►
From YouTube: Government Management Committee - November 13, 2017
Description
Government Management Committee, meeting 23, November 13, 2017
Agenda and background materials:
http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/decisionBodyProfile.do?function=doPrepare&meetingId=11833
Meeting Navigation:
0:10:53 - Call to order
2:54:12 - Public session
Agenda Items:
0:20:48 - GM23.1 - (9:45AM) Apportionment of Property Taxes - November 13, 2017 Hearing (Ward All)
0:24:28 - GM23.2 - (9:45AM) Cancellation, Reduction or Refund of Property Taxes - November 13, 2017 Hearing (Ward All)
0:14:02 - GM23.3 - Consolidation of Text of The Corporation of the City of York Employee Pension Plan (Ward All)
2:41:29 - GM23.4 - Appeal Decision - Toronto District School Board v. Cogeco Data Services Inc. (Ward All)
0:14:28 - GM23.5 - Properties leased by Real Estate Services - Designation of a Portion of Premises as a Municipal Capital Facility (Ward 11, 20, 22, 42)
2:04:11 - GM23.6 - Bringing Significant Procurements to Council Prior to Issuance (Ward All)
0:14:53 - GM23.7 - The Feasibility of Developing a Canadian Content Policy for Toronto's Procurements in Compliance with Existing Trade Agreements (Ward All)
2:12:26 - GM23.8 - Feasibility of Requiring Gender Diversity of Corporation Boards in City Procurements (Ward All)
2:24:34 - GM23.9 - Proprietary Information Technology Maintenance and Support Contract Renewals and Amendments (Ward All)
2:28:31 - GM23.10 - Request to Extend Contract No. 47017237 with Xerox Canada Limited (Ward All)
2:35:36 - GM23.11 - Provision of the Supply, Delivery and First Year Maintenance and Support of Oracle Software Licences from Oracle Canada ULC (Ward All)
0:17:18 - GM23.12 - Land Donation Located at 107 Comrie Terrace (Ward 36)
0:17:31 - GM23.13 - Acquisition of 925 Albion Road for Multi-Service Centre and Parkland Purposes (Ward 1)
0:17:50 - GM23.14 - Affordable Rental Housing - New Lease Agreements at 1313 Queen Street West, 125 Manse Road, 1177 King Street West, 156 and 158 Munro Street and 140, 163 and 164 Spadina Road (Ward 14, 20, 30, 44)
0:18:20 - GM23.15 - Termination of the Offer to Donate Land from Mount Pleasant Group of Cemeteries (MPGC) to the City of Toronto (Ward 23)
0:25:17 - GM23.16 - Expropriation of 1269 Danforth Road, Scarborough Subway Extension (Ward 38)
0:18:53 - GM23.17 - Expropriation of 13 Barberry Place and 23 Barberry Place for New East/West Road (Ward 24)
2:40:53 - GM23.18 - Facilities Management Service Review of External Cleaning Contracts (Ward All)
0:19:22 - GM23.19 - Amendment to Purchase Order No. 6042010 Lower Don River Trail Improvements (Ward 29)
2:40:39 - GM23.20 - Amendment to Purchase Order No. 6044167 with Mopal Construction Limited for Construction Work at the Guild Inn (Ward 43)
0:19:58 - GM23.21 - Contract Amendment for Corporate Express, Canada Inc. Operating as Staples Advantage Canada for the Non-exclusive Supply and Delivery of Office Supplies and Related Products (Ward All)
0:30:45 - GM23.22 - Fair Wage Policy Compliance Verification - Aloia Brothers Concrete Contractors Ltd. (Ward All)
1:43:16 - GM23.23 - Pegah Construction Ltd. - Disqualification from City Contracts, Fair Wage Policy Non-Compliance (Ward All)
2:54:18 - GM23.24 - Meeting the City of Toronto’s Environmental and Circular Economic Commitments through Procurement (Ward All)
2:54:48 - GM23.25 - Enactment of By-laws
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
Okay,
good
morning,
everyone
I'm
gonna,
call
this
meeting
to
order
first
off.
Are
there
any
declarations
of
interest
under
the
municipal
conflict
of
interest?
Act?
Sorry
and
I
have
to
go
back,
seeing
them
I
want
to
start
by
a
welcoming
counselor
troi,
see
to
the
government,
Management
Committee,
and
congratulations
on
your
appointment
toward
28
as
well.
I
know
everybody
here
is
looking
forward
to
working
with
you.
A
A
The
territory
on
which
this
meeting
is
taking
place
is
the
subject
of
the
dish
with
one
spoon
wampum
belt
covenant,
which
is
an
agreement
between
the
Iroquois
Confederacy
and
the
Confederacy
of
the
ghibli
and
allied
nations
to
share
peaceful
peaceably
and
care
for
the
resources
around
the
Great
Lakes.
Thank
you.
A
I
need
a
motion
to
confirm
the
minutes
of
our
September
25th
2017
meeting
counselor
Shannon,
all
in
favor
carried
speakers
and
presentations.
There's
a
list
here
in
front
of
us
of
all
the
speakers
that
are
interested
in
participating
in
this
meeting
and
just
to
let
everyone
know.
I
am
gonna,
be
moving
emotion
on
item
number,
one
just
for
the
deputy
ins
to
know
I'm
moving
this
on
gonna
move
it
on
behalf
of
councillor
Fletcher
when
we
get
to
that
item.
A
So
just
if
you
want
to
take
that
into
consideration
in
your
deputation
after
you
still
want
to
pute
the
government
management
committee,
not
appropriate
the
outstanding
taxes
for
to
our
201
car
law,
Avenue
bicep,
specifically
excluding
the
apportionment
application
for
201
Carla
Avenue
from
a
pendeks,
be
in
the
staff
report.
That's
a
timed
item
for
945,
but
that's
the
motion
that
I'm
gonna
be
moving
on
behalf
of
the
committee.
Just
so
everybody
knows
saying
that
we
will
now
go
through
the
agenda.
A
A
2017
number
three
is
a
consolidate
consolidation
of
the
text
of
the
corporation
of
the
city
of
York
employee
pension
plan.
Does
anybody
want
to
hold
that
councillor?
Davis
is
moving
an
option.
Number
two:
three
all
in
favor
carried
number
four
is
the
appeal
decision.
The
Toronto
District
School
Board
versus
cogeco
data
service
is
incorporated.
B
C
A
Davis
once
told
number
six
number:
seven
is
a
feasibility
of
develop
a
Canadian
content
policy
for
Toronto's
procurement
and
compliance
with
existing
trade
agreements.
I
also
I'm
going
to
be
moving
a
motion
on
this
to
defer
it
to
January
I,
know,
there's
a
number
of
groups
that
would
like
to
give
input
to
this,
but
that's
my
intention
with
this
one.
So
I
have
been
moving
deferral
until
January,
okay,.
D
C
A
C
A
Number
eight
feasibility
of
requiring
gender
diversity
of
corporations
boards
and
city
procurements.
There's
a
to
speak.
One
speaker,
sorry
on
that,
so
I'm
gonna
hold
that
in
my
name,
okay,
so
the
speaker
on
number
eight
has
withdrawn.
Does
anybody
want
to
hold
number
eight
councillor?
Davis
hold
number
eight
number:
nine
proprietary
information
technology,
maintenance,
support,
contract,
renewals
and
amendments.
C
A
C
A
C
C
A
Number
14,
affordable
rental
housing,
the
new
lease
agreement
at
13-13,
Queen,
Street,
West,
125
man's
Road,
11,
77,
King,
Street,
West
156
on
158
Monroe
Street,
as
well
as
140
163
and
164
Spadina
Road
counselor
Shannon.
So
you
want
to
hold
it
move
it
councillor
sham
everything,
reckon
recommendations,
number
14,
all
in
favor
carry.
A
The
item
GMC
23
point
one
five
be
withdrawn
from
the
agenda:
it'll
be
back
all
in
favor
carried
number
sixteen
expropriation
of
one:
two:
six:
nine
Danforth
road
for
the
Scarborough
subway
extension.
We
have
a
speaker
on
that
number:
17
is
the
expropriation
of
13
barbary,
place
and
23
barbary
place
for
new
for
a
new,
east-west
road
in
Ward
24
counselor
Shannon.
Did
you
want
me
the
recommendations
on
favor
carried.
A
A
A
E
Say
one
or
two
things
before
you
move
that
motion
yep.
Thank
you,
as
you
see,
there's
quite
a
few
residents
here
or
this
item
that
are
willing
to
speak
to
the
committee
and
I
think
they're.
All
agreeing
that
if
that
motion
gets
moved,
that
they
don't
need
to
address
the
committee
for
this
hearing
the
understand
it's
a
hearing
and
that
your
motion
is
to
remove
tool.
One-Car
law
from
appendix
B,
which
is
the
apportionment
list.
I
just
want
to
thank
mr.
E
Casey
Brendan
and
the
staff
for
attending
a
very
large
meeting
at
tool
and
car
law
and
say
that.
Thank
that
everyone,
in
the
condo
for
being
understanding
and
coming
to
a
good
conclusion
here.
I
hope.
So
the
condominium
corporation
went
broke
and
the
assessment
Review
Board
took
eight
years
in
order
to
conduct
an
appeal.
So
by
the
time
was
assessed.
It
was
now
assessed
on
individuals
rather
than
the
corporation
as
I
understand
it.
E
The
city
has
taken
steps
in
that
interim
to
ensure
that
a
corporation
must
remain
operational
in
order
to
have
any
charges
such
as
these
types
of
charges
against
the
corporation
rather
than
individuals
since
that
time.
So
I
just
want
to
thank
you
very
much
for
moving
that.
Mr.
chair
and
I
hope
that
this
passes
this
committee,
okay,
Thank.
A
A
Is
there
anybody
on
the
list
they'd
like
to
be
added,
and
then
I
have
to
ask
a
third
time
if
anybody
would
like
to
have
their
name
added
to
the
list.
Seeing
none
and
so
I
have
a
motion
that
I'm
moving
the
government
Management
Committee
not
appropriate,
not
appropriation.
The
outstanding
taxes
for
201
Carl
Avenue
by
specifically
excluding
the
apportionment
applications
for
201
Karl
Avenue
from
Appendix
B
in
the
staff
report.
A
The
cancellation
reduction
of
property
taxes
for
as
a
member
through
November,
13,
2017
hearing,
there's
no
registered
evidence.
Is
there
anybody
in
the
room
they'd
like
to
make
a
presentation
on
this
item,
so
anybody
in
the
room
that
would
like
to
make
a
presentation
on
item
number
2
and
finally,
is
there
anybody
that
would
like
to
have
their
name
at
it
to
make
a
presentation
on
number
2
seeing
none.
A
You
need
a
motion
to
move
the
recommendations,
councillor
Cole
all
in
favor,
Carrie,
okay,
the
next
item
on
our
list.
Actually
I!
Guess
that's
right!
So
we'll
go
down
to
item
number
16
expropriation
of
1269
Danforth
Road
Scarborough,
subway
extension,
Derrick,
Moran,
I
thought
I
saw
Derek
mourning
Derek
you've
been
here
before
you
know
the
drill
you
get
five
minutes
whenever
you're
ready,
I.
F
Just
want
to
say
by
me
speaking
at
this
meeting,
this
shall
not
be
deemed
to
be
in
any
way
my
consent
express
or
implied
in
doing
so
is
fraud.
God
bless
her
Majesty,
the
Queen
and,
along
with
it,
for
Majesty
the
Queen.
So
when
this
item
it
mentions
staff
will
continue
to
negotiate
terms
of
an
agreement
with
the
owner
of
the
property.
F
My
mistake,
the
Scarborough
subway
extension
now
just
in
case
this
property
owner
isn't
too
crazy
with
having
to
either
sell
or
be
expropriated
and
would
like
to
have
their
try
fighting
this
in
court.
Instead,
because
you
know,
maybe
they
think
on
principle,
the
seven
stop
L
are
tight.
Lrt
would
be
better
served.
The
people
of
Scarborough
than
the
one
stop
subway,
that,
oh
by
the
way,
just
happens
to
end
at
a
mall.
Just
like
this
Sheppard
subway
line
did
take
notice.
F
This
is
what
Supreme
Court
of
Canada
and
then
the
city
of
Nanaimo
versus
rascal
truck
in
2007
municipalities
do
not
possess
any
greater
institutional
competence
or
expertise
than
the
courts.
Municipalities
are
political
bodies,
neither
experience
nor
proficiency
and
municipal
law
and
municipal
planning
is
required
to
be
elected
a
councillor.
Finally,
council
decisions
are
more
often
byproducts
of
the
local
political
milieu
than
a
considered
attempt
to
follow
legal
or
institutional
precedent
and
are
necessarily
motivated
by
political
considerations
and
not
by
an
entirely
impartial
application
of
expertise.
F
Now,
as
I
understand
it,
expropriation
is
a
really
nice
way
of
saying:
hey,
you
might
not
like
it,
but
we're
taking
your
land
anyway,
but
so
knowing
can
accuse
us
of
stealing
it
from
you.
We're
going
to
make
it
up
to
you
by
paying
you
the
market
value
of
your
land.
Why?
Because
we
here
at
the
government
or
performing
God's
work
and
are
doing
this
for
the
greater
good,
because
we
know
what's
best
for
you-
and
this
is
just
in
the
public's
interest
and
hey
that
came
up
recently
didn't
at
the
public's
interest.
F
So
this
is
from
an
article
I
think.
Did
you
forget
to
get
his
okay?
This
is
from
an
article
by
Jennifer
pagli
era.
The
Toronto
Star
dated
Tuesday
November,
7th
2017.
This
is
the
most
voted
upon
project
I
think
that's
probably
ever
gone
through
the
City
Council
Tory
told
it
to
start
on
Friday.
He
said
if
councillors
believe
requesting
that
kind
of
analysis
was
in
the
public
interest,
they'd
vote
for
it
and
he
won't
actually
know
what
public
interest
actually
means.
F
It
serves
as
a
reminder
to
each
individual
judge
that
his
discretion
is
grounded
in
community
values
and,
in
particular,
long-term
community
values.
Five
includes
concerns
of
society
generally
and
the
particular
interests
of
identifiable
groups
in
the
context
of
weighing
the
balance
of
convenience
on
an
application
for
an
interlocutory
injunction
in
the
dictionary
of
Canadian
law,
interlocutory
injunction
is
defined
as
an
order
intended
to
ensure
that
certain
specified
acts
do
not
take
place
until
the
rights
of
the
parties
are
finally
determined
by
the
court.
So
in
case
this
guy
ever
wants
to
fight.
A
Sorry,
sixteen
I'm
look
at
the
wrong
one.
Any
questions
on
staff
on
number.
Sixteen
can
I.
Have
somebody
move
the
recommendations
in
number.
Sixteen
councillor
Shan,
all
in
favor,
carried
our
next
item
dep
yunnan
register.
Debian
is
number
twenty-two
fair
wage
policy,
compliance
verification,
a
low.
I
brothers,
concrete
contract
track.
The
contractor
is
limited.
A
Morning
this
McMahon
the
way
it
works
here.
So
you
have
five
minutes
to
make
a
presentation
at
committee
once
you're
done
each
councillor
can
ask
you
questions
for
up
to
five
minutes.
Once
that's
taken
place,
we
have
what's
called
taking
it
back
into
committee,
where
we
can
each
end.
If
you
Julie
asks
tough
questions
for
up
to
five
minutes,
then
we
bring
it
back
into
committee
where
we
debate
the
item.
E
C
I
understand
that
you
submitted
your
documentation
to
the
city
to
confirm
that
you
met
the
fair
wage
requirements.
However,
the
contractor,
as
you
know,
did
not
yeah
and
so
I
want
to
ask.
Do
you
have
other
remedies
that
you
can
pursue,
because
this
will
be
a
precedent-setting
decision
if
we
do
what
you've
requested.
E
C
C
G
A
H
H
C
C
I
Counselor,
first
of
all,
just
to
be
clear,
my
understanding
from
our
review
of
the
file
was
that
there
were
four
subs
and
three
of
them
were
unionized
up,
so
that
is
sort
of
a
self
policing
regime,
though
so
the
Union.
If
there's
any
issues
with
payment,
it
goes
through
the
Union.
So
three,
the
subs
were
unionized
subcontractors,
no.
C
I
B
If
I
may,
this
is
through
the
through
the
chair,
I
I.
Think
that
the
point
that
the
councillor
is
raising
is
whether
or
not
we
know
that,
on
a
corporate
level,
a
lawyer
has
met
its
obligations
to
to
fir
pack
and
I
and
or
any
other
contractors.
Aside
from
her
pack
and
I,
don't
believe
that
that
we
can
state
categorically
that
we
are
sure
that
that
is
the
case.
C
The
other
thing
to
staff
to
me
this
report,
you
have
the
recommendation
set
up
as
one
or
two
or
three
and
or
four
in
a
way
that
it
seems
to
me
it
could
be
one
and
two
and
three
or
I'm
wondering
if
we
were
to
adopt
number
one,
that
we
retained
the
150
in
case
there
are
any
claims
coming
forward
and
we
were
to
maintain
it
for
one
year
and
then
release
it
after.
If,
if
there
have
been
no
other
claims
with
an
administrative
fee,
how
would
that
which
motions
would
I
move?
C
C
I
B
J
C
C
I
I
C
C
G
G
I
H
G
G
And
it
seems
that
one-year
recommendations
is
to
advise
the
contractor
that
the
Hovick
will
be
released,
subject
to
an
additional
administrative
fee
of
15
percent
of
the
full
value
of
the
holdback.
So
if
that
was
the
decision
of
this
committee,
then
I
gather
you're
in
support
of
that
as
well.
That
is.
K
H
Company
has
not
done
a
lot
of
work
for
the
city.
This
is
one
of
the
major
projects
undertaken
and
prior
to
the
award
of
the
contract.
We
requested
the
company
to
disclose
their
payroll,
sorry
to
disclose
their
list
of
subcontractors
and
and
that
the
company
understood
fully
what
the
wage
rates
should
be
paid
to
the
workers
while
performing
the
work.
So
we
we
really
haven't
had
that
much
of
a
history
with
this
company.
J
J
G
A
I
I
I
Recommendation
2
is
that
the
city
withhold
the
funds
permanently
and
provide
those
funds
for
the
operation
of
the
fair
wage
office
for
their
compliance
related
activities,
so
you
could
do
one,
which
is
give
them
a
further
year,
so
that
would
be
2018
and
if
they
still
did
not
provide
the
records
that
are
required,
then
you
move
into
ok.
Now
you
have
lost
the
door,
has
closed,
you've
lost
that
opportunity,
and
the
city
will
just
direct
those
funds
to
the
fair
wage
office,
compliance
activities.
Okay,.
I
A
I,
just
wasn't
so
I'm
trying
to
understand
I
guess
did
have
another
year
to
provide
records
right.
So
if
I
move
number
2,
the
city
would
look
for
those
records
on
the
employees
behalf
or
how
does
I
don't
understand?
Why
you're
looking
for
records
in
one
or
expecting
them
hoping
they'll
still
provide
information,
but
not
hoping
they'll,
providing
that
information
in
number
2,
okay,.
I
So,
basically,
because
the
fair
wage
bylaw
is
silent
on
many
things
that
are
now
coming
up,
it's
just
not
been
amended
to
address
all
of
the
situations
that
are
being
encountered
by
the
fair
wage
manager.
Okay,
so
that's
why
we
said
we
need
guidance
on
a
number
of
fronts,
which
approach
does
the
committee
want
to
pursue?
Do
we
want
to
give
them
extra
time
where
it
appears
to
date
they
have
not
been
able
over
two
years
or
three
years
to
produce
these
records.
Question
is
well.
I
They
really
produce
them
in
the
next
year
coming
up
if
they
haven't
done
it
so
in
the
last
two
half
years
unlikely,
but
it's
an
option.
We
want
to
leave
open
for
the
community
to
consider.
So
if
you
take
that
out
of
the
mix-
and
you
can
say
well
what
else
can
we
do
so
we
can
just
say:
you've
had
your
time
you
haven't,
provided
them
hold
the
money
back.
I
If
you
think
that's
too
draconian,
then
you
have
another
option,
which
is
we
all
give
you
a
portion
of
the
money
back,
but
in
instead
of
the
normal
15%
administrative
fee,
well
tack
on
an
additional
15%
sort
of
non-cooperation
non-compliance
fee
to
the
norm.
That's
already
set
out
in
the
Bible
okay,
okay,.
A
So
then,
so
we,
the
committee
pass,
is
number
one
okay,
so
that's
another
year
where
you
hope
you'll
get
the
records
where
you
haven't
seen
them
in
two
years
and
the
the
employees
in
the
subcontractor
that
are
not
unionized,
for
example,
are
gonna
wait
another
year
before
they
see
any
money?
That's
my
understanding.
If.
I
A
A
So
then,
looking
at
the
five
options
in
this
path
in
this
package,
so
we're
supposed
to
come
up
with
a
package
of
options.
So,
if
I
wanted
to
see
the
implement
the
workers
paid
as
quickly
as
possible
and
the
appropriate
actions
taken
under
the
fair
wage
policy,
if
I
move
recommendations,
two
four
and
five,
that
would
be
recommendations
that
aren't
going
to
come
into
conflict
with
each
other.
I
I
D
I
And
five
would
be
that
a
portion
of
the
funds
that
you
would
be
directing
to
be
given
to
the
fair
wage
office
for
their
compliance
activities.
A
portion
of
that
would
be
directed
to
FERPA
and
I,
believe
that
there
have
been
instances
in
the
past
where
the
city,
for
various
reasons,
even
though
we
don't
have
a
direct
contract
with
the
subcontractor,
have
directed
funds
to
be
paid
to
a
subcontractor.
In
instances
when
we've
had
issues
with
the
contractor
of
the
general
contractor.
I
C
A
L
All
wages
have
been
paid
and
were
fairly
paid.
We
submitted
all
documentation
that
we
had
to
the
fair
wage
office.
We
also
noted
many
discrepancies
in
reports
from
the
City
of
Toronto
staff
versus
our
own
records.
The
most
blatant
of
one
came
the
very
last
day
of
the
job
when
the
only
contractor
allowed
to
work
on
the
site
was
ferp
ACK,
and
that
was
by
order
of
Hector
Morano.
At
that
time,
the
director
of
that
department,
they
were
the
only
ones
on
site.
The
listed
employees
or
workers
on
site
by
fur
pack
was
six.
L
The
listed
number
of
workers
on
site
by
the
City
of
Toronto
staff
was
20.
It
was
impossible
to
have
20
employees.
On
that
last
day,
we
have
been
repeatedly
providing
information
to
this.
The
fair
wage
office,
letting
them
know
that
there
were
some
blatant
discrepancies.
The
first
day
of
the
contract.
We
had
three
employees
on
site,
two
deliveries
they
listed
14,
which
is
highly
impossible.
We
repeatedly
and
again
I
underlined
this
repeatedly
told
them
this.
We
repeatedly
provided
the
information,
especially
regarding
the
employees.
L
All
employees
have
been
paid.
Subcontractors
were
asked
to
hold
on,
as
was
Anna
to
hold
on
until
this
$100,000
holdback
was
released
to
us,
because
that's
what
we
were
considering
it
I'll
hold
back.
That
hundred
thousand
dollars
represents
about
9%
of
the
entire
contract
that
we
did
with
the
City
of
Toronto
that
year.
This
is
not
our
first
contract
with
the
City
of
Toronto,
we've
been
working
as
a
general
contractor
for
the
City
of
Toronto
since
1996.
We
do
not
take
a
lot
of
jobs.
L
We
only
take
a
handful
here
and
there
nothing
obtrusive
to
the
larger
contractors
who
can
really
take
on
those
jobs.
I
understand
that,
but
we've
never
ever
not
paid
our
bills
and
Anna
knows
that
as
soon
as
the
hundred
thousand
dollars
hold
back
is
released
to
us,
hers
is
the
first
check
that
goes
out
so
I
ask
you
to
please
release
the
hundred
thousand
dollar
hold
back
that
is
owing
to
us.
L
K
L
No
more
we
can
provide
to
them.
We've
also
listed
out
all
the
discrepancies
we
sent
the
discrepancies
email
to
them
a
few
times
which
they
maintain.
They
fall
back
on
the
City
of
Toronto
records,
but
we
keep
telling
them
that
the
City
of
Toronto
records
are
incorrect.
Based
on
the
last
day,
if
you
just
take
a
look
at
the
last
day,
when
fir
pack
was
the
only
tractor
allowed
to
work
on-site,
the
only
one
because
it
past
November
the
30th
and
they
list
20
employees
for
pack
list
6
I
go
with
fur
pack
information
so.
L
K
L
K
L
C
G
L
Has
not
been
paid,
the
$13,000
and
I
asked
Mike
and
Anna
for
zoko
of
fur
pack,
like
I,
asked
the
other
contractors
these
subcontractors
that
were
involved
hold
off
until
we
get
that
hold
back
released
to
us.
So
we
can
release
that
to
you
because
we're
we're
Brunton
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
at
that
point,
not.
G
G
L
L
They
were
working
on
a
special
portion
of
the
project
right
in
front
of
Puzo
Terry
right
and
Hector.
Moreno
wanted
that
portion
completed,
but
for
a
pack
could
not
get
it
completed
before
November
the
30th,
so
Hector
Morano
said
only
fur
pact
is
allowed
to
be
on
site
to
complete
that
portion
of
the
work
and
that's
it
end
of
contract.
So.
G
L
That
doesn't
even
sound
right,
nope,
Dean
percent
plus
fifteen
percent,
because
I
believe
your
specs
as
a
maximum
fifteen
percent.
So
if
I
was
a
true
into
contractor
throughout
since
1996
I
could
see
that
I
could
see
your
fifteen
percent
I,
don't
understand
the
additional
15
percent
at
all,
because
I've
been
pushing
to
get
this
put
before
the
GMC
for
about
a
year
and
a
half.
So.
L
G
L
G
L
A
H
H
At
the
same
time,
we
also
asked
transportation
services
to
provide
us
with
daily
inspection
logs
to
be
able
to
determine
how
many
hours
how
many
workers
were
out
in
the
field.
On
the
one
hand,
the
payroll
may
show
that
the
workers
are
being
paid,
the
appropriate
wage
rate,
but
you
have
to
look
at
the
number
of
hours
those
workers
performed
in
the
field,
and
how
do
we
do
that?
First
of
all,
a
lawyer
and
none
of
their
subcontractors
other
than
for
fur
pack
provided
daily
field
time
cards
for
the
workers.
H
We
have
no
time
cards.
At
the
same
time,
we
obtained
the
daily
work
inspection
logs
from
transportation
division,
and
we
saw
such
a
major
discrepancy
between
the
two
and
we
could
not
consolidate
that.
So.
We've
had
multiple
meetings
with
a
Loya
transportation
services
going
back
and
forth,
clearly
trying
to
come
to
a
consensus
in
terms
of
what
really
happened
in
the
field,
how
many
man-hours,
etc,
etc.
C
So
these
options
before
us,
if
we
were
to
hold
back
for
a
year,
are
you
saying
then
that's
recommendation
one?
Then
you
can't
determine
that
they
fail
to
comply
the
number
you
cannot
adopt
number
four,
or
can
you
adopt
number
one
which
is
a
hold
back
for
the
purposes
of
paying
the
workers?
Should
they
come
forward
or
is
it
still
to
wait
to
determine
whether
or
not
they
were
in
non-compliance,
because
these
all
say
or
or
and/or,
and
what
is
the
purpose?
C
A
H
C
C
I
The
reason
why
we
put
these
options
is
because
it's
difficult
to
know,
given
the
passage
of
time
today,
whether
or
not
any
others
will
come
forward,
seeing
as
the
work
was
completed
in
2014,
it's
possible,
there
could
be
one
or
two
employees
out
there.
The
fair
wage
office
has
paid
employees
directly
in
the
past.
So
but
at
a
certain
point
I
guess
you
have
to
say
well,
if
no
further
records
are
going
to
be
produced,
then
then
what
happens?
I
I
I
To
keep
a
list
of
the
names
classifications
of
all
workers
employed,
the
hourly
rate
and
hours
worked
per
day
and
a
record
of
the
amounts
paid
to
each
and
then
from
time
to
time,
Maj
affair
wage
office
can
demand
a
certified
copy
of
all
pay
sheets
list,
records
and
books
relating
to
the
work
etc.
So
that's
the
difficulty
that
the
manager
fair
wage
office
is
having
is
people
are
saying,
sorry,
we're
not
giving
you
those
records.
They'll.
I
Just
give
you
a
lump
sum
and
say
these
workers
worked
and
here's
the
gross
amount
that
we
paid
them
and
they
will
not
break
it
down
on
an
hourly
wage.
So
there's
no
way
to
really
do
the
analysis
you
know
have
they
complied
with
the
hourly
rate
under
the
fair
wage
file,
and
this
happens
quite
frequently,
and
it
makes
the
the
work
of
the
fair
wage
office
difficult.
So
that's
why
the
Auditor
General
said:
go
back
to
the
operating
department.
I
Get
their
site
logs,
see
how
many
people
were
on
the
job,
because
sometimes
there
may
be
unreported
if
the
number
of
people
attending
at
the
site,
because
if
you
say
we
paid
X
number
of
people,
you
know
Y
dollars
and
that's
only
like
8
workers.
But
if
there
actually
had
been
ten
there,
then
maybe
there's
two
they're
not
getting
paid
a
fair
wage
office.
I
K
You,
mr.
chair,
so
the
way
recommendations
are
1.
2,
&
3
are
mutually
exclusive.
One
is
to
give
one
year
time.
The
second
one
is
to
not
permanently.
We
call
I
am
saying,
stop
the
withholding,
but
make
retain
it
to
use
towards
fair
wages
operations,
and
then
third
one
is
to
release
the
fund
back.
So
these
three
are
mutually
exclusive.
What
the
four
and
five
you
have
four
and/or,
why
is
five?
And
should
it
be
and/or
five,
so.
I
B
Through
the
chair,
I
think
one
way
to
deal
with
the
relationship
between
recommendations,
one
through
three
and
five.
If
the
committee
is
going
to
adopt
one
of
recommendations,
one
through
three
and
at
the
same
time
wishes
to
adopt
recommendation
five,
then
it
should
be
thought
of
as
being
adopting
recommendations,
one
through
three
subject
to
recommendation
five,
so
that
the
account
the
committee
determines
what
it's
going
to
do
in
relation
to
the
funds
generally
subject
to
a
direction
that
certain
monies
be
paid
directly
to
fur
pack.
Okay,.
I
Guess
we
were
trying
to
make
it
with
the
option
before
the
committee.
Do
you
feel
like
a
sanction
should
be
made
in
light
of
the
non-compliance
from
the
standpoint
at
a
fair
wage
office?
So
there
has
been
non-compliance
in
that
we
have
not
had
compliance
with
the
Bywater
okay.
So
the
question
is:
do
we
want
to
take
the
extreme
step
and
say,
okay,
disqualify
them,
despite
the
fact
that
they
have
not
had
another
event
of
non-compliance?
K
I'm
just
gonna
because
of
the
time
I'm
gonna
ask
a
few
questions
together.
So
the
the
investigation.
There
is
a
story
from
the
main
contractor
and
there
is
a
contradictory
somewhat
of
a
contract
restore
II.
What
we
have
from
you
see
have
subcontractors
and
the
contractor
stories
been
in
any
way
contradicting
each
other
from
your
investigation.
H
In
terms
of
the
inspection
logs
to
believe
transportation,
services
can
speak
to
that.
We
rely
on
City
daily
inspection
logs
in
terms
of
understanding
the
headcount
for
number
of
workers
on
on
any
particular
day,
and
then
comparing
that
with
the
payroll.
So
there
has
been
such
a
wide
gap
that
we
certainly
have
not
been
able
to
bridge
that
gap
after
countless
attempts
at
this
when.
H
K
In
terms
of
past
experiences
of
us
releasing
money
to
a
subcontractor,
when
do
we
decide
that
at
what
point
do
we
decide?
Do
we
look
at
what
they,
what
steps
they
have
taken
to
recover
that
money
and
what
what
steps
do
they
have
to
take
before
they
come
to
city,
to
get
the
subcontractors
money
precisely.
H
K
The
fair
wages
policies
is
there
to
protect.
You
know
employees
from
being
exploited,
basically
or
paid
less,
or
so
in
a
situation
like
this,
where
ninety
percent
of
the
money
has
been
given.
So
ninety
put
it
this
wasn't
if
this
contract
was
in
violation
of
where
we
just
just
hypothetically,
we
have
kind
of
had
90
percent
of
our
funds
go
to
a
project
where
employees
could
have
potentially
been
exploited
there
in
early
stages,
were
we
in
terms
of
fair
wages,
related
assessment
on
this?
H
Typically,
the
way
it
works,
let's
say
the
non-compliance
where
it
works,
250
thousand
dollars,
so
the
15
percent
is
the
administration
fee,
that's
levied
on
top
of
that
50
thousand
dollars,
and
and
and
and
that's
the
way
the
bylaw
has
been
written
in
terms
of
how
we
can
recoup
some
of
the
money
in
terms
of
the
administration
fees.
Okay,
thank
you.
Last.
G
All
right
here
we
go
so
I,
just
a
couple
of
questions
of
clarification.
First,
on
the
recommendations,
recommendation
number
one
makes
reference
to
well,
the
very
the
very
last
few
words
to
provide
the
requisite
information.
What
additional
information
are
you
expecting
or
do
we
have
everything
already
so
rec
one
so.
I
H
I
Okay,
so
so
I
guess
to
clarify
transportation
services
attends
at
the
site
and
there's
only
one
project
being
performed
in
you
know
between
these
two
blocks.
It's
a
city,
project
and
transportation
services
observes
15
people
working
perhaps
some
for
the
general
some
from
two
different
sub
contractors,
so
they
mark
down
employees
they're
attending
at
the
site.
I
Working
when
we
asked
for
the
for
the
records
from
the
general
contractor
instead
of
showing
15
workers,
they
may
show
8
worker
and
in
say,
here's
our
records
for
fair
wage
purposes
and
fair
wage
said,
but
we
have
15
workers
recorded
by
transportation
services
as
attending
at
the
site.
Working
on
that
day,
how
do
you
reconcile
the
two?
So
this
has
been.
The
standoff
is
that
we
have
transportation
records
and
we
have
general
contractor
records
and
they
are
not
in
oh
I.
A
A
B
The
report
from
Markham
fair,
wage
and
I
compared
it
to
our
notes-
and
there
was
a
lot
of
contradicting
points
brought
up
by
the
contractor
where
they
said
they
didn't
work,
but
we
actually
have
material
tickets
to
show
they
were
on
site
and
other
subcontractors.
So
that's
where
the
discrepancy
is
all
their
reports
show
several
contractors
on
site
and
we
have
actual
material
tickets.
A
G
I
So
so
the
fair,
fair
wage
by
law
allows
an
administrative
fee
nan
an
excess
of
15
percent
of
the
balance
to
make
up
as
an
administrative
fee.
So
because
of
the
work
that
the
fair
wage
office
has
had
to
undertake
in
this
over
this
number
of
years.
We're
saying
if
it's
released
then
might
be
appropriate
for
the
committee
to
recommend
an
additional
15
percent.
In
addition
to
what's
in
the
bylaw.
G
G
F
A
C
I
So,
to
adopt
number
4
means
you
have
made
a
determination
that
they
are
in
non-compliance
and,
as
I
said,
it
would
be
an
extraordinary
situation,
because
the
bylaw
requires
two
instances
of
non-compliance
within
a
one
or
two
year
period,
its
three-year
period.
Okay,
so
that
is
three
year
period
has
not
occurred
because
they
had
not
had
an
incidence
of
non-compliance
within
the
last
three
years
to
couple
up
with
this
one:
okay,
not
cooperating
with
the
fair
wage
officer,
not
providing
the
records
required,
would
be
determined
to
be
non-compliance.
G
G
No
but
I
think
I'll
recommend
what
should
be
moved.
Ok,
so
again,
I
see
staff
struggling
with
this
and
certainly
I'm
struggling
with
it.
It's
obviously
a
very
complex
situation
and
it
should
be,
it
should
be
really
straightforward
and-
and
it
looks
like
an
arrangement
that
is
failing
in
communication
on
both
ends,
I
think
severely
and
I
think
I
know,
there's
an
old
saying
that
takes
two
to
tango.
G
Well,
you
know,
maybe
maybe
if
this
disagreement
could
have
been
better,
better
managed,
maybe
at
both
ends
and
given
that
this
company
has
been
doing
business
with
the
city
for
more
than
20
years,
there's
a
relationship
there
I
think
there's.
If
there
was
anything
serious
here,
any
real,
big
problem,
it
would
have
been
the
this.
This
relationship
would
have
terminated
long
ago
and
I
hear
that
there
could
be
motions
and
there
could
be
other
suggestions
and
how
we
deal
with
these
five
recommendations.
G
We've
been
holding
the
money
now
for
three
years.
We
are
clear:
it
seems
clear
that
there
is
one
subcontractor
that
yet
has
not
been
paid.
So
the
way
I
see
this
mr.
chair
is
that
we,
the
the
the
most
reasonable
solution
to
this,
is
to
possibly
recommend
I
would
recommend
that
we
adopt
recommendation
number
three,
that's
tied
into
recommendation
number
five
and
that
would
should
settle
the
outstanding
issues
are
on
the
table.
At
the
moment.
G
They've
done
the
work
on
this
they've
done
the
due
diligence
and
if
things
were
clear
to
staff
or
clearer
to
staff,
I
think
that
we
would
have
been
facing
a
very
different
option
in
front
of
us
and
maybe
had
only
one
recommendation
in
front
of
us
clearly
stating
this
is
the
right
direction.
We
need
to
go
where
staff
would
be
directing
us
to
encourage
us
to
accept
accept
whether
that
recommendation
was
any
one
of
these
four.
G
They
will
pick
one
and
say
this
is
the
way
we
recommend
committee
move
on
this
particular
item,
because
it's
perfectly
clear
to
us
that
there's
a
problem
or
there
isn't
a
problem
or
whatever.
Well,
we've
got
five
recommendations
here.
It's
not
too
often
I
see
that
and
seven
years
have
been
here,
and
this
is
why
you
know
I
think
staff
clearly
has
been
struggling
with
it.
I
were
struggling
with
it.
We
could
mix
and
match
more
recommendations,
but
I
think
we
need
to
make
sure
that
people
get
paid
now.
G
I,
don't
know
how
large
this
company
is.
But
$100,000
is
a
lot
of
money
and
I
thought
we
got
to
make
sure
that
everyone's
been
paid
and
that's
the
only
reason
I'm
suggesting
we
tie
it
into
recommendation
number
five.
So
everyone's
comfortable
that
and
even
the
deputy
and
indicated
that
you
know
they.
Certainly
there
are
no
issues
between
them
and
and
this
other
company
for
a
pack,
and
so
they
should
be
paid.
So
that's,
that's!
That's
an
agreed.
G
A
And
just
to
be
clear
councillors,
so
if
you're
moving
emotion,
you're
supposed
to
be
doing
it
at
the
beginning
of
your
remarks
and
I
did
ask
you
at
the
beginning,
if
you're
moving
anything-
and
you
said
you
weren't-
well,
no,
no,
no
you're,
maybe
I'm
a
three
and
five
so
just
to
be
clear
if
you're
gonna
move
something
all
right
have
to
do
it
at
the
beginning
of
your
remarks,
that's
the
procedural
bylaw!
Thank
you.
Okay!
Thank
you.
Questions
from
counselor
Shannon.
Mr.
K
Speaker
when
the
deputy
end
from
the
main
contractor
alloy,
our
brothers
thought
she
did
mention.
If
the
money
was
released,
they
would
pay
the
subcontractor
correct.
So
you
doing
three
and
five
makes
us
pay
the
subcontractor
and
release
the
money
to
the
thing.
So
we
are
we
giving
more
than
what
what
the
contractor
actually.
G
No
good
question
the
way:
I
read
that
and
if
I'm
wrong,
then
I
stand
corrected
and
we
could.
We
could
adjust
that
I
read
by
combining
three
and
five.
We
would
release
a
hundred
thousand
less
the
thirteen
that's
old
to
the
contractor
and
the
contractors
paid
directly
I'm
happy
either
way
as
long
as
people
get
paid.
As
long
as
it
happens,
that's
the
way,
I
see
it
and
then
there's
the
15
percent
hold
back
as
its
recommending
here
as
well.
That's
my
understanding,
yeah.
K
C
G
C
C
G
Counselor
I,
you
know
what
honestly
I'm
comfortable
with
just
moving
three.
Well,
the
only
reason
I
tied
it
into
five
when
I
spoke
with
legal.
Behind
me,
they
made
I
thought
the
advice.
I
got
was
that
if
you
tie
any
any
one
of
one
two
or
three
to
five,
then
we
ensure
that
fur
pack
gets
paid
and
in
terms
of
sanctions.
G
Well,
the
we've
already
been
holding
these
funds
for
three
years
and
I
and
as
I
indicated
in
my
comments,
that
if
staff
was
comfortable,
if
it
was
clear
in
their
mind
that
you
know
what's
happening
here,
I
believe
they
would
have
come
back
only
with
one
recommendation
and
that
would
have
been
recommendation
for
that's
not
the
case.
They're
comfortable
with
any
of
these
recommendations.
A
C
C
C
You
and
then
withhold
the
funds
until
July
and
that
we
defer
consideration
but
I,
don't
know
whether
we're
defer
considerations
gone
of
number
four,
which
is
whether
to
disqualify
them
to
the
July
meeting.
So
essentially,
it
says:
okay,
you've
got
one
last
chance
to
provide
the
time
cards
and
the
additional
information
do
it
to
in
July
before
this
end
of
this
term,
and
then
we
will
determine
whether
or
not
to
disqualify
them
and,
as
for
five
I,
completely
disagree
that
we
should
be
paying
for
pack.
C
Four
pack
has
remedies
that
arise
out
of
their
contract
with
a
lawyer
and
I,
don't
believe
we
should
be
paying
a
subcontractor.
We
don't
know
what
the
other
sub
caught,
whether
the
status
of
the
other
subcontractors
payments,
whether
they
are
in
default,
whether
lawyers
in
default
to
the
other
subcontractors
and
we
will
have
them
come
forward
to
I,
understand
we've
all
been
struggling.
C
I
also,
don't
think
that
counselor
croissant
ease
I,
understand
where
you
were
going,
but
to
provide
them
full
restoration
of
the
hundred
thousand
and
to
give
money
to
fur
pack
doesn't
work
because
then
we're
double
paying
so
I
can't
support
that
motion.
I.
Just
think
that
we
have
a
fair
wage
policy
that
seems
to
work
for
all
other
contractors
and
I.
Don't
understand
why
it's
not
working
for
a
lawyer.
C
If
they've
got
time
cards
they've
got
time
cards
and
they
can
submit
them.
If
they
don't
have
time
cards,
they
should
that's
a
quote.
That
is
a
requirement
of
our
fair
wage
policy.
The
only
way
we
can
tell
if
people
have
been
paid
is
if
we
have
the
daily
cards
and
the
hours
of
work
and
if
they
can't
provide
the
hours
of
work
and
who's
been
paid,
then
they're
in
violation
of
our
fair
wage
policy
period.
C
So
our
staff
have
been
put
in
a
difficult
position
in
our
transportation
staff,
put
in
a
difficult
position
as
well,
because
they
failed
to
provide
the
information
they
should
be,
providing,
if
fir,
PAC
can
do
it
and
every
other
contractor
who
comes
has
a
contract
with
us
that
abides
by
the
fair
wage
policy.
Every
single
day
can
do
it,
so
can
a
lawyer
and
they
fail
to
do
it.
So
you
know
I.
C
The
discrepancy
is
too
large
to
not
sanction
them,
and
if
the
only
sanction
is
that
15%
administrative
fee
I,
don't
think
that's
right
either.
So
this
will
be
the
second
time.
So,
let's
give
them
a
few
more
months
and
then
we're
going
to
have
to
decide
whether
we
sanction
them,
and
it
may
be
that
there
is
no
further
information
and
the
question
will
be
whether
or
not
they're
prepared
to
comply
with
the
city's
fair
wage
information
requirements
in
the
future,
and
there
should
be
a
sanction.
The
question
is:
what.
K
So
during
the
deputation,
we
heard
clearly
that
there
doesn't
seem
to
be
any
more
additional
information
that
a
lawyer
produced
concrete
contractors
can
provide.
So
what
would
this
additional
time
get
us
if
this
time
for
my
additional
information,
I
just
want
time
for
the
staff
from
the
city
to
kind
of
English?
Look
into
this
details.
K
You,
mr.
chair,
you
know
it's
it's
it's
a
very
complicated
file
for
many
reasons
and
and
I
think
there
are
three
options.
One
is
to
you
know,
ask
for
more
information,
but
I
hear
there
isn't
much
more
information
to
be
provided,
but
I
think
we
there
might
be
a
reason
for
us
to
extend
to
to
get
more
information
on
our
side.
You
know
when
happy.
Under
what
circumstances
have
we
paid
subcontractors?
Under
what
circumstances
have
we
investigated
through
subcontractors
and
and
look
for
further
proof
of
what
was
going
on
and
so
on?
K
K
So
so
it
is,
it
is
it
is.
It
is
a
big
scenario
and
I
think
one
of
my
bigger
concern
is
that
you
know
we
are
in
a
situation
where
the
bigger
picture
question
is
about
workers
and
their
right
and
their
right
to
have
decent
pay,
and
this
is
not
necessarily
only
about
the
9%
of
the
money
being
with
all
about
who
the
workers
were,
what
they
got
paid
and
where
they
were,
they
paid
decent
wages,
were
they
paid
what
they
were
supposed
to
be
paid?
K
It
is
of
a
serious
concern
and
we
need
to
look
at
it
more
seriously,
so
I'm
willing
to
look
at
an
option
of
having
that
extra
time,
not
just
for
the
contractor
to
provide
additional
information
if
they
wish
to,
but
also
our
staff
to
come
up
with
a
more
detailed
senior
detailed
report
on
the
situation,
proving
what
we
see
as
a
violation
in
any
way
as
well.
For
us
to
take
that
concrete
measure
of
offsetting
examples
of
any
violations.
K
If
there
were
violations
of
fair
based
policy,
we
need
to
take
that
serious,
so
I'm
leaning
towards
supporting
councillor
Davis
motion
to
get
that
extra
time,
not
only
for
more
information
from
the
contractor,
but
also
more
information
from
our
staff,
particularly
on
the
area
of
a
fair
wages.
Policy
needs
to
be
implemented
and
needs
to
be
inspected.
It
doesn't
always
happen
only
at
the
last
we'd
throw
a
last
money
being
withheld
it
would.
It
would
have
happened
throughout
the
times.
K
So
I
want
to
know
if
there
were
further
communication
during
the
contract
time
around
implementation
of
fair
wages
and
I
would
like
to
see
some
more
records
of
that.
So
thank
you
for
the
débutantes
for
your
for
your
information
I'm.
Looking
forward
to
additional
information
through
supporting
consul
general
Davis
motion.
A
A
G
A
You
just
want
to
move
three
on
its
own
yeah
Rex.
Okay,
all
right
right!
Thank
you
sway
the
most.
So
the
first
motion
that
was
moved
was
by
counselor
croissant
II
who's
now
amended.
It
he's
just
moving
recommendation
number
three
in
the
report.
All
in
favor
opposed
now
loses,
and
we
have
councillor
Davis's
motion
if
we
have
it
on
the
screen,
all
in
favor
opposed
and
that
carries
item
as
amended
all
in
favor,
nope,
nope
nope,
all
right,
too
much
paper.
Okay.
A
A
So
the
way
it
works
here
you
have
five
minutes
to
address
the
committee.
Each
member
of
the
committee
can
speak,
asking
questions
for
up
to
five
minutes,
and
then
we
can
ask
questions
of
staff
individually
for
up
to
five
minutes,
and
then
we
debate
it
within
committee
and
reach
a
decision.
So
you
have
five
minutes.
Whenever
you're
ready,
there's
a
clock,
you
can
see
up
on
all
over
there
that
lets.
You
know
when
your
five
minutes
is
up
and
I'll
remind
you
as
well.
A
M
Thank
You
chair
and
thank
you,
members
of
the
committee.
As
you
are
aware,
we
submitted
a
letter
responding
to
concerns
brought
up
by
the
city
staff
and
so
I
all
make
my
marks
quite
brief
and
we'll
obviously
answer
any
questions
that
you
may
have
afterwards.
So
staff
have
been
very
helpful
to
us
and
I
hope
that
they
also
appreciate
and
I
think
that
they
have
been
happy
with
our
follow-up
actions
overall
you're
looking
at
two
issues
here
that
we
believe
are
quite
minor
in
nature.
M
However,
our
understanding
from
staff
is
that
they,
they
are
required
to
report
to
the
committee
because
of
their
of
the
bylaw
may
be,
and
they
would
support
our
recommendations
that
we
submitted
to
you.
If
the
committee
decides
to
adopt
it,
we
have
worked
for
the
city
for
a
long
time
to
I
think
it
was
when
Mel
Aspen
was
the
mayor
of
North
York
and
prior
to
the
megacity
and
I
will
just
take
a
few
seconds
to
go
over.
The
issues
that
we
have.
The
first
item
is
to
us
is
the
matter
of
interpretation.
M
There
is
a
father
and
son
business
that
we
had.
We
had
hired
to
be
thought
that
they
were
exempt
from
the
policy,
but
they
did
hire
some
other
workers
which
were
not
so.
There
was
some
confusion
there
and
having
you
know
them
in
different
jobs.
Projects
for
us
and
the
city
staff
brought
it
to
our
attention.
We
clarified
it,
we
dealt
with
it.
We
made
sure
that
they
comply
and-
and
also
there
were
some
rate
issues
that
we
were
confused
about.
Again.
M
M
They
were
basically
people
at
the
site
that
our
site
staff
did
not
realize
that
they
had
union
union
stickers
on
their
vehicles
and
their
protective
gears,
and
when
it
was
brought
up,
began
to
immediate
action.
We
reimbursed
for
the
grievances-
and
you
know
always
in
order-
we
ourselves
are
facing
into
becoming
Union
and
we
just
have
a
grace
period,
because
we
have
some
obligations
and
contracts
right
now
that
they
were
priceless
non-union.
So
we
are
kind
of
being
phased
in.
M
The
the
second
item
was
to
us
was
clerical
error.
Once
for
every
job
is
brought
to
our
attention,
we
took
action
to
review
their
findings.
We
spoke
to
our
payroll
provider
ADP
and
then
our
employees
and
then
once
details
were
confirmed.
We
corrected
the
payroll
and
we
provided
the
favorite
office
with
all
the
documents.
M
M
Let's
say
that
we
be
kind
of
should
have
been
proactive,
we
were
reactive,
is
only
0.3
percent
of
the
whole
job.
It's
it's
very
minimal
in
terms
of
dollar
value.
This
committee
has
never
disqualified
the
company
for
simple
errors.
The
past
disqualifications
had
evidence
of
deliberate
fraud
and
falsified
documentation
and
outright
defiance
of
the
fair
wage
office.
We
we've
always
been
cooperative
every
time.
The
officers
called
me
in
above
calling,
and
basically
we
looked
at
the
situation
and
we
jumped
at
it
and
being
corrected.
M
It
we
have
reiterated
the
importance
of
full
compliance
with
the
Farage
office
to
all
of
our
staff
and
all
of
our
subcontractors.
In
closing,
we
trust
you
can
adopt
the
recommendation
we
included
in
our
letter,
so
we
are
on
you're,
put
on
probation
City
fair
wage
office
staff
has
confirmed
with
me
that
they
can
support
that
recommendation
if
this
committee
adopts
it.
Thank
you.
M
M
It's
it
would
be
probation,
we
can
still.
We
will
be
working
with
the
staff
every
every
contractor
we
have.
We
will
now
check
with
them
before
hiring
them
just
make
sure
that
they,
you
know
they
can
look
into
our
payroll
and
all
the
information
that
they
want.
It's
going
to
be
open
book
and
they
can
see
everything.
So
we.
M
H
C
C
M
C
M
Yeah,
it
was
a
misunderstanding
in
terms
of
which,
because
fair
wage
office
rates
are
quite
extensive,
I
brought
them
here.
So
we
were
under
the
wrong
category.
We
were
basically
allowing
for
that
and
then
they
said,
no.
You
have
to
use
this
rate
based
on
that
rate,
we
were
sure
we
had
shorted
our
staff,
so
we
made
the
dear
friends
and
then
it
was
an
issue
with
ADP,
because
ADP
has
only
one
rate,
so
we
had
to
have
two
rates
for
the
same
person.
So
we
corrected
that
and
they
adopted
on.
M
The
payroll
system,
so
they
wasn't
going
through
properly,
so
we
came
back,
we
fixed
it.
We
gave
it
I
think
actually,
on
that
one
we
had
already
made
on
the
first
issue.
We
had
to
give
the
checks
to
the
Farage
office.
They
distributed
those
to
the
workers,
the
difference
and
then
the
second
issue
being
already
taking
care
of
it.
So
we
provided
documents
of
ADP
to
this
stop
so
that
they
could
verify
that.
Okay.
C
M
Were
not
well
that
there
was
a
landscapers,
so
landscapers
have
a
different
rate.
That's
what's
one
thing:
we
were
paying
them.
What
we
thought
is
landscaping
raids
for
one
and
people
paying
them
as
a
contract,
actually
we're
not
even,
but
we
knew
how
much
they
were
paying,
and
that
was
short
of
the
amount
that
the
favorite
office
was
suggesting.
M
C
But
what
I'm
asking
you
there
was
restitution,
if
that's
the
correct
word
of
the
wages,
as
you've
explained
for
the
police,
33
division
project,
yes
or
a
PTA
for
whatever.
Oh,
that
you
were,
those
were
paid
directly,
I,
guess
and
then,
but
were
the
azores
workers
compensated
for
the
difference
between
what
they
were
paid
and
what
the
rate
should
have
been.
M
Well,
this
was
this
should
have
been
done
by
a
Soros
and
they
went.
They
made
sure
that
they
go
through
the
Beveridge
office.
They
take
care
of
it.
So
that's
what
we
did
we
actually
pushed
for
pushed
as
well
as
to
comply.
We
had
a
meeting
with
the
Foreign
Office
and
finally,
they
came
through
because
they
were
resisting
to
provide
all
the
payroll.
A
G
Thank
you.
So
just
a
couple
of
questions
so
you've
taken
some
corrective
measures,
and
it
says
here
on
page
four
of
staff
report
you've
taken
upon
yourselves
to
make
restitution
to
the
affected
workers,
so
you
were
not
prompted
by
staff
you.
This
is
a
an
initiative
you
took
upon
yourself
to
to
make
restitution.
Is
that
how
correct.
M
G
M
I
said
it
was
landscaping
workers
we
had
under
the
under
fair
wage
schedule.
First
of
all,
there
is
an
IC
I
and
then
there's
a
general
classification,
so
B
by
mistake,
using
a
wrong
chart
and
wrong
rate
to
basically
justify
the
pain,
but
then
they
corrected
that
and
we
looked
after
it,
we
basically
paid
them
the
difference.
Well,.
G
C
H
All
all
outstanding
back
wages
have
been
paid
to
pegas
own
direct
employees
in
terms
of
Azores.
They
have
processed
checks
for
the
two
workers
that
that
were
on
the
jobsite.
We
are
just
trying
to
track
these
two
individuals
down,
given
that
we've
had
difficulty
in
terms
of
determining
their
addresses
and
contact
information.
C
G
You,
mr.
chair,
so
they
mentioned
in
the
bottom
of
the
letter
that
the
City
Council
directed
their
recommendation.
So
your
thoughts
in
the
recommendation
and
is
that
something
that
they
indicated
that
you
you
they've,
had
discussion
with
staff
yourselves
with
respect
to
probation.
Would
that
be
an
option
that
you
would
be
okay
with
if.
H
G
K
H
Not
that
often
because
the
the
bylaw
is
relatively
flexible,
so
if
you
disqualify
a
company
it's
within
a
three-year
period
and
after
a
three
year
period,
they
go
back
to
being
to
square
one.
So
in
essence,
if
it's
one
of
those
situations
where
it's
quite
blatant
in
terms
of
the
bylaw
contravention,
then
then
we
would
report
so.
K
It's
not
that
often
so
in
terms
of
two
instances
we're
talking
about
instances
where
we
found
situations
where
the
fair
wages
policy
was
violated.
Does
that
mean
out
of
all
the
instances
the
two
were
found,
or
is
it
just
the
two
aren't
randomly
being
reported
back
or
in
terms
of
X
in
the
inspection
because
doesn't
mean
only
two
happened
or
could
have
been
more
instances
of
it
that
we
haven't
examined.
H
K
When,
when,
when
these
recommendations
come
into
play,
is
it
based
on
the
violation
itself
or
does
it
get
like?
We
are
now
hearing
that
actions
were
corrective
actions
were
taken
and
just
exchange
the
recommendation,
because
after
finding
something
had
happened,
the
corrective
actions
have
been
taken.
Would
that
change
the
recommendation
that
you
are
putting
forward
because
after
finding
something
happened,
the
correction
has
a
patent
before
he
went
came
here.
H
A
G
I
think
the
deal
with
this
specific
issue
that
it
will
enable
staff
to
immediately
bring
it
back
here
if
there's
any
further
issues
going
forward,
and
so
a
one-year
probation
will
give
them
the
opportunity
to
be
able
to
monitor
this
in
a
way
that
otherwise
they
otherwise
could
not.
So
that
would
I
think
probably
just
be
the
best
course
of
action.
A
A
We
have
one
motion
on
the
floor
by
a
counselor
Chris
aunty,
all
in
favor
opposed.
That's
carried.
Dr
item
is
amended:
no
okay,
all
right
and
our
next
item
going
back
to
well,
then
we're
gonna
go
from
the
beginning
of
the
agenda
through,
since
we've
done
all
the
deputies.
So
our
next
item
is
item
number
for
Appeal
decision
of
the
Toronto
District
School
Board
versus
cogeco
data
services
like
councillor
data's.
My.
C
C
J
Through
the
chair,
it
varies,
but
some
of
them
have
asked
specifically
for
the
authority
to
issue
a
procurement
in
the
form
of
which
it
would
take,
such
as
when
we
outsource
district
2.
There
were
requests
for
RFQs
and
then,
while
that
was
a
council
council,
made
other
suggestions
with
respect
to
about
those
procurements.
J
C
The
intent
is,
you
provide
counselors
with
sufficient
information
to
be
able
to
effectively
decide
whether
this
is
an
option
that
they
support
the
chair.
Yes,
okay
and
one
of
those
things
could
be.
You
know
what
the
service
levels
would
be,
what
the
terms
and
conditions
of
the
contract
would
be.
Are
there
any
conditions
on
the
contract,
the
kind
of
service
that
kind
of
thing
we
should
know
about
it.
J
J
C
Defined
what
the
service
was,
how
much
we
were
contracting
for
the
basic
content
of
what
we
were
going
to
be
through
the
chair,
those
contracting
for
did
you
have
a
chance
to
comment
on
the
contract
that
became
before
counts.
The
last
last
week
on
contracting
out
of
security
contracting
out
of
crossing
guards.
J
C
You
I
was
pleased
to
have
this
report
again
because
in
fact
there
were
comments
made
last
week
that
councillors
had
no
role
in
in
in
in
contracts
before
there
were
contracts
that
were
put
up
before
the
contracts
were
put
out
in
the
market,
whether
it's
a
tender,
an
RFP
and
this
policy
says
we
can
provide
input
before
not
during
and
not
after
what
happens.
Is
we
get
contracts
here
after
and
then
we
get
told?
C
Well,
there's
nothing
really
you
can
do
about
it
now
you
either
have
to
toss
out
that
RFP
and
start
again
can't
change
it,
because
that's
what
contract
law
has
said
and
if
you're
going
to
toss
out
that
contract
and
start
again,
the
terms
have
to
be
different.
Why
did
you
do
that?
There
has
to
be
justification
or
we'll
get
sued.
C
Under
valued
is
contract
profile,
and
it
is,
is
this
an
issue
that
is
a
public
interest?
Is
it
an
issue
of
interest
to
counselors
and
I
think
that
this
ought
to
be
interpreted
more
broadly,
and
in
that
case,
if
a
contract
is
brought
to
us
before
it
goes
in
the
market
out
to
the
marketplace,
it
should
have
a
certain
amount
of
detail
in
it.
C
Otherwise
we
are
not
making
any
decision
whatsoever
and,
at
the
risk
of
being
chastised
by
the
chair,
I
do
want
to
say
that
the
report
that
we
got
last
week
on
contracting
out
crossing
guards
was
completely
inadequate.
It
told
us
nothing
nothing
about
what
we
were
contracting
for,
how
many
crossing
guards?
What
is
the
service
level?
What
are
we
looking
for
in
terms
of
terms
and
conditions?
These
are
the
things
that
we
should
have
had
to
say
about.
C
A
C
C
J
Through
the
chair,
the
the
alternative
policy
was
to
ask
all
corporations
to
provide
that
information,
then,
within
five
years,
make
it
a
requirement.
So
that
was
that
was
the
alternative
from
the
secular
panel.
But
the
issue
with
with
gathering
this
information
still
goes
to
the
inability
for
the
city
to
validate
the
information
being
provided
so
we'll
be
just
collecting
information
from
corporations
in
which
they
do
not
have
to
disclose
in.
They
do
not
have
to
have
a
board
composition
with
30
percent
gender
diversity.
C
J
To
be
to
be
clear,
the
environmental
responsible
procurement
policy
doesn't
require
a
certification.
It
just
encourages
the
providing
an
environmentally
product
depending
on
what
this
is,
what
we're
trying
to
procure
so
there's
no
certification.
Respect
to
that,
but
the
distinction
here
is
that
we
would
be
requiring
only
one
type
of
proponents
or
bitter
a
corporation
to
provide
information
in
which
we
only
actually
give
bids
and
proposals
for
more
than
just
corporations.
We
get
them
from
sole
proprietors.
C
Why,
wouldn't
you
apply
it
to
all
corporations
evenly
I
mean
I'm,
saying
that
all
of
the
all
of
the
bidders
are
the
same
type
of
corporate
entity.
Of
course
they're
not,
but
of
those
that
are
boards,
for
instance,
the
Business
Corporations
Act,
it
says
requires
them
to
be
reported
out
to
the
federal
level
of
government
I
believe.
Why
could
we
not
of
those
that
have
corporate
boards,
both
not-for-profit
public
and
non-public
business
corporations?
Why
couldn't
we
simply
ask
them
through.
C
It's
a
different
notion
and
I
understand
it's
a
very
different
notion.
There's
one
that
says:
if
you're
a
board,
what
are
you
doing
to
ensure
that
you
have
gender
representation?
It's
a
question
and
if
you're
not
a
board
that
has
more
than
one
during
or
even
if
you
have
one
director
tell
us,
is
it
a
male
or
a
female
I,
don't
know
why
would
we
not
ask
for.
J
C
C
J
The
chair,
I,
think
from
our
perspective,
is
that
if
we
have,
you
know
a
very
beer,
we're
seen
as
a
very
bureaucratic
procurement
process
in
them
itself
to
ask
for
information
that
we
will
not
be
able
to
do.
We
won't
be
able
to
validate,
and
we'll
only
apply
to
one
type
of
corporation
did
not
seem
to
be
the
best
use
of
our
resources
where
the
issue
might
be
better
students,
whether
a
different
approach
from
a
business
corporation,
you
know
tactic
would
be
more
appropriate
than
using
procurement.
J
K
K
So
I
mean
for
us
to
look
into
this
issue
a
little
bit
more.
We
don't
even
have
current
data
to
kind
of
I
mean
anecdotally.
We
know
how
reflective
these
corporations
are
in
terms
of
gender
diversity,
but
we
don't
know
from
city
of
Toronto's
point
of
view
that
in
the
in
these
two
years
that
we've
had
businesses
with
cooperation
that
have
an
ninety-five
percent
men,
we
don't
have
those
data
right.
That's.
J
Through
the
chair,
it's
still
I
so
loved
the
view
that,
because
of
the
legislative
requirements
where
a
corporation
can
choose
how
they
set
up
their
board
composition
and
that
collecting
the
data
end
of
itself
is
not
going
to
be
sufficient.
I
do
not
think
I
think
the
issue
will
be
that
we
run
risks
of
reducing
competition
for
those
companies
who
choose
not
to
change
and
to
go
elsewhere
as
we're
not
a.
K
We
are
not
deciding,
though
my
understanding
is
not
even
not
it
forget
about
making
a
decision
whether
to
go
with
somebody
because
of
gender
diversity,
but
to
even
have
data
to
to
be
able
to
use
that.
What
do
we
do
anything
else
in
terms
of
how
do
we
do
social
procurement
in
terms
of
smaller
newcomer
and
and
how
does
that
work
for.
C
Don't
think
that
there
are
easy
solutions
here,
but
I
I
do
think
we
could
be
a
leader
if
we
should
choose
to
take
pursue
some
of
the
alternatives.
I
am
also
very
aware
of
the
workload
issues
that
you
raised
in
this
report
and
other
reports,
which
concerns
me
greatly
and
that's
a
budget
issue
it's
and
is
used
in
two
reports
to
justify
not
taking
these
certain
things
further
and
I.
C
A
Okay,
thank
you
other
speakers,
seeing
none
so
I
just
going
to
speak
briefly
on
this
I
want
to
thank
staff
for
the
the
report
they
did
on
this
appreciate
councillor
Davis's
remarks.
I
think
that
when
it
comes
to
board
composition,
I
think
one
of
the
problems
that
we
have
I
think
we
really
need
to
get
our
own
house
in
order.
The
number
of
boards
that
I
sit
on
that
I
don't
think
adequately
reflect
the
the
population
of
the
City
of
Toronto
I.
A
Don't
think
we
have
a
enough
youth
on
our
board
youth
minorities,
women,
the
number
of
boards
that
I
think
are
unbalanced
when
it
comes
to
youth,
minority
women,
indigenous
population,
I
think
we
have
a
lot
of
work
to
do.
I
think
what
we're
going
understand-
the
intent
of
this,
but
you
know
one
trying
to
we-
don't
have
our
own
house
in
order
and
also
trying
to
then
look
at
outside
boards,
or
we
don't
have
any
control
or
cloud
telling
them
or
dictating
to
them.
A
What
the
composition
of
their
board
should
be
I
think
is
problematic,
so
I'll
be
supporting
receiving
of
this
report
for
information.
Thank
you.
So
we've
councillor
Davis's
motion
to
receive
it
for
information
all
in
favor
and
sending
it
to
City
Council
for
information.
Thank
you.
Okay.
Our
next
item
is
number
nine
proprietary
information
technology
maintenance
and
support
contract,
renewals
and
amendments
held
by
councillor
Davis
councillor
Davis,
to
have
questions
of
staff,
so
we're
on
number
nine.
Now.
C
B
Through
the
chair,
so
yes,
this
report
brings
together
it's
it's
essentially
an
updated
version
of
an
annual
cycle
where
we
bring
back
the
maintenance
and
support
requirements
for
systems
that
have
reached
a
certain
threshold.
So
it's
specific
to
maintenance
and
support
for
existing
contracts
that
have
reached
a
threshold
of
either
five
years
or
$500,000
and
has
contracts
age.
B
B
C
J
A
D
So
through
the
chair,
the
the
move
is
to
extend
the
existing
contract
for
an
additional
years
and
the
rest
of
the
there
is
a
shared
services
executive
steering
committee.
That's
looking
on
a
separate
matter
in
a
joint
procurement
with
the
rest
of
us.
It
sees
so
this
time
for
that
year
is
to
allow
us
to
go
through
that
process
to
build
those
requirements
and
essentially
to
have
that
joint
procurement.
A
B
C
J
J
I
B
Just
threw
the
chair
at
what
I
do
understand
was
that
the
previous
CFO
Roberson
II
actually
went
to
the
boards
and
actually
did
some
presentations
on
shared
services.
So
this
was
discussed.
Did
they
go
specifically
on
the
IT
piece,
not
sure,
but
I
know
that
they
understood
the
the
importance
of
integrating
and
consolidating
the
procurement
power.
C
C
One
of
the
things
that
concerns
me,
the
bigger
and
bigger
and
bigger
these
contracts
get,
and
we
tie
every
one
of
our
corporations
boards
and
division
whatever
we're
calling
them
now.
It's
not
ABCs
its
Dax
or
something
like
that
is
that
does
it
not
increase
the
risk
and
that
and
if
there's
any
failure,
everyone
is
affected
by
it.
C
We
get
one
massive
contract,
for
you
know
one
set
of
photo
copiers
and
what
you
know:
I,
isn't
diversity
and
competition
supposed
to
be
one
of
the
things
to
that
help
drive
down
costs.
If
Xerox
knows
they've
got
the
entire
corporation
of
the
City
of
Toronto
and
every
single
agency
board
and
Commission.
D
The
chair,
it's
a
valid
question,
but
the
challenge
that
also
you
look
at
the
other
point
is
Dean
not
just
the
economies
of
scale,
but
the
operational
efficiencies,
often
the
vendors.
What
they
find
is
that
the
set
of
requirements
across
those
different
ABCs
or
you
call
them,
are
very
similar
and
what
we
find
it
now
with
a
lot
of
the
technology
advancement
in
those
components.
D
If
we
sit
in
the
room
with
our
colleagues
and
we're
actually
walking
on
the
same
requirements,
then
what
we
find
is
that
the
through
to
that
item,
the
actual
vendors,
don't
actually
propose
us
the
best
solution
of
modernization.
So
there
is
a
financial
component,
absolutely
that
we're
trying
to
get
economies
of
scale,
but
there's
also
a
component
that
leverages
all
the
requirements
together
to
add
modernize
it
in
a
more
efficient
way
and
by
combining
those
requirements
together.
D
We
have
a
lot
more
strength
in
those
numbers
in
terms
of
the
negotiating
power
that
we
can
actually
push
back
in
terms
of
the
contractual
terms,
the
the
ability
of
the
some
of
those
renewals
in
that
piece.
That's
that's
just
how
the
industry
is
going
and
what
we
find
in
the
shared
services
group
that
our
requirements
are
all
the
same,
but
we
find
that
we're
having
four
or
five
different
conversations.
D
So
what
what
is
risk
recently
occurred
is
that
through
the
city,
we've
got
a
project
manager
which
we
will
be
leading
and
we
get
all
their
input
together.
It's
certainly
a
consultation
process.
If
you
follow
up
a
racy
model,
who
is
responsible
accountable,
none
of
the
other
agencies
will
actually
come
in
to
it
if
they
feel
that
their
requirements
are
not
being
met,
so
it's
actually.
C
A
Davis
is
moving
the
recommendation
in
the
report
all
in
favour,
Karen
opposed
carried.
Our
next
item
is
number
11
provision
of
supply
delivery
and
first
year,
maintenance
in
support
of
Oracle
software
licenses
from
Oracle
Canada
ulc,
held
by
councillor
Davis
concertinas,
to
have
questions
of
staff
I.
C
C
D
The
chair
is
actually
based
on
net
new
in
terms
of
based
on
the
growth
in
terms
of
those
licenses.
If
you
actually
look,
it's
actually
additional
19
licenses
that
I've
made.
So
in
your
comment
about.
Why
is
it
coming
across
now
from
a
planning
standpoint
in
terms
of
how
we're
looking
in
terms
of
the
growth
of
the
licenses
based
on
essentially
where
we
are,
we
had
to
we're
seeing
the
increase
across
in
terms
of
the
city
of
the
consumption
of
those
licenses,
so
it's
actually
net
new
that
we
represent.
D
D
There
are
times
where
by
you,
have
to
go
and
increase
the
licenses
of
that
to
meet
the
demand
based
on
the
utilization
based
on
a
way
to
cancel.
That's
over
the
preference
from
a
strategic
planning
is
a
start
of
the
year.
You
would
know
essentially
working
for
you
what
you
need,
but
they
are
circumstance
that
you
need
to
extend
that
in
there
that
you
just
can't
foresee,
based
on
okay.
C
D
To
the
chair,
so
Oracle
is
a
platform
that
goes
in,
and
you
may
have
heard
this
so
excuse
if
I'm
repeating
words
that
are
pre
people
of
use.
Alright,
there's
software,
there's
utilize,
call
cots
custom
off-the-shelf.
So
essentially,
Oracle
is
a
very
proprietary
software.
That's
used
for
a
lot
of
case
management,
a
lot
of
very
specific
areas.
The
way
you
transition
out
of
that
business
is
by
essentially
trying
to
go
open
source,
so
you're
now
moving
to
an
open
source
technology
that
isn't
predominantly
needed
to
be
linked
to
Oracle.
D
The
city
has
extensive
areas
of
Oracle's.
So
when
that
would
occur,
that's
gonna.
Take
some
time.
Are
we
doing
that
yeah?
Well,
we're
looking
at
through
a
technology
city
strategy
that
we're
starting
to
look
at
where
we,
where
the
city
needs
to
go
aligned
in
with
essentially
where
the
direction
for
the
next
five
years,
we're
looking
at
the
essentially
best
practice
is
out
there
from
Gartner,
so
those
those
conversations
and
planning
is
occurring,
but
in
the
meantime
there
is
still
a
business
that
needs
to
run
in
that
respect.
D
A
A
There
was
an
add-on
to
the
agenda
that
councillor
Layton
it's
distributed
on
pink
paper
before
you,
I
just
need
I'm
gonna,
move
a
motion
to
add
that
to
the
agenda
all
in
favor
carry
and
then
councillor
Crisanta
you
had
this
question
answered
on
number
20
is
moving
the
recommendation
and
that
all
in
favor
carried
and
now
we're
on
number
18
facilities,
management,
service,
review
of
external
cleaning
contracts
held
by
councillor
Davis
councillor
Davis.
Do
you
have
any
questions
on
this.
A
So
the
first
motion
is
on
the
screen
to
go
in-camera
all
in
favor
opposed
carried,
and
the
second
item
motion
is
to
extend
the
meeting
to
finish
this
item.
All
in
favor
opposed
carry,
so
members
of
the
general
public
I
have
to
ask
members
of
the
general
public
and
any
staff
that
aren't
associated
with
this
last
item
on
the
agenda:
Toronto
District
School
Board
versus
cogeco,
Data,
Services
Limited
to
exit
the
room.
Thank
you.