
reason
being
is
that
the
market
values
change
over
time.
I
understand
that,
and
so
you
know,
eventually,
we
are
going
to
reach
a
situation
where
most
properties
will
be
at
CVA.
I
can't
give
you
the
precise
date,
but
it
you
know
it's
certainly
less
than
a
decade.
L
K
A
K
G
So
we
see
this
coming,
we've
imposed
this
10%
control
on
what
the
bill
the
property
owner
can
increase
by
what
does
that
translates
to
to
a
like
a
change
in
value
of
assessment?
So,
if
my,
if
I
own
a
building-
and
it
goes
up
by
ten
percent-
that
doesn't
mean
I-
get
a
ten
percent
jump
on
my
taxes,
how
what
order
of
magnitude
of
increase
on
my
property?
Would
it
have
to
be
I'm?
Just
saying
empirically,
you
know,
would
it
have
to
be
the
trigger
at
ten
percent?
Something
big
I
think
sure.
G
So
so
thirty
was
the
was
the
water
line
across
the
city.
So
if
you
were,
if
you
got
thirty
were
doing
average,
if
he
got
less,
he
actually
got
a
decrease
in
taxes,
and
if
you
had
something
a
stir,
anomaly
passed
30%
in
four
years,
you
were
one
of
the
the
landlords
that
got
the
big
tax
bill.
Correct.
Yes,.
K
G
So
to
me,
if
I
was
a
landlord
I
said
my
building
doubled
in
value
in
four
years,
what
I
not
want
to
appeal
that
finding
to
say
you
know,
how
could
this
be?
What
has
changed?
Is
the
real
estate
market
truly
changed
that
much
did
we
have
this
big
rush
of
landlords
going
out
there
to
say?
Don't
please
reassess
me
to
something
more
reasonable.
Here's
evidence.
K
N
G
Basically,
you
know
if
I'm
the
landlord-
and
they
got
this
massive
tax
bill,
because
I
had
this
massive
increase
on
the
value
of
my
property
in
four
years,
and
you
know
looking
around
the
neighborhood,
not
much
has
changed
what
I.
Would
it
not
be
in
my
interest
to
appeal
that
CVA
just
say
you
know
come
on
impact
like
you,
you
assess
me
something
crazy
here.
Why
would
you
do
this?
Yes,.
N
G
So
was
there
activity
on
that
or
did
or
is
there
some
other
advantage
to
having
a
highly
assessed
value
property
like
you
know,
I
go
to
the
bank
without
and
get
a
bigger
mortgage
or
leverage
that
somehow
is
there.
Some
is
there
some
reason
why
I'd
happily
pay
a
little
bit
more
tax
and
pass
it
on
to
my
tenants.
G
Cuz
there
was
turnover:
okay,
I,
try
to
squeeze
two
questions
in
here,
really
quick,
because
we're
short
on
time
can
anyone
comment?
Is
there
a
gia?
Is
there
a
geospatial
disbursement?
That's
of
interest
on
this
particular
file
like
is
there?
Is
there
a
hot
spot
in
the
city
where
this
is
happening,
is
not
anywhere
else
or
is
it
kind
of
peppered
across
the
map?
G
K
G
Enough
and
in
long
term
wise
is
this
sustainable.
You
mentioned
this
is
an
interim
measure,
I
get
it.
We've
got
to
do
something
about
what
has
happened
in
instances
of
extreme
changes,
but
mathematically
are
we
getting
ourselves
into
a
trap
where
the
values
will
continue
to
go
and
be
faced
with
this
question
soon,
it'll
be
twenty
percent.
Thirty,
four,
maybe
to
be
less
it'll,
be
five
percent.
The
cap.
Where
do
you
see
this
going
in
the
long
future
and
how
do
you
think
we're
gonna
manage
it
as
a
council?
This
is
the
easier
decision.
K
So
through
the
chair,
we
are
looking
at
a
number
of
measures
and
we
want
to
engage
the
province
in
terms
of
potentially
looking
at
the
assessment
system,
how
impact
values,
properties
looking
at
potentially
different
tax
classes,
and
we
will
be
coming
back
with
a
more
sustainable
solution
to
the
issues
before
us
as
I
mentioned
earlier.
This
is
simply
an
interim
measure
to
afford
some
protection
to
those
property
owners
that
are
facing
a
substantial
increases.
Thank.
A
P
Thank
you
very
much,
madam
Speaker
I'd
like
to
table
a
motion.
Please.
My
motion
is
to
simply
delete
recommendation
number
two
and
to
replace
it
with
a
new
recommendation
and
simply
is
to
have
the
staff
to
do
some
broad
consultation
and
to
bring
back
a
report
in
July
rather
than
having
the
report
come
back
in
the
first
quarter
of
2019
I.
P
Intention
of
the
motion,
madam
Speaker,
is
to
make
sure
that
we
can
actually
get
the
work
done
quicker.
So
we
don't
miss
a
a
taxation
year
just
as
much
as
staff
have
responded,
saying
that
this
is
an
interim
measure.
It's
only
a
one
term.
Sorry,
it's
a
one
year
response
and
during
our
meeting
at
the
executive
committee,
when
I
asked
staff
whether
or
not
they
were
able
to
do
this
work
faster
and
what's
the
quickest,
they
can
respond
back.
P
L
L
P
This
is
happening
in
every
single
major
area
that
has
growth,
whether
its
Yonge
and
Eglinton,
or
perhaps
in
North
York
along
the
young
Finch
corridor,
even
along
King
and
Spadina.
It
is
happening
everywhere
and
I
was
actually
hearing
from
businesses
all
over
the
city
based
on
what
they
were
seeing.
That
was
happening
in
my
local
community.
So
by
way
of
passing
this
motion
and
adopting
the
staff
recommendations,
we're
actually
just
taking
our
time
to
find
another
landing
place.
So
this
is
just
one
step.
P
Our
next
step
is
to
find
a
more
permanent
solution,
and
that
is
going
to
require
us
doing.
Broad
consultation,
CBA
was
implemented
in
the
province
of
Ontario
in
1998
and
I.
Think
that
you
know,
with
all
the
best
intentions,
they've
created
a
system
that
is
flawed
and
we're
not
going
to
be
able
to
reform
CBA
today,
not
from
this
particular
chamber.
That
requires
a
conversation
with
the
province,
but
things
that
we
can
do
that.
P
P
Gonna
have
to
really
roll
up
our
sleeves
and
get
very
creative,
but
if
we
don't
do
it,
madam
speaker,
my
big
fear
is
that
what
is
happening
on
Yonge
Street
is
gonna
happen
in
many
other
neighborhoods,
and
we
know
that
this
growth
is
not
slowing
down
anytime
soon,
especially
not
with
these
massive
speculative
land
values
and
transactions
that
are
taking
place.
So,
let's
talk
about
CVA
just
for
one
second,
madam
Speaker,
three
methodologies
to
arrive
at
a
valuation
of
property,
one
is
comparable
approach.
P
One
is
the
income
approach
and
one
is
the
the
the
replacement
approach.
Interestingly
enough,
in
theory,
all
three
of
those
methodologies
to
evaluate
a
real
estate
should
bring
you
to
the
same
conclusion
and
value,
but,
interestingly
enough,
because
of
the
wild
speculation
of
land
and
because
the
optimal
and
high
and
best
use
approach
when
it
comes
to
the
comparable
sales
in
arriving
at
evaluation
for
CVA,
it
does
not
line
up
and
yet
CVA
through
the
highest
and
best
use.
P
Optimal
approach
for
methodologies
is
exactly
what
all
the
appraisers
are
using
at
impact,
so
the
algorithms
are
sending
our
assessment
through
the
roof
and
whether
you're
a
parking
lot
or
a
small
little
mom-and-pop
corner
shore
store
it
you're
evaluated
at
the
same
in
the
same
way.
So
that's
got
to
stop.
I
want
to
thank
staff
for
their
hard
work.
The
motion
that
councillor
Thompson
I
put
on
the
table
only
happened
in
December
and
week,
and
they
came
back
with
a
report
back
in
January.
They
did
some
very
good
work
with
all
of
us.
G
P
K
Thank
you,
speaker
and
I'll
keep
my
remarks.
Brief.
I
just
want
to
begin
by
thanking
our
staff
in
financial
services.
They
don't
always
get
the
the
recognition
from
the
floor
of
counsel
so
Casey
and
a
dear
and
Mike
and
of
course,
Joe
are
our
CFO
for
their
work,
as
well
as
our
EDC
staff
under
Mike,
Williams
I
thought.
Councillor
Holliday
alluded
to
the
real
challenge
in
his
questions
very
well,
which
is
long-term.
K
What
we're
doing
here
is
not
the
solution
long-term.
We
are
dealing
with
a
broken
assessment
model
which
is
not
in
the
city's
purview
and
the
broken
assessment
model.
Her
under
current
value
assessment
with
highest
and
best
use.
It
doesn't
work
in
a
successful
City.
That's
as
counselor
wong-tam
was
referring
to
in
a
successful
city
with
land
values
and
speculation,
driving
them
up
the
assessment
model.
K
We
have
pushes
out
many
of
the
enterprises
and
the
uses
in
the
buildings
we're
seeking
to
protect,
and
so
when
you
have
401
Richmond
in
my
ward,
that's
being
taxed
at
a
commercial
rate
on
a
highest
and
best
use
as
if
they
were
a
gap
in
a
Starbucks
as
opposed
to
159
arts
and
cultural
nonprofits
and
enterprises.
That's
broken
when
you
have
a
French
restaurant,
the
Select
Bistro
that
owns
a
two
building,
a
two-story
building
on
Wellington
being
taxed
as
if
they
were
a
12
story.
K
Condo,
then
it's
broken
or
when
you
have
King
and
Spadina
heritage
buildings
that
we
at
the
sea
are
trying
to
protect
and
conserve,
that
are
being
taxed
as
if
they
were
40
storey,
condo
towers,
thus
creating
a
disincentive
to
keep
the
heritage
which
we
are
saying
we
want.
The
model
is
broken,
and
so
the
assessment
model
is
what
needs
to
be
fixed,
but
that's
not
in
our
purview.
So
how
do
we
use
fiscal
policy
as
a
tool
for
city
building?
I?
Think
what's
being
brought
here
today,
with
capping
and
claw
backs?
K
Is
a
critical
and
important
first
step,
I?
Think,
what's
coming
forward
to
executive
committee
next
week
is
part
of
the
budget
deliberations
for
the
new
creative
co-locations
facilities.
Tax
class
is
an
important
first
step,
but
our
work
to
ensure
that
as
councilor
holiday
spoke
to
the
long
term
to
deal
with
the
assessment
model,
that
province
is
where
we
ought
to
go,
but
that
does
not
take
away
from
the
important
steps
we're
taking
here
today
as
a
city
and
I
want
to
reiterate
again
my
thanks
to
our
staffing
and
Finance
for
making
this
happen.
K
C
Troi
see,
thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
Downtown
small
business
in
particular
have
been
hard
with
tax
increases
in
recent
years.
We
know
the
issues
were
relates
to
the
current
value
assessment,
by
impact
for
properties
being
based
on
highest
values
in
the
area
which
often
are
based
on
residential
condominium
developments.
The
vibrant
residential
community
in
the
downtown
core
is
a
good
thing
for
small
business.
It
provides
local
customers
who
can
shop
near
to
home,
but
the
unintended
knock
of
effect
of
skyrocketing
small
small
business
property
assessments
due
to
the
land
value
of
nearby
condominium
development
is
suffocating.
C
L
L
Nothing
could
be
further
from
the
truth
in
that
statement
right
there
on
this
particular
issue
and
I'll,
tell
you
what,
when
this
system,
when
we
went
to
curtain
and
by
the
way,
I'm,
not
a
fan
of
current
value
assessment,
I
understand
that
okay
and
I
understand
the
inequities,
the
the
sort
of
inherent
unfairness
--is
that
that
system
basically
introduces
into
our
tax
regime
for
people
right
across
the
board.
But
here's
what's
been
happening
with
this
particular
issue.
L
You
all
know
what
happened
properties
properties
downtown
in
the
city
of
Toronto.
Basically,
you
know
quadrupled
overnight
in
terms
of
it.
In
terms
of
value
and
in
terms
of
assessment,
their
taxes
went
from
700
$800
to
3000
3500
4000
dollars.
They
started
to
carry
the
freight
for
the
rest
of
the
city.
That's
what
amalgamation
did
that's,
what
updating
the
current
value
the
taxation
system
did,
but
for
businesses
for
the
commercial
industrial
sector,
Harris
introduced
the
form
of
capping
and
clawback
system.
L
What
it
basically
did.
It
was
those
businesses
and
commercial
properties
that
were
supposed
to
be
getting
these
massive
increases.
Those
increases
were
leveled
off
those
businesses
that
had
been
overpaying
for
years
since
1940
for
years
and
years
and
years
that
been
paid
way
beyond
what
they
were.
They
should
have
been
under
the
system.
Those
businesses
basically
were
told
you
gotta
carry
the
freight
for
those
other
guys
almost
forever,
and
many
in
some
cases
now,
I
agreed
with
that
earlier
on.
L
I
understand
that
in
some
cases
the
increases
would
have
been
through
the
roof,
so
you
say:
okay,
give
them
a
little
time
to
adjust,
but
20
years
and
then
20
years
later,
we're
still
saying.
20
percent
of
those
people
still
haven't
reached
that
that
that's
sort
of
the
level
of
fairness
that
equity
in
a
system.
Let's
continue
it
some
more
so
that
those
people
who
have
been
overpaying
in
the
commercial
industrial
property
classes
for
decades
and
decades.
Where
would
what
this
tells
them
today?
L
L
We
need
to
bring
it
to
a
place
where,
where
everybody
pays
on
the
basis
of
their
value,
doesn't
matter
where
you
are
no
matter
whether
you're
downtown
Yonge,
Street
or
downtown
Scarborough,
why
should
downtown
Scarborough
or
the
suburbs
and
Scarborough
sir
North
York
or
other
places
that
have
been
carrying
the
freight
on
this
one
for
two
decades?
Now
we're
saying
to
them,
you
still
got
to
continue
to
carry
the
freight
here.
L
You
still
got
to
continue
to
overpay,
because
we
refuse
to
give
those
other
people
who
should
be
paying
more
those
increases
passing
those
increases
onto
them.
We
need
to
bring
this
to
a
closure.
We
need
to
set
a
clock
to
it
and
we
need
to
bring
everybody
to
an
even
equitable,
fair
place,
because
this,
what
we're
doing
here
is
not
fair,
so
a
title
that
says:
tax
policy
tools
to
support
businesses,
yes
support
some
businesses
in
some
areas
to
the
jet
riman
of
others.
In
other
places
that
have
been
overtaxed
over
paying
for
decades.
M
You
very
much
Speaker
I,
too,
want
to
offer
my
thanks.
First
to
a
council,
mate
council,
Wong
Tim,
who
took
up
this
issue,
I
recall
there
was
an
article
I
believe
was
a
Toronto
Star,
where
the
councillor
was
I,
think
she
was
pictured
in
the
star
and
she
had
made
mention
about
the
impact
that
this
was
having
on
some
of
her
business
and
so
on,
and
recognizing
that
clearly,
whether
or
not
it
was
Yonge
Street,
lower,
Street
or
bathos
or
any
other
area
in
the
city.
M
I'm,
an
agreement
of
what's
here,
I
would
have
would
have
liked
to
have
done
more,
but
I
think
the
staff
have
come
to
a
very
rational
position
where
they
say.
We
certainly
want
to
see
a
cap
on
the
businesses
that
has
been
assessed
in
a
tax
increase,
that's
greater
than
ten
percent,
and
so
we
are
trying
to
impact
that
and
try
to
affect
that.
We've
dealt
with
situations
in
the
past
speaker,
which
were
rather
one-off
and
I.
Recall,
though,
the
one
that
we
dealt
with
some
time
ago
was
with
red,
Pat's
sugar.
M
We
were
dealing
with
that
company
and
they've
been
in
Toronto
on
the
waterfront,
such
a
landmark
business.
For
such
a
long
time,
they
in
fact
were
going
to
close
up
shop
and
leave
the
city
of
Toronto
because
of
this
increase
with
respect
to
the
current
value
assessment
and
the
impact
on
their
taxes
to
be
paid
to
the
city
and
so
on.
So
we
were
about
to
lose
many
many
jobs,
I,
remember
working
with
mr.
M
Williams
and
the
staff
and
finance
and
others
as
well
in
the
local
councillor
of
the
day,
the
the
late
Pam
McConnell
and
the
efforts
that
we
made
in
order
to
ensure
that
we
could
actually
find
a
way
through
a
process.
And
of
course
we
had
to
go
on
our
knees.
To
point
of
fact,
2m
cap
to
say:
look,
you
know
this
was
a
right
pair
of
the
things
that
we
need
to
do.
M
M
It
doesn't
make
a
lot
of
sense
to
me
and
I
say
this
because
I
know
I've
had
numerous
discussion,
I'm
sure
other
members
of
council-
and
maybe
the
mayor
has
had
as
well
with
the
province
about
the
impact
of
the
CVA
and
how
it's
actually
affecting
our
businesses
and
so
on,
and
so
we
do
have
to
stand
up.
We
do
have
to
fight
for
our
businesses.
We
do
have
to
help
them
because
we
know
if
we
don't
help
them.
What
we
will
see
is
very
much
that's.
M
They
all
had
to
close
down
or
move
elsewhere
because
of
the
they
lead
that
this
is
the
CVA
current
value
assessment,
because
all
of
a
sudden-
but
it
was
overnight
that
the
value
of
those
business,
the
assessed
value
of
those
businesses
had
increased
so
dramatically
that
the
businesses
there
could
not
afford
to
pay
the
taxes
and
so
on,
and
so
this
is
the
road
that
we're
actually
going
down.
That's
won't
unless
we
do
something
about
it.
M
Clearly,
those
businesses
on
Main
Street
are
not
going
to
be
there,
we'll
be
finding
that
the
highest
and
best
use
offer
is
what's
going
to
be
there
and,
in
essence,
we're
going
to
lose
the
opportunity
of
the
jobs
in
the
city.
We're
gonna
lose
the
vibrancy
of
our
Main,
Street
and
I.
Think
it's
time
that
the
provincial
government,
through
its
agency
I,
am
cap,
recognise
the
impact
that
this
is
actually
having
on
our
in
our
city.
Thank
you
speaking
thank.
A
R
Madam
Speaker
again
I
think
this
has
been
a
quality
debate.
I
would
say
through
you
to
councilor
prude,
so
only
that
I
hope
he
was
facing
facing
either
north
or
east
when
he
made
his
remarks
north,
if
he
wanted
to
direct
them
properly,
where
they
belong,
which
is
at
Queen's,
Park
or
East
would
be
an
acceptable
second
choice,
because
that's
where
the
impact
headquarters
is
because
what
we're
really
dealing
with
here
today,
madam
Speaker,
is
a
poor
assessment
policy,
a
very
poor
assessment
policy.
It's
been
poor
for
a
long
time.
R
I
really
got
to
the
point
where
I
was
so
fed
up
and
so
frustrated
with
impact
and
it's
inflexibility,
and
it's
insensitivity
and
it's
awkwardness
in
terms
of
actually
dealing
with
reality
that
I
sort
of
came
to
the
conclusion
that
what
I
called
at
the
time,
one
of
those
controlled
demolitions,
it
was
in
order
where
you
actually
safely
evacuated
the
people
from
the
building
down
there
and
Pickering
I
think
that's
where
it
is
and
then
just
blew
it
up,
because
you
know
it
just
requires
such
fundamental
reform
and
governments.
Plural,
I!
R
R
Well,
look
this
isn't
our
doing,
because
most
of
what's
going
on
here
is
a
function
of
the
assessment,
but
you
know
we
we
are
going
to
do
something
about
it.
So
here
we
are
and
I
think
it's
not
unlike
the
first
item
that
we
dealt
with
earlier
today,
which
is
what
we're
doing
today
is
not
meant
to
be
the
answer.
R
You
know
yes
at
a
cost
to
some
others,
but
you
know
what
I
mean
I
think
in
many
areas
of
our
life
in
Toronto
and
in
Canada
we're
all
in
this
together,
and
we
want
to
make
sure
that
overall,
just
like
the
health
system,
where
there's
some
people
that
use
that
more
than
others.
But
we
all
pay
that
we
maintain
a
healthy
business
community
here
and
I.
R
Think
this
cap
is
a
fair
way
in
which
to
do
that,
but
pending
the
other
recommendation,
which
is
that
our
staff
be
looking
at
other
options
and
even
more
important
than
that.
I
think
we
won't
have
gone
too
far.
To
be
quite
candid,
if
we
don't
get
some
fundamental
reform
to
the
assessment
policy
in
law
which,
at
the
very
least,
takes
into
account
the
fact
that
not
every
single
piece
of
property
in
Toronto
is
going
to
be
a
hotel.
A
office
building
or
a
condo.
R
We
know
that
anybody
would
know
that,
but
yet
the
thing
works
on
a
kind
of
one-size-fits-all
basis
like
it
always
has,
and
it
causes
terrible
unfairness
to
people
in
the
process
and
so
I
just
hope
that
we
don't
look
at
today
as
a
conclusion,
but
rather
as
a
beginning.
It's
a
beginning
that
provides
some
shorter-term
relief
and
certainty
for
people,
but
that
must
be
accompanied
by
a
will
on
the
part
of
all
of
us,
as
well
as
our
staff,
public
service
staff.
R
Colleagues
to
both
pursue
other
options,
and
there
is
a
report
coming
back
on
that
and
to
pursue
a
change
to
provincial
policy
which,
like
in
so
many
areas,
is
often
so
slow
to
come.
If
ever
and
I
pledge
myself
certainly
to
work
with,
as
I
have
I
raised
it
with
the
Minister
of
Finance
for
Ontario
as
recently
as
last
week,
and
will
continue
to
raise
it
and
continue
to
to
fight
on
it,
and
maybe
the
election
gives
us
an
opportunity
to
make
some
more
progress
on
that.
Thank
you,
madam
Speaker.
Thank.
N
A
L
R
I
completely
I
supported
I,
made
it
a
priority
item
and
have
strongly
supported
doing
something
along
the
lines
of
what
we're
doing.
I
simply
have
said,
and
it's
not,
that
inconsistent
was
what
you
said.
It's
just
that
you
I
think
we're
directing
your
comments,
somehow
people
in
this
room,
as
opposed
to
other
rooms
where
they
could
actually
change
some
of
this
I
just
said
this
is
not
a
permanent
solution.
Everybody
knows
that
we
all
know
that
the
permanent
solution
rests
in
other
options.
R
L
You
agree
that
by
continuing
the
system
of
capping
and
clawback
that
we,
while
we
continue
to
charge
a
lesser
rate,
attacks
to
businesses
or
commercial
properties,
that
it
should
have
been
paying
more
many
many
years
ago
and
and
we're
basically
continuing
to
overcharge
a
class
of
properties
that
basically
have
been
paying
more
than
their
fair
share
for
years
and
years
and
years,
it
just
continues
an
unfair
and
unfair
an
inequity
in
our
tax
system.
You
agree
with
that,
and.
R
I'm
heartened,
madam
Speaker,
through
you
to
the
member
that
our
officials
have
been
asked
in
the
second
part
of
the
recommendation
in
this
very
report,
to
examine
all
options
with
respect
to
our
taxation
policies,
to
try
to
make
sure
that
the
small
businesses
generally,
including
some
of
those
you
might
feel
have
been
unfairly
dealt
with,
are
dealt
with
in
a
fairer
manner
and
so
I'm
assuming
they'll.
Look
at
all
options.
There's
no
restriction
on
what
they
can
look
at
in
the
motion.
L
You
understand
as
well
that
we
are
not
bound
as
I
understand
it
from
our
staff.
We
are
not
bound
to
the
10%
limit.
We
can
accelerate
that
we
can
create
a
more
level
playing
field
and
more
fairness
in
this
system
by
accelerate
by
removing
that
the
10%
increasing
it
to
15
or
20
or
25.
We
can
do
that
now.
We
don't
have
to
rely
on
impact.
We
don't
have
to
rely
on
anybody
to
do
that
and.
R
I,
madam
speaker,
through
you
again,
I
gave
him
the
wrong
information
either
Speaker
I
threw
you
again.
I
also
heard
other
people
talking
about
the
fact.
We
should
lower
that
10%
number.
So
the
bottom
line
is
the
10%
is
what's
been
recommended.
It's
a
recommendation.
I
support
the
staff
are
gonna,
have
full
open
opportunity
to
look
at
every
other
option.
They
wish
to
recommend
to
us
in
order
to
help
small
businesses
of
all
kinds
across
the
city
and
I'm.
Looking
forward
to
reading
that
report,
but.
L
But
you
you
would
agree
just
just
from
a
fairness
perspective
that
if
twenty
years
ago
you
had
a
commercial
property
in
Downsview-
and
someone
said
to
you
that
we're
implementing
a
current
value
assessment
system,
where
you
should
be
you,
we
know
you've
been
overpaying
by
thousands
of
dollars.
Your
taxes
should
come
down
by
thousands
of
dollars
and
someone
else's
should
go
up.
L
R
He's
talking
about
it's
the
same,
which
is
and
I
understand,
the
system
was
meant
to
operate
in
what
I'll
call
sort
of
revenue
or
a
Susman
assessment,
neutral
basis
where
some
went
up
and
others
went
down
by
the
same
measure.
I
understand
that's
how
the
system
was
meant
to
operated
and
again
I
repeat
what
I
said:
I
think
our
staff
now
in
being
directed
by
us,
to
look
at
all
options
to
try
and
remedy
some
of
the
inequities.
R
Plural
that
have
arisen
here,
we'll
have
full
opportunity
to
give
us
a
report
when
it
comes
back
to
us
to
look
at
all
of
these
things,
but
in
the
meantime,
I
strongly
support,
not
only
that
request
of
them,
but
also
the
Ken
%
cap,
so
that
businesses
that
we're
going
to
be
adversely
affected
by
a
combination
of
tax
policy
and
assessment
policy
will
have
a
degree
of
certainty
and
some
degree
of
relief
from
what
we're
exorbitant
and
unacceptable
and
unbearable
a
tax
increase.
You.
L
L
You
should
fairly
be
paying
$10,000
less
in
taxes
than
you
are
today,
but
then
later
they
came
back
to
you
and
said
you
know
what
we're
implementing
the
system,
but
we're
only
going
to
bring
your
taxes
down
just
a
little
bit,
so
we
can
protect
someone
else
from
going
up
and
we've
been
doing
that
for
two
decades
and
you've
been
continuing
to
overpay
for
two
decades
or
more
way
beyond
when
they
implemented
the
system,
so
that
someone
else
could
benefit
from
that.
You
think
that
that's
fair
and
we
should
continue
that.
R
Why
someone
who
heard
that
commentary,
or
those
two
sets
of
communications,
would
be
frustrated
by
that,
but
again
we're
gonna
be
implementing
the
10%
cap
for
tax
bills
one
year
over
another,
so
that
people
will
have
a
degree
of
relief
in
certainty
and
our
staff
are
now
going
to
look
at
the
policies
that
you've
made
reference
to
and
make
recommendations
to
us
as
to
how
we
can
make
them
a
fairer
for
smaller
businesses
and
I'm.
Very
gratified
we're
gonna
have
that
opportunity
to
review
those
recommendations.
Thank.
G
I
G
R
Speaker
I
would
answer
just
a
plain
yes
to
that
with
just
a
minor
modification,
when
you
say
an
unfair
assessment,
I
think
it's
it's.
It
turns
out
to
be
unfair,
but
it's
really
just
because
they're
applying
the
wrong
sort
of
criteria
that
don't
take
into
account
the
realities
of
small
business
and
and
the
realities
of
the
use
of
different
properties
which
are
not
going
to
be
condo,
towers
or
office
towers.
All
the
way
up
and
down
the
streets
we're
talking
about,
and
then
the
only
other
thing
that
I
would
add.
R
Is
that
not
only
are
we
going
to
press
for
a
change
to
that
assessment
policy,
as
others
have
done
before
us,
but
hopefully
more
successfully,
but
we're
asking
our
public
service
to
also
provide
us
with
other
ideas,
other
options
as
to
things
we
could
do
to
alleviate
the
situation
you
described,
but
the
short
answer
to
your
question
is
yes.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Okay,.
A
A
C
A
A
Let
it
go
we're
good,
so
nobody
else
has
questions
so
you're
just
releasing
it.
I
got
my
questions
answered
okay,
so
on
the
item
on
favor
carried.
My
next
item
is
page
three
edy
25.5
ensuring
a
robust
hotel
supplies.
Counselor
want
em,
you
held
the
item
down.
Do
you
have
questions?
Yes,
I.
Do
madam
Speaker,
okay,
so
questions
to
staff?
Yes,.
I
P
Very
much
ma'am
chair
for
you
to
our
general
manager
of
Economic,
Development
and
culture,
with
respect
to
the
the
number
of
planning
applications
that
are
in
the
pipeline
for
approval
and
for
review.
Many
of
them
are
actually
now
affecting
hotels,
full
on
hotels
and
they're.
Proposing
to
demolish
them
is
that
correct
either.
A
P
P
A
A
P
I
P
J
P
P
So
while
the
applications
are
being
reviewed
and
and
planning
staff
are
raising
these
concerns
with
the
applicant
asking
them
to
reintroduce
the
same
level
of
hotel
rooms-
or
perhaps
you
know
just
a
modification
of
more
or
slightly
less
the
response
from
the
applicants?
Has
it
been
largely
favorable?
Are
they
coming
back
with
like-for-like
generally.
P
I
I
The
large
hotel,
sorry,
the
large
meeting
and
conference
planets,
always
take
a
look
at
the
availability
of
hotel
rooms
when
they're
to
make
sure
that
there's
enough
space
for
their
attendees
to
get
housed
and
therefore
we
know
some
very
large
conventions
that
cannot
come
to
Toronto
because
there
are
not
enough
hotel
rooms
in
it.
And.
P
P
I
S
I
Could
that
be
hosted
in
the
convention
center
with
with
the
accompanying
rooms
that
would
be
required
in
hotels
in
our
city,
so
we
had
Microsoft
booked
and
they
pulled
out
of
that
booking
because
of
a
worry
of
one
of
the
reasons
was
a
significant
worry
about
the
amount
of
hotel
space.
Thank
you
very
much.
Okay,.
P
P
Thank
you
very
much.
It's
it's
a
fairly
straightforward
motion,
madam
Speaker
I'm.
Simply
asking
the
staff
to
report
back
on
the
recommendation
by
by
April
2018
at
the
next
meeting
at
the
meeting
of
economic
development
and
culture.
I.
Think
that
you
know,
staff
are
prepared
to
do
this
work,
which
is
to
find
to
explore
the
creation
of
a
hotel
accommodation,
replacement
policy
and
I
can't
stress,
madam
Speaker.
How
important
it
is
that
we
close
this
particular
loophole.
P
P
Six
ten
hundred
rooms
at
the
Chelsea
Hotel,
the
application
that's
before
us,
is
not
even
going
to
replace
close
to
a
half
and
and
that's
the
largest
hotel
that
we
have
in
the
city,
and
so
when
we're
talking
about
the
magnitude
of
numbers
of
visitors
coming
in
through
a
microsoft
convention
of
a
hundred
thousand
there's
just
no
way.
Of
course,
we
were
not
going
to
be
a
competitor.
Of
course
they
were
gonna
back
out
from
the
City
of
Toronto.
P
We
can't
host
them
and
then,
at
the
same
time
we
want
to
talk
about
building
a
second
Convention,
Center
I
would
say,
don't
bother
unless
it's
going
to
have
a
large,
very,
very
significant
volume
of
hotel
capacity.
There
I
would
say
simply
don't
bother
we're
at
it.
I
would
say.
Madam
Speaker,
we
have
a
bit
of
a
crisis
here.
P
I
go
again,
I
hate
to
use
this
word,
but
where
we
have
an
emergency
before
us,
madam
Speaker
and
the
emergency
is
that
we're
losing
Hotel,
high
quality
mid
range
hotels
at
alarming
rate,
and
if
we
don't
build
this
policy-
and
we
have
to
get
it
back
onto
the
floor
very
quickly,
because
we
need
to
have
some
type
of
lever
to
negotiate
with
these
developers
as
they
come
in
with
their
applications.
If
we
don't
do
this
in
quick
order,
we
are
not
just
going
to
lose
the
Chelsea
we're
going
to
lose
them.
P
The
Courtyard
Marriott
we're
going
to
see
a
lot
of
other
hotels,
go
under
the
wrecking
ball
and
you
will
not
see
them
back.
So,
yes,
we
have
an
affordable
housing
crisis,
guess
how
it
happened.
And
yes,
we
are
doing
very,
very
well
internationally
from
the
perspective
attracting
international
tourists.
Toronto
is
on
fire.
People
are
talking
about
us,
but
we're
not
going
to
be
able
to
compete
for
anything,
not
for
quite
honestly
for
FIFA
or
the
Olympics
or
anything
else.
P
M
Think
that
there's
a
corresponding
component
of
that
argument
that
we
have
to
realize
as
well
many
of
the
conventions
that
we
actually
want
to
attract
in
this
city.
We
actually
can't,
and
the
reason
why
we
actually
can
is
that
we
don't
have
the
convention
space
to
be
able
to
facilitate
bringing
those
conventions
here.
So
even
with
respect
to
the
Microsoft,
it
wasn't
just
the
issue
around
the
hotel,
availabilities
or
rooms
that
we
actually
didn't
have
in
the
city.
We
don't
have
enough
amenities.
M
Just
last
week,
speaker
I
had
to
call
the
owner
of
the
Royal
York
Hotel.
In
order
to
speak
to
her
about
an
issue
we
were
having
with
a
convention
to
come
into
the
city,
they
wanted
to
bring
the
convention
in
in
in
October.
They
couldn't
get
those
dates,
they
want
to
bring
them
in
in
November
and
they
can
get
those
eight.
They
said
perhaps
December,
because
we
have
a
narrow
window
there
with
respect
to
capacity
and
so
on.
M
So
the
point
that
I'm
simply
making
to
you
is
that
it's
not
just
the
issue
with
respect
to
the
shortage
of
the
rooms,
because
even
with
respect
to
our
planning
and
even
some
of
us
as
councillors,
we're
not
amenable
to
adding
in
additional
space
or
capacity
to
buildings
that
are
being
built,
so
we
can
actually
have
more
hotels
or
hotel
rooms.
So
there
is
a
challenge
with
respect
to
this
issue.
The
whole
dichotomy
in
terms
of
whether
or
not
we
have
an
offer
don't
have
enough,
and
so
on.
M
It's
a
greater
conversation
that
has
to
take
place.
I,
don't
think
it's
just
the
issue
around.
You
know
the
hotels
and
what
I
was
in
Hong
Kong
recently
and
I
met
with
the
owners
of
the
Delta
Chelsea,
and
they
have
plans
to
build
a
particular
hotel.
They
have
gone
to
London
England,
to
build
a
hotel,
they've
gone
to
San
Francisco.
The
discussion
I
had
with
them
about
spending
money's
here
in
Toronto.
M
Obviously
they're
going
to
proceed
with
respect
to
spending
some
money
here,
but
when
the
mayor
sent
an
email
to
them
about
they,
you
know
that
the
concerns
that
they
had
regarding
you
know
the
planning
issues
around
putting
a
hotel
in
the
city
the
long
the
amount
of
time
it
takes.
All
of
these
things
create
problems.
So
if
builders
and
developers
can
actually
advance
the
building
opportunities
for
their
hotels
they'll
do
it
quicker.
It
seems
to
take
an
inordinate
amount
of
time
here.
M
So
I
just
wanted
to
raise
those
issues
speaker
to
let
you
know
that
it
isn't
just
the
fact
of
capacity.
It
is
even
just
the
ability
to
go
through
the
planning
process
that
really
creates
a
level
of
frustration
so
to
create
that
environment
where
people
actually
don't
want
to
invest,
and
so
those
are
some
of
the
challenges
that
we
have
to
look
at.
We
have
to
deal
with
those.
A
O
A
C
A
H
C
G
Can
someone
talk
to
me
a
little
bit
about
any
analysis
that
was
done
on
the
segment
of
a
proposed
transit
right-of-way
along
the
lakeshore
from
I?
Think
that
it's
called
the
Humber
base
section?
Has
anyone
done
any
impact
analysis
to
the
traffic
and
the
motoring
environment?
Does
this
involve
any
changes
to
turns
Michigan
u-turns?
That
kind
of
thing
the
things
that
we've
been
talking
about
with
the
modifications
to
the
Edmonton
LRT
project?
I,
don't
see
any
motoring
environment
analysis
in
the
report,
because
someone
offer
comment
on
that.
C
G
Same
okay,
so
the
same
number
of
lanes
will
be
preserved.
What
about
any
turning
movements
into
st.
Palais,
Royale
or
one
of
the
the
under
passes
that
go
underneath
the
the
Gardiner
Expressway
Palace,
pier
development
I,
think
suggested
by
one
of
my
colleagues
here:
are
there
any
are
there?
Any
interruptions
to
those
left
turns
as
I
know
that
putting
a
transit
corridor
through
a
major
arterial
can
disrupt
those
type
of
movements.
There's
a
central
bone
of
contention
contention
with
the
Eglinton
proposal.
C
G
C
G
G
I
had
a
different
questions
and
I
think
I
wanted
to
talk
about
the
extension
along
base
Street.
Can
someone
confirm
to
me
that
the
cost
was
between
the
order
of
400
to
600
million
dollars
for
that
small
segment
down
there
I
know
one
of
the
options
that
we
were
looking
at
was
to
convert
the
the
existing
streetcar
tracks
underground
into
a
pedestrian
tunnel.
So
why
do
we
cast
aside
that
particular
option.
S
G
G
G
S
S
Q
Q
S
The
approach
to
Union
Station,
starting
with
that
one,
we're
looking
at
a
peak
hour
flow
of
passengers
of
approximately
3,700
in
the
peak
hour
peak
direction.
The
design
in
that
section
is
aimed
at
something
more
robust,
approximately
7,000
as
we
move
away
from
Union
Station.
Obviously,
the
passenger
numbers
decline
we're
looking
at
approximately
500
to
a
thousand
in
the
Exhibition
Place
area.
Q
K
Q
Where
could
we
find
what
other
projects
are
in
the
realm
of
its
roughly
a
billion
dollars?
One
point
one
point,
one:
to
1.4
billion
for
this
level
of
transit
infrastructure.
What's
the
range,
what
types
of
projects
have
that
dollar
value
that
would
need
to
be
pushed
later
on
or
changed
significantly
to
to
to
address
this
pressure
so.
K
Q
George
Street
wouldn't
be
enough,
but
changing
direction
on
the
gardener
or
Scarborough
of
the
Scarborough
subway
extension
would
both
would
be
in
the
in
the
same
value
realm
that
could
accommodate
an
additional
transit
project
of
this
scale.
Yes,
that's
correct,
okay,
kids.
Can
someone
remind
me?
Thank
you
very
much.
Can
someone
remind
me
of
the
timeline
because
the
ea4
portions
of
this
was
we're
started
before
I?
Was
a
city
councilor
in
2008
correct?
Q
S
S
Q
S
Q
E
Thank
you
very
much.
My
issue
is
the
it's
the
peace
between
Union,
Station
and
Queens
key.
Let
me
start
with
this
question.
I
asked
the
former
city
planner
this
same
question:
what
kind
of
population
density
are
we
looking
in
the
next
10
20,
30
years
being
added
to
an
already
intensifying
waterfront.
S
Through
the
chair
as
part
of
this
project,
we
looked
at
the
population
employment
forecast
throughout
this
study
area.
The
key
areas
in
terms
of
growth
are
in
Humber,
Bay
shores,
Liberty,
Village
and
downtown
on
the
Portland's
in
particular.
We're
looking
at
numbers
of
twenty
to
forty
thousand
in
terms
of
population
increase
significant
numbers
right
along
the
waterfront
in.
E
S
E
E
So
we
have
done
in
the
EA.
Tdc
did
an
EA
and
it
led
to
the
conclusion
that
the
best
way
to
develop
waterfront
East
was
to
add
capacity
to
the
underground
connection
between
Union,
Station
and
Queens
key.
So
this
question
to
the
TTC:
could
you
affirm
that
we've
done
that
that
the
TTC
has
done
that
work
had
done
that
work
or
has
done
that
work
through.
E
E
C
E
C
E
Okay
and
can
I
ask
I
just
said
to
the
while
I'm,
not
sure
to
the
planning
staff
how
much
of
that
exercise
it,
because
I
know
that
that
we
all
know
that
that
peace
between
Union
Station
and
Queens
key
is
an
expensive
proposition.
Is
this
an
area
where,
frankly,
while
it's
almost
a
redundant
question,
so
is
this
a
place
where
we
should
be
saving
money
or
really
investing
given
the
kinds
of
densities
that
are
going
on
the
waterfront
through.
M
The
the
chair
just
to
clarify
that
is
an
expensive
section
of
of
the
plan.
That
also,
though,
includes
the
cost
of
the
the
East
Bay
front
part.
It's
not
just
the
Queens
keyd
Union
loop
and
that's
a
very
critical
piece
of
the
of
the
infrastructure
of
the
the
line,
one
of
the
most
important
piece
not
a
place
to
cheap
out.
A
H
S
H
H
The
ami
thank
you,
mister,
lady,
so
and
and
on
counter
holiday,
deputy
mayor
holidays.
Questioning
of
this
study
and
I.
Don't
think
he
really
understands
the
type
of
study
that's
happening
there.
We
call
it
the
Park
Lawn
master
study.
This
is
just
not
a
study.
That's
going
to
take
two
three
months
and
come
back
to
recount
incorrect.
H
H
And
then
guess
the
big
unknown
at
Parkland
Lakeshore?
What's
that
stepping
point
now
and
we've
had
no
investment
in
transit
there,
that
our
city
manager
has
said
that
in
Prior
meetings
across
street
we
have
the
craft
plan,
how
big,
how
many
acres
are
over
there
on
the
other
side
of
the
street
through.
H
H
S
H
You,
madam
Speaker,
and
this
is
music
to
my
ears-
this
report
coming
forward.
I,
want
to
thank
the
PC
manager,
John
levy
for
helping
me
bring
this
forward.
It's
very
important
that
we
get
this
done
and
on
the
books
we
have
an
explosion
just
in
the
West
End.
The
big
unknown
is
we'll.
Have
the
mr.
Christie
plant
the
crap
plant,
whatever
happens
there,
if
it's
mixed
user
industrial,
we're
gonna
need
transit
there.
H
So,
on
the
our
deputy
mayor
holidays
question
with
the
two
lanes
before
they
used
to
concern
me,
but
now
we
have
express
buses
heading
downtown
that
take
40
minutes
sitting
in
traffic
to
go
one
kilometer
and
if
you
look
around
them,
there's
one
person
in
every
car
and
I've
had
the
mayor.
A
number
of
patients
we're
out
there
last
week
for
a
press
conference,
he's
hearing
it
loud
and
clear
from
my
residents
that
transit
has
to
be
improved
there
and
and
I
want
to
thank
the
mayor
for
coming
out
on
a
number
of
occasions.
H
But
it's
at
the
tipping
point.
We
have
to
do
something
and
if
you
look
at
parkland
or
lakeshore
I've
talked
to
the
TTC.
If
we
curb
from
parkland
and
lakeshore
going
to
the
current
Humber
loop,
which
is
about
I'd,
say
a
kilometer
and
then
you've
got
all
the
work
encounter,
dousset's
Ward,
that's
already
under
the
work,
is
being
done
now,
there's
already
a
dedicated
runway
close
to
the
st.
Joe's
hospital
and
stops.
We've
got
30
percent
design
going
in
behind
Exhibition
Place,
going
out
the
west
to
join
with
Dufferin.
That's
a
30%
design
that
happens.
H
H
Dollars
or
more,
but
this
is
the
link
we
have
to
find.
So
this
is
what
my
rents
want
to
hear
and
I
wanted
to
say.
This
is
can't
be
any
more
important
and
it's
right
across
the
waterfront.
So
this
is
a
very
important
piece
and
I
said
the
the
crab
plant.
Whatever
is
going
to
happen
there,
it's
going
to
be
huge,
it's
at
a
tipping
point
now
and
we
have
to
come
forward
with
something
so
I'm
happy
to
this
forward.
Ask
you
to
support
this
important
plan.
Thank.
C
Troi
see
thank
you.
Madam
Speaker.
Council
has
already
determined
that
Queens
key
East
LRT
is
a
priority
project.
When
that
plan
was
approved
in
2010,
we
intended
to
be
ahead
of
the
game
and
leading
the
revitalization
of
the
precinct
with
transit.
But
now
we
are
no
longer
at
the
beginning
of
the
redevelopment
course
intercourse.
Entertainment,
George,
Brown,
College,
residential
development
by
Tridel,
Hines
Daniels,
have
opened
or
are
or
are
under
construction
sidewalk
Toronto,
with
a
major
investment
of
50
million
u.s.
C
is
studying
the
next
wave
of
development
at
Queens
key
two
weeks
ago,
I
attended
the
groundbreaking
of
the
new
LCBO
head
office
in
the
lower
young
precinct.
At
the
event,
Mayor
John
Tory
rightly
encouraged
our
provincial
partners
to
come
to
the
table
with
funding
for
this
project,
so
I'm
supporting
continuing
the
study
of
transit
options
for
Bayfront
LRT
to
evaluate
a
solution
that
provides
excellent
transit
and
gets
this
project
going
as
soon
as
possible.
Thank
you.
Thank
You.
E
E
E
Do
it
on
the
cheap
kind
of
solution,
not
when
you're,
adding
hundreds,
literally
hundreds
of
thousands
of
people
to
waterfront,
East
and
waterfront
West
you're,
going
to
have
to
make
that
connection
that
missed
that
link
right.
There
is
going
to
be
absolutely
critical
to
any
infrastructure.
That
then
follows
going
eastward
and
westward.
E
So
my
hope-
and
my
plea
and
my
eyes
will
be
on
our
planning
staff
and
on
our
TTC
to
do
the
right
thing
there
and
if
it
cost
half
a
billion
dollars,
it
costs
half
a
billion
dollars
and
get
over
it
because
you're
doing
this
not
for
your
children,
but
for
your
children's
children
and
they'll
regret
it.
If
we
don't
do
the
right
thing,
it
is
600
metres
between
Queens,
Key
and
Union
Station,
making
a
mistake.
E
There
will
can
cost
you
literally
hundreds
of
thousands
of
transit,
rides
on
a
weekly
basis,
and
you
don't
want
people
going
into
their
cars,
are
not
taking
the
journeys
or
naughty
that
they
need
to
take
or
not
contributing
to
the
economic
vitality
the
downtown,
because
that
missing
link
is
not
dealt
with
appropriately.
So
I'm.
Just
really
as
saying
at
this
point
is,
is
that
my
hope
and
plea
is:
is
that
staff
look
at
that
carefully
and
respect
the
work
that
TTC
has
to
has
already
done?
And
if
there
is
a
higher
thing?
E
Okay,
fine
I
suppose
we
will
all
learn
to
accept
it.
That
provides
more
mobility
and
more
yeah.
More
mobility
between
Union
Station
in
Queens,
key
fine
I,
don't
see
it
I
think
many
people
that
all
right
spoken
to
say
they
don't
see
it,
and
so,
if
they,
if
it
isn't
there,
then
let's
do
the
right
thing
and
make
sure
that
there's
a
very,
very
good
LRT
connection
between
King
Queens,
key
east
across
Queens,
key
and
Queens
key
between
Queens
Queens,
key
and
Union
Station.
Thank
you
very
much,
madam
Speaker.
Thank.
A
Q
Councilor
muhabba
crazed
a
really
really
important
point
at
the
very
end
there
and
I
think
that
it
got
lost
and
it's
us
doing
what's
right,
not
what's
easy,
and
it
would
be
very
easy
for
me
to
respond
to
my
constituents
that
say
from
Liberty
Village
that
say
the
King
Street
car
is
packed.
We
need
a
subway,
you
need
to
build
a
subway
lawn
King.
You
need
to
be
able
subway
lawn
Queen
subway,
subway
Subway's.
Q
But
would
it
be
right
and
would
it
be
a
good
direction
for
us
to
take
of
the
city?
Would
it
work
in
the
mix
of
projects
within
our
debt
ceiling?
Would
it
work
within
the
available
resources
for
the
specifically
for
the
number
of
people
that
would
be
taking
that
particular
piece
and
the
reality
is
no,
it
won't
and
no
matter
how
hard
I
try
to
spin
it.
It
won't
those
numbers.
Just
don't
don't
work
that
what
works
there
is
the
technology.
Q
That's
been
proposed
for
25
years
that,
unfortunately,
due
to
three
things
as
I
count
them
or
see
them
and
I
might
be
wrong.
There
may
be
more
one.
Is
a
McGinty
government
cut
a
whole
lot
of
money
to
the
City
of
Toronto
to
implement
transit
City
many
of
the
projects
disappeared
on
that
day
and
I
can't
remember
the
year
it
was
before
I
was
on
City
Council
part.
Was
it
2009
that
all
of
a
sudden
they
went
from
a
fully
funded
transit
city
to
a
half
funded
transit
city?
Q
We've,
never
gotten
back
that
money
in
the
form
of
the
other
projects.
We've
gotten
back
some
money,
it's
all
gone
into
a
hole,
it's
gone
into
planning
and
building
one
stop
in
Scarborough,
but
that's
not
what
I
want
to
focus
on,
because
the
second
point
is
unbeknownst
to
all
of
us.
When
our
last
mayor
was
elected,
he
said
pencils
down
on
some
pretty
key
projects,
including
this
one
and
so
work
towards
planning
the
the
LRT
for
City
Place.
Q
All
those
buildings
at
City
Place
all
of
the
future
development
in
King
Spadina,
that's
going
to
be
a
new
city,
the
size
of
Collingwood
in
the
next
five
years
in
the
downtown
core
everything
west
of
Bathurst
in
Fort,
York,
those
5,000
people,
the
12,000
people
that
live
in
Liberty,
Village
and
I,
don't
know
how
many
thousand
people
to
live
in
South
Etobicoke
that
have
been
waiting
20
years.
But
the
moment
that
mayor
Ford
said
pencils
down
on
that
project.
Q
We
lost
another
five
years,
so
between
those
two
things
we
could
have
had
transit
to
those
neighborhoods.
Now
we
don't
as
a
result
of
those
two
decisions,
those
two
individuals.
The
third
piece
is
where
we're
putting
onto
choosing
to
put
our
current
resources
and
that,
as
we've
heard,
there
are
two
projects
of
the
similar
magnitude
that
would
allow
us
if
a
change
in
direction
was
chosen
by
this
council
at
their
current
cost.
Q
I
might
also
say,
because
that'll
probably
change
with
time
as
things
do,
but
there
are
two
projects
that
are
holding
us
back
from
implementing
this
transit
project
as
well
as
transit
projects
in
those
munoz
to
other
projects
and
that's
keeping
the
elevated
gardener
and
the
one-stop
Scarborough
subway.
So
those
are
the
three
things
that
are
really
holding
back
this
or
have
held
back
this
piece
of
infrastructure
for
not
one,
but
for
two
decades,
and
it's
not
banking
on
development
coming
to
an
or
addressing
potential
future
needs
of
a
community.
Q
It
is
real
need
because
we
approve
that
development
and
that
development
has
all
happened.
So
I
hope
I
beg
that
this
council
takes
this
seriously
and
moves
this
forward
with
the
same
vigor
that
they
used
to
push
forward.
Other
other
transit
projects
across
the
city
and
I
just
hope
that
we
can
remember
what
councilor
may
have,
except
it
does
take
courage
to
talk
about
what's
right
with
our
constituents,
rather
than
taking
the
easy
approach
of
just
saying
exactly
what
they
would
like.
We
have
to
spend
a
row.
Q
A
I
First
of
all,
madam
Speaker
I
want
to
commend
Commission,
can
salerto
bayar
maker
for
not
adding
his
name
to
the
speaker's
list
after
that
speech
and
not
to
get
into
that
debate.
I
think
this
is
great
news
for
both
the
residents
in
Etobicoke
that
councilor
Grimes
has
been
advocating
for
and
pushing
for
the
so
obvious
transit
improvements
that
are
needed
over
there.
It's
good
news
for
what
we're
doing
the
east,
of
course,
but
to
go
back
to
Commissioner
mackovic
speech.
It's
it's
that
middle
link.
I
That
really
I
think
is
the
most
integral
portion
of
this
report
and
debate.
That's
in
front
of
us.
How
do
we
get
from
Union
Station
to
Queens
key
and,
and
we
have
to
make
sure
that
we
we
choose
a
mode
and
a
method
that
makes
sense
for
the
number
of
transit
users
that
we
expect
and
just
residents.
We
expect
in
that
part
of
the
court
of
the
city.
It
will
be
massive
and
so
I
think
that
we
have
to
make
the
right
choice.
I
I
think
the
TTC's
done
a
lot
of
good
work
and
due
diligence
on
what
that
appropriate
choices
and
I
think
I
hope
it
won't
get
lost
in
the
greater
debate
over
the
entirety
of
this,
of
the
waterfront
and
transit
debates
in
general,
but
I
think
that's
important.
I
know
that
the
city
and
Waterfront
Toronto
on
the
TTC
are
doing
very
good
work
together,
they're
doing
more
analysis
and
more
analysis,
more
analysis,
because
there
is
a
bit
of
a
logjam,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day,
I
think
we
know
what
the
right
choice
is.
I
The
TTC
laid
that
out
it's
been
on
the
books
for
quite
some
time.
They've
done
that
further
analysis,
and
the
sooner
we
move
forward
with
that
piece
that
link
that
missing
link.
Then
all
these
other
pieces
will
will
follow
suit,
and
so
with
that,
I
commend
everyone
for
bringing
this
report
forward
linking
all
of
these
transit
issues
together
along
the
waterfront.
But
let's
address
that
one
issue
and
I
think
we
know
what
the
right
way
to
go
forward
on.
That
is.
Thank
you.
Thank.
J
E
G
G
The
second
motion
is
to
include
some
motor
vehicle
travel
time.
Analysis
on
the
impact
to
lakeshore
I
didn't
see
any
of
it.
In
this
report,
that's
important
to
me
it's
important
to
my
constituents
to
understand
what
these
changes
to
lakeshore
mean.
Perhaps
they
are
nothing.
Perhaps
they
are
something.
G
This
just
motion
just
asked
that
that
be
included
in
the
work
going
forward
and
I
hope
I'm
wrong
and
that
it's
redundant
asked
that
it's
coming
anyways
back
to
my
first
motion
reading
the
report
I
realized
that
a
big
chunk
of
the
cost
is
this
quote
unquote
missing
link
it
was
funny.
I
actually
went
right
through
that
space
on
Monday
night
it
was
on
the
six
bay
bus
and
a
couple
of
weeks
earlier.
I
walked
that
very
stretch
and
I.
G
Think
most
the
time
I
spent
was
at
the
light
at
Lake
Shore
Boulevard
more
than
that
walk,
it's
a
four
minute
walk.
You
know
the
subway
was
really
busy
this
morning,
so
just
for
fun,
I
got
off
at
Spadina
and
I,
transferred
to
the
southbound
train
and
I
counted
my
steps.
Everyone
talks
about
the
big
link
and
Spadina
station.
G
Well,
if
I
count
on
my
steps,
right,
I
figured
that
that
that
stretch
is
about
half
of
this
stretches
and
to
equate
that
to
anyone
that
rides,
a
TTC
TTC
is
150
meters,
long
for
a
train
platform,
we're
talking
about
a
distance,
the
length
of
three
train
platforms
that
gets
you
to
450
meters.
According
to
the
map
that
I
looked
at.
G
If
you
come
out
of
the
South
door
of
the
Union
Station,
it's
about
350
meters
to
that
intersection,
so
I
don't
know
where
we've
lost
our
sense
of
perspective
or
scale,
but
we're
talking
about
something
that
is
in
the
order
of
one
to
two
million
dollars.
A
meter
I
understand
the
notion
of
bringing
some
tracks
in,
but
there's
also
another
option
here
to
put
a
cable,
actuated
car
I'm,
not
really
sure
that
that's
good
value
for
money.
G
So
you
know
people
will
feel
strongly
about
this
I.
Don't
think
we'd
be
doing
our
due
diligence
unless
we
always
consider
that
one
singular
option
I
think
you
should
do
some
reality.
Testing
yourselves
members
of
council
do
what
I
did
count
some
spaces.
Some
paces
figure
out
how
long
it
takes
for
you
to
walk
that
distance.
Where
are
the
precedents
in
the
city?
Can
you
imagine
the
people
that
get
off
at
Union
Station
off
the
subway
and
walk
through
the
pass
system
to
their
place
of
work?
G
A
it's
a
whole
heck
of
a
lot
more
than
500
meters,
but
councillor
Kerry,
Janice
likes
Tim,
Hortons
coffee,
well,
I
figured
out
that
it
was
about
500
meters
from
his
office
door
to
the
Tim
Hortons
across
the
square.
That's
one
way
to
put
that
in
perspective.
It's
something
that
many
of
us
move
in
every
day,
multiple
times
a
day
and
let's
face
it,
we
should
be
doing
a
lot
more
walking
around
here.
Anyways
I,
hope
you
give
the
motion
some
consideration.
How
do
you
take
questions?
Councillor,
perks,.
N
N
Purpose
of
a
transportation
network,
whether
it's
transit
or
automobiles,
or
bicycles
or
sidewalks,
or
any
of
these
things.
As
for
people
from
get
to
get
to
point
A
to
point
B:
yes,
not
the
conveyance
itself,
so
the
meaningful
information
is
how
long
it
takes
people
to
get
from
point
A
to
point
B.
So
I
was
wondering
if
you
would
amend
your
motion
to
remove
the
vehicles
and
put
in
people,
because
that's
after
all,
the
job.
G
I
made
a
specific
note:
the
report
actually
speaks
to
some
of
the
different
modes
in
the
lakeshore,
including
delay
to
transit
with
the
different
configuration
options,
but
it
didn't
look
at
motor
vehicles,
so
I
think
the
motor
vehicle
component
should
be
included
if
the
report
also
talks
about
other
modes
of
transport,
I'm
happy
to
look
at
those
as
well.
I
think
that's
useful
information
and
in
fact,
if
configuration
much
like
the
discussion
on
Eglinton
Avenue
should
tell
us
delay
in
terms
of
configuration
for
people.
G
So
if
one
alignment
is
quicker
than
the
other
I
think
that
goes
into
the
mix
of
decision
making,
but
I'm
very
very
concerned
that
we're
not
understanding
what
happens
to
the
flow
on
Lakeshore.
And
if
you
live
out
in
Etobicoke,
where
I
am
you
know
that
lakeshore
in
the
garden
are
pretty
much
all
that's
left
at
the
south
end
of
the
city
to
get
into
downtown.
So
if
there's.
G
N
B
You,
madam
chair
I,
think
most
people
here
are
united
in
the
importance
of
of
approving
this
item.
A
waterfront
transit
network
plan
I
want
to
begin
by
thanking
councillor
Grimes
for
resetting
this
plan
and
bringing
it
back
to
this
council
and
I
just
wanted
to
give
a
little
bit
of
an
idea
of
what's
going
on
in
Ward
5
Etobicoke
lakeshore
is
one
of
the
largest
constituency
in
the
country
without
a
doubt,
and
it's
growing
like
gangbusters
and
we've
talked
about
parkland
and
lakeshore
a
lot.
B
A
great
deal
of
discussion
happens
with
respect
to
parkland
and
lakeshore.
Well,
people
need
to
further
understand
as
what's
happening
on
the
Queensway
one
Street
north.
It
is
growing
like
gangbusters.
This
is
an
avenue,
that's
somewhat
of
a
highway
and
we
have
so
many
planning
applications
in
the
hop
right
now
imagine
mid
rise
applications
coming
in
with
200
plus
units.
That's
the
size
of
mid
we're
not
talking
about
these
small
little
buildings
coming
in.
So
on
top
of,
what's
going
on
in
councilor,
Grimes
Lord,
we
just
can't
move
in
a
topical
lakeshore
anymore.
B
The
Queensway
is
is
frozen.
The
lakeshore
is
frozen.
The
food
terminal
right
at
Park
Lawn
in
the
Queensway
the
food
terminal,
is
currently,
if
you
drive
down
the
QEW
right
now,
a
massive
expansion
of
the
food
terminal.
So
you
need
you,
you've
got
business
interests,
you've
got
residential
interests,
nothing
is
more
important
than
making
sure
we
can
connect
the
the
West
End
to
the
downtown
core
and
that's
without
talking
about
what's
happening
on
the
Christie
lands.
I
mean
imagine,
what's
the
future,
the
Christie
lands,
whether
it
be
employment
or
whether
it
be
residential?
B
How
can
any
of
us
approve
something
on
the
Christie
lands
when
there's
there's
no
hope
for
for
transit
in
the
area?
We
need
transit,
I'm,
hoping
everyone
here,
I'm
hoping
it'll,
be
a
unanimous
vote
that
the
waterfront
transit
network
plan
is
approved
here
and
we
get
on
with
with
making
sure
that
we
connect
residents
and
businesses
to
the
rest
of
the
city
in
a
way
that's
convenient
for
everybody.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
J
A
T
A
T
Yeah
thanks
sorry,
okay,
great
John!
Thank
you.
Okay,
so
I'm
just
gonna
move
a
quick
motion,
so
this
item
was
reviewed
by
staff.
I
know
that
I
worked
really
closely
with
staff
on
this
particular
review
of
our
procurement
policies.
In
regard
to
my
my
initial
recommendation,
which
was
to
do
business
with
corporations
that
would
meet
gender
parity
on
their
boards,
but
that
was
not
staffs
recommendation
to
move
forward
with
that,
but
so
I
did
work
closely
with
staff
on
this
recommendation.
T
Information
on
gender
diversity
on
their
boards
so
simply
put.
This
would
not
demand
that
corporations
have
gender
parity
on
their
boards,
but
I
think
what
it
would
do
is
work
with
corporations
to
have
hub
disclosure
I
mean.
Obviously
there
are
no
entities
out
there
that
would
validate
or
be
able
to
verify
that,
but
there
is
a
strong
movement
and
current
within
the
corporate
sector
to
move
towards
gender
parity.
T
As
we
know
we're
at
forty
four
percent,
gender
parity
on
the
city's
boards
in
the
private
sector
were
only
at
thirteen
percent,
which
is
a
glacial
speed
of
one
percent
a
year,
which
would
mean
it
would
take
about
thirty
years
to
meet
gender
diversity,
so
I'm,
hoping
that
I
get
your
support
on
this
I
think
it's
the
right
direction
and
it
it
hopefully
hopefully
we'll
we'll
meet
some
sort
of,
or
at
least
move
the
dial
I
would
say
on
on
advancing
gender
parity
on
boards
and
I.
Think
there's
quite
I
had
the
questions.
A
C
T
Is
right,
so
it's
basically
our
so
with
my
patch
Locke
and
his
team
are
very
aware
that
the
province
is
has
conducted
and
set
up
a
steering
committee,
Charles,
Sousa
chairs
that
and
there's
a
number
of
of
MPPs
that
sit
on
that
steering
committee
and
they're
working
towards
gender
parity
and
working
with
the
private
sector.
So.
C
T
We
wouldn't
have
the
city,
the
city
sitting
on
their
steering
committee,
so
you're
asking
our
staff
to
sit
on
the
steering
committee,
no
I'm,
asking
them
to
work
with
and
to
continue
dialogue
with
the
province
in
this
regard.
So
when
this
item
was
coming
through
and
they
were
doing
and
conducting
public
consultations
and
getting
feedback
on
my
original
motion,
what
what
they
came
up
with
was
the
reality
that
the
province
holds
the
power
in
this
regard
in
order
to
mandate
such
legislation.
T
T
C
A
I
Thank
you.
Okay,
I
get
some
clarification
on
the
first
part
of
your
motion
where
so
I
understand
that
when
this
were
bought
before
government
management
and
the
recommendation,
the
treasurer
when
I
talked
about
gender
parity
was
to
receive
it
for
information
and
now
you're
asked
you've
revised
your
motion
and
you're
looking
at
increasing
gender
diversity
on
our
corporate
boards
and
I'm.
Trying
to
understand
why
you're
stopping
in
gender
diversity
and
not
also
looking
at
racial
diversity
right.
T
So
that's
a
great
question
and
it's:
it
was
discussed
at
the
public
meeting
that
was
held
with
staff
and
looking
at
a
broader
scope.
We
look
at
racial
diversity
within
gender
diversity
and
so,
for
example,
on
the
corporation's
nominating
panel
which
I
chair.
We
account
that
within
the
gender
diversity
component
and
obviously
in
the
broader
factor
of
that
as
well,
this
one
is
exactly
what
it
says.
T
I
I
And
then
so,
my
next
question,
madam
Speaker,
on
the
the
second
motion,
the
last
part
where
it
says
City
stop
establish
a
mechanism
to
collect
from
entities
connecting
business
with
the
city,
information
on
gender
diversity
of
their
boards.
The
treasurer
and
the
original
report
said
that
that
couldn't
be
done.
No.
T
T
A
T
I
think
it,
it
would
be
great
if
they
were
included
in
it
in
some
in
some
manner.
I
know
that
again,
under
with
Mike
Pasha
lock
shop,
they
do
a
lot
of
engagement
with
all
kinds
of
groups,
from
diversity
to
women's
groups.
To
30%
I
mean
there's
an
array,
probably
about
50
organizations
that
they
work
with
in
order
to
look
at
our
social
procurement
policies,
but
also
to
engage
them
and
that's
what
they
did
when
they
were
doing.
The
public
consultation
for
this
particular
motion.
So.
T
D
As
you
said,
the
the
title
of
this
item
is
feasibility
of
requiring
gender
diversity
of
corporation
boards,
its
city
procurements,
and
if
you
go
through
the
report,
it
then
starts
talking
about
seeking
to
improve
gender
equity
by
increasing
opportunities
for
women-owned
businesses.
Now
board
members
may
not
necessarily
be
shareholders
or
business
owners.
What
are
we
trying
to
achieve
here?
Are
we
trying
to
achieve
the
gender
equity
as
board
members,
whether
they're
owners
are
not
or
do
we
want
a
majority
of
female
or
female
owners
as
board
members?
D
T
Through
the
social
procurement
policy,
we've
we've
actually
been
going
through
a
lot
of
review
with
procurement,
as
it
pertains
to
our
social
procurement
policies
and
also
reviewing
it
in
terms
of
making
it
more
open
and
inclusive
when
it
comes
to,
let's
say,
new
technologies.
So
we
know
that
historically,
how
we've
been
working
at
the
city
has
not
been
open
to
a
lot
of
parties
out
there
and
a
lot
of
enterprises
that
would
basically
put
their
hands
up
at
the
city
and
not
even
apply
so
through
through
it's
a
like
I
would
say
two
different
lenses.
T
We've
been
looking
at
it
through
social
procurement
and
making
sure
that
we
engage
with
women-led
and
women-owned
businesses,
so
female
founders,
and
then
also
we've
been
looking
at
it
through
a
technology
lend
with
new
technologies
that
historically,
would
not
have
applied
or
would
have
put
their
hands
up
to
the
city
to
make
sure
that
we're
including
them
in
in
their
application
process.
So
this
part
of
the
this
part
of
it
just
waiting,
I'll
answer
you,
so
this
part
of
it.
T
My
original
motion
was
to
say
that
we
would
do
business
with
businesses
that
that
had
50%
women
on
their
boards,
so,
let's
say
50%
gender
parity,
but
the
issue
became
that
we
couldn't
find
a
mechanism
to
do
that.
So
this
motion,
what
it's
saying
is
that
we
would
have
the
ability
to
have
those
corporations
report
out
on
their
on
their
gender
parity
on
their
boards.
So
it's
enough.
It's
another
way
that
they're
recording
out,
but
it
would
not
include
them.
T
So
that's
a
that
was
your
last
question.
Okay,
so
I
understand
the
question
that
you're
asking,
but
the
result
of
the
original
motion
was
a
receipt
for
information.
So
then,
because
that
was
a
receipt
for
information,
it
wasn't
really
going
to
go
anywhere.
We
all
know
where
that
goes
into
the
ether.
T
G
T
G
Purpose
of
that
is
towards
to
report
out
to
the
world
is
to
analyze,
if
you're
asking
for
something
you
have
to
tell
the
person
why
you're
collecting.
To
what
end
are
you
collecting
that
information
I
want
to
understand
what
we
would
tell
them?
You
know
what
is
the
end
purpose
of
taking
this
information.
I
need
to
understand
that
okay,
so
it's
a
liability.
If
we've
got
it
right
like
if
we
don't
have
a
purpose
for
it,
I.
T
G
T
T
T
Okay,
I
didn't
say
that
there
was
not
a
purpose
for
the
information.
You
said
there
was
not
a
person.
You
said
that
there
was
a
liability.
I
never
said
there
was
a
liability
on
collecting
any
information.
I
think
the
purpose
is
the
obvious
intent
and
that's
to
get
to
gender
parity.
That's
the
intent.
Okay,.
G
J
J
Is
it
possible
that
what
you
are
doing
here?
You
say
you
worked
with
staff,
so
what
we
know
from
reading
the
report
is
that
you
brought
a
more
robust
motion.
You
had
hoped
to
require
gender
parity
and
in
the
report,
a
government
management.
What
you
heard
is
that,
right
now
you
can't
do
that.
You
couldn't
do
that
for
a
number
of
reasons,
not
the
least
of
which
is
resources
and
and
that,
in
fact,
what
mr.
J
patchak
recommended
in
his
report
was
that
you
allow
him
to
try
to
achieve
that
through
his
social
procurement
policy,
and
you
said
that
what
you
wanted
is
that
at
least
a
statement
be
made
a
neutral
statement.
It's
not
a
requirement,
but
that
that,
within
his
social
procurement,
discussions
might
achieve
what
you
were
trying
to
achieve.
Well,
not
mandatory.
Is
that
what
this
motion
is
trying
to
do?
That's
right,
so
right!
So
so
that's
what
we're
doing!
This
is
a
fallback.
J
A
B
Sir,
thank
you,
madam
Speaker
I
need
clarification.
What
this
means?
How
will
this,
how
will
a
statement
that
indicates
City
Council's
support
that
all
corporations
strive
to
have
gender
parity
on
their
corporate
boards?
How
is
that
statement?
How
is
that
intended
to
affect
the
procurement
process
right.
T
So,
while
there's
so
generally
in
the
procurement
policy,
they
would
have
a
weighting
system
or
they
would
have
a
marking
system,
so
they
would
give
a
certain
weight
of
points
towards
whatever,
whatever
they
would
meet
in
terms
of
the
requirement.
So
that's
actually
not
before
us,
so
we're
not
going
down
that
road
of
that
being
an
actual
requirement
that
they
would
have
to
have
gender
parity
on
their
boards.
It's.
Q
H
B
So
Mike,
so
the
quit.
My
question
to
you
too,
for
clarification
is
this:
either
is
a
part
of
the
procurement
process
or
it
is
not,
and
so
does
this
directing
the
chief
purchasing
officer
to
include
procurements
in
all
procurements
statement
that
indicates
city
council
support
for
corporations
strive
for
gender
parity?
Is
that
either
part
of
the
process
or
is
it
not
part
of
the
process?
Part.
B
B
T
B
B
B
B
T
Think
that
in
this
day
and
age,
with
the
corporate
sector
being
at
13%
gender
parity
on
their
boards,
that
the
responsibility
Fault
falls
on
politicians,
I
would
say
at
every
level,
and
since
the
province
is
failing
to
actually
legislate
this,
that
we
should
be
doing
something.
On
behalf
of
the
city.
T
T
T
B
T
A
P
Based
on
I
didn't
at
first
based
on
all
the
questions,
I
now
have
questions
I'm,
sorry
counselor,
to
keep
you
on
the
on
your
feet,
but
I
try
to
be
as
quickly
move
as
quickly
as
possible.
Your
motion
is
not
directing
any
company
to
do
anything.
It's
simply
asking
them
to
strive
to
achieve
gender
parity
on
their
boards.
Is
that
correct
exactly
so?
There
is.
There
is
no
direction
here
that
that
you
have
to
have
certain
quotas.
P
This
is
not
a
quota
motion
correct,
exactly
and
and
with
respect
to
the
concerns
that
colleagues
may
have
that.
Perhaps
if
we
talk
about
gender,
we're
not
necessarily
talking
about
race
or
perhaps
age
or
ability,
if
we
put
an
intersectional
lens
over
the
word
over
a
gender
diversity
that
will
allow
us
to
take
a
look
at
the
wide
range
of
gender
and
all
the
the
sub
hyper
diversity
is
within
gender.
That
would
be
helpful.
Would
it
not.
T
Well,
you
know
what
that
was
a
that's
a
really
great
question,
and
that
was
asked
at
the
at
the
public
meeting
that
we
held
because
I
am
of
that
view
as
well.
The
issue
is,
if
you
want
to
separate
and
do
a
separate
amendment,
that
this
initiative
was
really
about
gender,
but
it
does
include.
It
absolutely
includes
all
aspects
of
diversity
within
it
within
it
and.