Toronto Council meets today! Their agenda includes the vacant home tax, parking tickets, the vacant home tax, Airbnb regulation, and the vacant home tax. Did I mention the vacant home tax? Streaming live here. I will post happenings. www.youtube.com/watch?v=KORc...
The mayor has designated an item about student nutrition programs as the first key matter, so it’ll be up first. She’s scheduled her second key matter — on the vacant home tax, maybe you’ve heard about it — for first-thing tomorrow. The agenda is here. secure.toronto.ca/council/#/co...
I had a preview of the big stuff on the agenda in Friday’s free bonus issue of City Hall Watcher. In addition to five — five! — items about the vacant home tax, there are also debates brewing on drinking in parks and pedal pubs. toronto.cityhallwatcher.com/p/vacant-tax...
Council kicks off with Mayor Olivia Chow recognizing that it’s National Poetry Month. She encourages everyone to “discover the joy of poetry.” I do enjoy a good limerick. Toronto Poet Laureate Lillian Allen is here to mark the occasion.
Councillor Nunziata notes she’ll be withdrawing a motion she had planned about reductions to UP Express service. She says she spoke to Doug Ford and “within an hour” it was confirmed that service wouldn’t be changing. “Can you ask him to open the Eglinton LRT?” Matlow jokes.
Chow provides updates on yesterday’s federal budget. There’s $1.1 billion for Canada-wide program for sheltering refugees. Chow says that means Toronto should get enough to cover its costs. Feds also partnering on MURA. And “a lot more funding on the table” for affordable homes.
Chow says there’s still work to do with Trudeau’s government, pointing out they still haven’t offered up funds for new trains on the Bloor-Danforth subway line. Provincial funding is conditional on feds joining the party.
On the coming item about increasing fines for parking tickets, Councillor Jennifer McKelvie — chair of the infrastructure committee — says she’s got a motion coming that will implement proposed hikes to “safety-related” offences, but limit “nuisance fines” to rate of inflation.
Notable addition to the agenda: new provincial legislation means Councillor Jon Burnside is no longer eligible to serve on the Police Board, as he’s a former Toronto cop. Mayor is recommending Councillor Carroll as his replacement. secure.toronto.ca/council/agen...
Council votes 23-0 to direct staff to work with Indigenous communities to come up with an Indigenous name for Villier’s Island in the port lands. secure.toronto.ca/council/agen...
Council votes 23-1 to authorize overnight permit parking on Longbourne Drive in Etobicoke. secure.toronto.ca/council/agen...
Council votes 22-2 to reduce the speed limit on Burnhamthorpe Road from 50 km/h to 40 km/h. secure.toronto.ca/council/agen...
38 items have been held for debate. The rest are approved as a package. Up first from the held items: student nutrition programs. Is it a good thing when hungry kids are given food? Studies and analysis suggest yes. secure.toronto.ca/council/agen...
Councillor Cheng asks how the recent federal announcement re: student food programs will affect the student nutrition program overseen by Toronto Public Health. Chief Medical Officer Eileen de Villa says it’s a good question but no answer yet because dollar figures aren’t known.
Student nutrition programs in 619 school communities provide about 227K meals per day. City has budgeted $19 million to support programs this year. TPH looking for more prov/fed funds to support current programs, and making push for it to become universal—in all schools.
Councillor Paula Fletcher moves for a review of the governance model for the student nutrition programs. She says the current setup is pretty complicated and would like to know if it’d make sense to simplify it.
Fletcher’s motion carries via show of hands. Council votes 25-0 to support the new federal School Food Program and urge the provincial government to increase funding for student nutrition programs too.
With the student nutrition program item dealt with, council breaks to get some nutrition of their own. Back at 2 p.m. after lunch.
Council has returned. Before we get to the next debate, Councillor Gord Perks announces that there’s a major chess tournament taking place right now at Hart House. “The most prestigious chess tournament ever hosted in the City of Toronto!” he says.
Up now: the future of the blue bin program. The City did not bid to continue collecting recycling under the new provincial “Extended Producer Responsibility” program, so someone else will be picking up your blue bin starting in 2026. The city has concerns. secure.toronto.ca/council/agen...
The good news is that the city has made a deal to sell its stock of 517,513 blue bins. The city won’t need them anymore under the new arrangement. The sale price is hidden by a confidential attachment so we’re left to just make wild guesses at what an old recycling bin is worth.
Other piece of this report is a look at whether City Hall could “in-source” garbage collection in District 2 after the current deal expires in 2026. Staff say no — it’d take Toronto 5+ years to get the equipment and yard space necessary, and they don’t have that kind of time.
Councillor Paul Ainslie asks if the blue bins they’re selling to the new collector will continue to have the City’s logo on them, because that could confuse people. Staff say they’ve looked at scenarios where the city’s logo would be covered with a big sticker, but TBD.
Asked about how city will ensure the new recycling regime won’t lead to issues with overflowing litter bins during World Cup, staff say they’re going to put a special focus on the World Cup area because they don’t want the city’s “reputation to look bad, in terms of cleanliness.”
Councillor Parthi Kandavel has questions about some confidential aspects about this blue bin business, so Council opts to go “in camera”, where there are no cameras. And no media. They should be back soon-ish.
The mysterious fog clears. Light returns to the council chamber. The secret session is over. Mayor Olivia Chow moves to approve the terms of the sale of Toronto’s 500K+ recycling bins to the new collector.
Chow also moves for a report in Q1 2025 on what would be required to bring garbage collection in-house following the expiry of the *next* agreement.
Councillor Michael Thompson moves for the city to develop a communications plan to let people know about the coming changes to the blue box program.
Thompson notes that a comms plan on the blue box change, in addition to providing info, might also prompt public outcry that could lead to a “decision reversal” from the provincial government, stopping this whole thing from happening.
Chow’s motion for a report on the requirements for in-sourcing garbage collection in District 2 following the end of the next contract CARRIES 24-2.
Chow’s motion to approve the terms of selling the blue bins to the new collector CARRIES 23-3.
Chow’s motion asking staff to report back on a potential agreement with new vendor where residents can still call 311 if they have blue box problems CARRIES 23-3.
Thompson’s motion for the city to develop a comms plan to let residents know about the blue box switch CARRIES 25-1. (Colle is declining to vote because he wasn’t permitted to speak on the item. Under Council procedures, declining to vote equals a no vote.)
Item as amended CARRIES via show of hands. I’ve got to do a daycare run, so I am tapping out for now. I’ll fill you in on anything else they do tonight tomorrow morning. Back at 9:30 a.m.
Council is back for day two, and so am I. First item scheduled for this morning is about the vacant home tax. Collection of the tax this year has, um, not gone well. Council’s gonna try to fix it. Today’s stream is here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UXj...
While I was away, Council had a quick debate on hiking parking fines. A Councillor Jennifer McKelvie motion for a “goldilocks approach” where fines for safety-related offences were hiked more than “nuisance” offences CARRIED 20-1.
Here’s a quick look at some of the approved changes to parking fines, compared to the status quo and the staff & committee recommendations, which were higher in some cases. datawrapper.dwcdn.net/oOLGk/5/
We may get another parking ticket debate soon. Councillor Josh Matlow’s motion for a report in Q3 2024 on increasing fines for illegal parking during rush hour also CARRIED 20-1. (Item as amended was adopted via show of hands.)
Time for the vacant home tax debate. It starts with staff questions. Councillor Michael Thompson keeps it simple, asking the CFO: “What happened, why, and how can we prevent this from happening again?”
By the numbers: - only 80% of households filed status by extended deadline of March 15. - 108K complained to city after receiving bills, almost all reversed - 58K properties who didn’t declare are still on the hook for the bill, which is waaay higher than 11K last year.
To finish mopping up the mess, staff are recommending council deem all remaining properties that were declared occupied last year as still occupied this year, even though they didn’t declare. That’ll take about 48K households off the list of those subject to the vacant home tax.
Councillor Josh Matlow asks the CFO about using utility bill data as an alternative to the manual and annual declaration process for the vacant home tax. CFO warns about privacy concerns and challenges getting consent, but city lawyer says they’ll be looking at it.
During questioning, staff confirm some residents who called 311 angry about the vacant home tax were hung up on because the callers violated the “code of conduct” — presumably by using a lot of profanity.
Councillor Myers asks the CFO if the city ever received an official opinion from the Ontario Privacy Commissioner on whether they can use utility bill data for the vacant home tax program. CFO says no. Legal staff has done research but not received a confirmation from commish.
Councillor James Pasternak asks why the city switched from a bright yellow notice reminding residents about the vacant home tax in 2023 to a dull white forgettable notice in 2024. CFO says city will reviewing all aspects of reminder/notice process.
“Were any staff fired as a result of the rollout?” Councillor Jon Burnside asks, re: the vacant home tax. No, says the city manager.
Councillor Holyday asks Chow about a media story where she said the person who designed the vacant home tax is no longer employed at city hall. Chow says it’s inappropriate to talk about personnel matters in a public session like this. Nunziata agrees. The issue is dropped
This is the CBC story Holyday was asking the mayor about. I don’t quite get how it squares with Johnson saying just now that no one has been fired over the rollout. Weird! www.cbc.ca/news/canada/...
Fletcher asks if city’s website is still not issuing any kind of receipt or confirmation after residents submit their vacant home tax. CFO says there’s still no confirmation. Fletcher asks how a system could be designed in 2024 with no confirmation. Staff can’t really answer that
Bradford asks if Chow met with staff before rollout of this year’s vacant home tax. Chow says no, because rollout started in June and she wasn’t sworn in until July “It’s clear that in the nine months after she never met with staff,” Bradford says. “That’s not true,” says Chow.
McKelvie asks if the vacant home tax program is “fatally flawed” or should be kept. CFO says there are some obvious and immediate fixes, starting with setting a threshold where the city doesn’t start sending out bills until a certain percentage of declarations are received.
Chow is first speaker. “This program was designed in a way that was just flawed,” she says. “It caused grief and anxiety and it should not have happened.” She credits councillors and their offices for helping people through the process. “We’re cleaning up the mess.”
Chow says the vacant home tax remains “a good policy” but the implementation she inherited from the Tory era was bad. “We apologize. Let’s redesign it together.”
Bradford asks Chow why deadline for declaration was extended by 2 weeks this year instead of 4 weeks like last year “It’s not the extension that’s the problem. The design of the entire program is flawed,” Chow says, pointing out Bradford was on council when program was approved
Bradford clearly wants to take a rapid-fire approach when questioning the mayor, but Chow blocks him by giving slow, deliberate answers, running out the clock. I think it’s fair to observe this drives Bradford batty.
Councillor Nunziata has two motions: first to refund any residents who have already paid the late fee for not declaring, and then for the revised process for declaration to include a system that gives a confirmation number / receipt when you declare online.
Councillor Shelley Carroll moves to work on a “completely revised vacant home tax program” that considers utility bill data, a comprehensive communication plan, etc. She also moves to deem all homes that were declared not vacant for 2022 as still not vacant for 2023.
Quick follow-up on an earlier tweet: the staffer who was involved in the design of the vacant tax program who is no longer with the city is Casey Brendon, former director of revenue services. He retired in March. He was not fired.
Councillor James Pasternak blames the vacant home tax screw-up on too many city workers working from home. “Complex organizations like the City of Toronto cannot be run by kitchen tables,” he says. “The more the city goes remote, the more we’re going to have situations like this”
Councillor Stephen Holyday: “What is absolute rubbish is how some members of council have made comments and pointed fingers at the Toronto public service on this.” He says councillors were told on March 20 that the declaration rate was low and did nothing about it.
Councillor Vince Crisanti moves to cancel the vacant home tax program altogether. If that fails, he’s also got a motion to make it more “user-friendly” for seniors.
“We clearly have evidence that this vacant home tax program has proven to be a disaster — to put it very lightly. There’s only one fix: scrap it, get rid of it, we don’t need it,” says Crisanti. (City is banking on around $200 million from tax over next 2 years for housing.)
Councillor Anthony Perruzza moves to ensure the redesign of the program allows people to make declarations both online and by mail, and that no penalties or fees be charged to those who declare their homes not vacant.
Perruzza’s intent is to ensure people who “weren’t paying attention” because “they were on their couch playing video games” don’t get stuck paying the vacant home tax and/or a late fee. He mentions couches and video games several times during his speech.
The vacant home tax item cannot be contained to the morning session of this council meeting. Council breaks for lunch. They’ll finish it when they come back at 2 p.m. See you then.
Council is back and still pondering emptiness. On the vacant home tax, Councillor Josh Matlow moves to request a formal opinion from the Privacy Commissioner on whether the city could use utility data to help determine if a house is vacant.
Time to vote! Councillor Vince Crisanti’s vote to immediately cancel the Vacant Home Tax FAILS 5-18.
The vacant home tax lives. Staff will work on an overhaul to the process in time for next year’s budget. All other motions CARRY via show of hands. Item as amended CARRIES 23-1.
Councillor Paula Fletcher’s motion to request the province require an EA for a proposal to expand the natural gas plant in the port lands CARRIES 23-1.
Fletcher’s motion to rename Tiverton Parkette after Caroline Huebner CARRIES via show of hands. secure.toronto.ca/council/agen...
Mayor Olivia Chow’s motion to put Councillor Shelley Carroll on the police board, replacing Councillor Jon Burnside who is no longer eligible, CARRIES via show of hands.
Council votes via show of hands to make a deal with the MLSE Foundation to name a basketball court in Dixon Park as the Raptors North Legacy Court. They’ll also extend the naming agreement for Vince Carter Court in Dixon Park for another decade. secure.toronto.ca/council/agen...
Up now: bikes. Council is set to vote on these proposed Q2 bike network additions and upgrades. secure.toronto.ca/council/agen...
Councillor Stephen Holyday asks for a separate vote on the proposal to install bike lanes on Portland Street, from Queen Street West to Front Street West. That project is APPROVED 20-2.
Councillors break into applause to celebrate Councillor Stephen Holyday actually supporting a cycling item for once. In response, Holyday stands up on a point of privilege to complain that “the silliness in the chamber is becoming unparliamentary.”
Proposed updates to Toronto’s RentSafeTO program for monitoring landlords APPROVED by Council 22-0. secure.toronto.ca/council/agen...
Up now: it’s 5 o’clock somewhere. Council debating report on their drinking-in-parks pilot that allowed alcohol in 27 parks. No major issues reported with the pilot. But instead of taking the program city-wide, staff are proposing incremental approach secure.toronto.ca/council/agen...
The alcohol-in-parks pilot project cost city hall about $60K. About half of that was spent on very large signs placed in parks informing people that alcohol was now allowed.
Here are the 27 pilot parks where alcohol has been allowed. Report recommends permanently allowing alcohol in these parks and working to incrementally add more, with goal of at least one per ward.
The goal of having at least one alcohol-permitting park in each ward is likely to be a bit controversial with this group. By my count, 12 of 25 councillors had no parks in the pilot.
“Is there any actual evidence that the pilot worsened harms associated with alcohol?” Councillor Dianne Saxe asks. Medical Officer of Health says emergency room visits associated with alcohol were comparable to pre-pilot. “We have no data to suggest that things changed.”
Support for continuing to allow alcohol in parks is highest in Toronto & East York, where people are most likely to not have backyards. (T&EY also had vast majority of pilot parks - 21 of 27.)
The city’s poll on park drinking found that 46% of people are in favour of continuing allowing drinking in parks, while 23% are neutral and 30% are opposed. Two councillors so far — Crisanti and Pasternak — have used this to suggest 54% are against alcohol in parks.
“Why isn’t Toronto Island on the list?” Councillor Holyday asks of alcohol-permitted parks. Staff say it was deemed a “waterfront park” and waterfront parks were specifically excluded because of concerns about people swimming while intoxicated.
Councillor Paula Fletcher moves to add Dieppe Park to the list of parks permitting alcohol. She points out councillors have raised no objections to allowing alcohol on CafeTO patios, so it’s odd they’d object to continuing to allow alcohol in parks.
Councillor Brad Bradford moves to add Stan Wadlow and East Lynn parks as alcohol-permitting parks in his ward. “I can confirm I’ve had a beer in both of these parks over the years,” he says.
Matlow, a longtime supporter of allowing alcohol in parks, says he was tempted to bring a motion to take the program city-wide, but says he’s talked to his colleagues and “I understand that different communities and different individuals have arrived at different places on this.”
As if on cue, Councillor James Pasternak moves to direct that no parks in his ward allow alcohol consumption.
Citing survey in the report, Pasternak says “a little over half of people are opposed or neutral to this [drinking in parks] policy. Now that doesn’t sound like overwhelming support for this kind of roll-out.” Pasternak was first elected to council in 2010 with 19% of the vote.
“The reality is, if there’s a problem in a park, police will not respond to it,” Pasternak says. “You can’t have police officers arriving at a park that’s sometimes 50 acres, 100 acres, and trying to find where the problem is. They won’t respond.”
“What we’re doing takes away business from restaurants and pubs,” Pasternak argues. “Instead of going to your local pub and sitting on the balcony and having a drink, you will buy alcohol at either an LCBO or a Beer Store and you will go to your local park.”
The parade continues. Councillor Frances Nunziata moves for there to be no alcohol-permitting parks in her Ward 5. She says she knows what her constituents want. “Don’t come into my ward. That’s my business. Not your business.”
Changing the tone, Councillor Amber Morley moves to allow alcohol in Cloverdale, Etobicoke Valley, Fairfield, Grand Avenue and Home Smith parks in her Ward 3.
Councillor Stephen Holyday moves to direct that no parks in his Ward 2 allow alcohol consumption. He also moves to prohibit alcohol in any parks with a “water hazard” like a large pond.
Holyday also moves to strike a policy intended to ensure that at least one park in each ward permits alcohol. “I won’t be supporting any of this stuff,” he says. “We are trying to solve a problem that didn’t exist.”
Councillor Vince Crisanti moves to direct there be no alcohol-permitting parks in Ward 1. Geez. Maybe someone could just move these as a package?
“This is not going to work. It’s a bad policy,” Crisanti says, following alcohol-in-parks pilot that found it worked and produced data suggesting it’s good policy. “Stop this nonsense about alcohol in parks. All we’re doing is enabling, and that’s not a good thing.”
Councillor Paul Ainslie moves to add Botany Hill, Confederation, North Bendale and Scarborough Village parks in his ward as alcohol-permitting parks.
Councillor Alejandra Bravo moves to add Bert Robinson Park, McCormick Park and Wallace Emerson Park as alcohol-permitting parks. “We’re regularizing a behaviour that’s already out there. We’re regularizing a behaviour that the pilot found was unproblematic and unconcerning.”
Councillor Michael Thompson moves to add Ashtonbee Reservoir Park and Thomson Memorial Park in his ward as alcohol-permitting parks. If I remember right, Thomson has played host to Ford Fest events in the past.
Councillor Anthony Perruzza moves to direct that no parks in Ward 7 allow alcohol consumption. West side of the city appears to be very into the temperance movement.
“It’s very easy to dichotomize this as, ‘if you are against the policy, you are the mayor of Footloose,’” notes Councillor Parthi Kandavel. But he says this is “nuanced” debate and councillors need to respect differing views from their colleagues.
Finally, the debate is over. The votes begin. Holyday’s motion to reject policy that there should generally be at least one alcohol-permitting park in each ward FAILS 6-16.
Holyday’s motion to not permit alcohol in parks with “water hazards” like ponds FAILS 7-15.
Bradford’s motion to add two parks in his ward to the list of alcohol-permitting parks CARRIES 21-1.
Pasternak’s motion to not allow any alcohol-permitted parks in Ward 6 (York Centre) FAILS 11-12.
Nunziata’s motion to not allow any alcohol in parks in Ward 5 (York South Weston) FAILS 11-12.
Holyday’s motion to not allow alcohol in parks in Ward 2 (Etobicoke Centre) FAILS 10-12.
Crisanti’s motion to not allow alcohol in any parks in Ward 1 (Etobicoke North) FAILS 10-12.
Bravo’s motion to permit alcohol in three additional parks in her ward CARRIES 20-3.
Perruzza’s motion to not allow alcohol in any parks in Ward 7 (Humber River - Black Creek) FAILS 10-13.
Alcohol in parks policy is APPROVED by Toronto City Council, 20-4. Staff will move forward with incremental approach, recommending new parks to be added to alcohol-permitted list, with plan for at least one per ward.
Next up: a debate about creating a Somali Centre for Culture and Recreation. Councillor Holyday has moved for a confidential attachment to the report to be made public. It’ll reveal a location the city is looking at for the new centre. secure.toronto.ca/council/agen...
Councillor Gord Perks is strongly urging councillors to reject Holyday’s motion, arguing that it’s a bad ideal to reveal the city’s interest in a property before any transactions are finalized. Holyday’s motion FAILS 3-20. Okay then.
Councillor Jamaal Myers voted incorrectly on that one. On the redo, Holyday’s motion FAILS even harder, 2-22 .
Councillor Holyday moves to conduct a community consultation before any site is selected for the Somali Culture & Rec Centre, and to release the confidential report after this item is adopted. He seems very concerned about where this centre might end up located.
Quick pause here as Mayor Olivia Chow moves to complete this agenda tonight, so no one needs to come back tomorrow. That CARRIES 15-6. Strap in.
Councillor Holyday’s motion to conduct a “robust community consultation” and report back to council on potential sites for the Somali Community Centre FAILS 2-21.
Holyday’s motion to publicly release the confidential shortlist of sites for the Somali Community Centre FAILS 1-22.
Somali Community Centre item is ADOPTED 22-1. CreateTO will work with community group to explore viability of sites on shortlist.
Up now: City Hall has been told it needs to fork over $2.2 billion of total 2024 property tax revenue to the province to pay for education. Perruzza, as he often does, moves to ask Queen’s Park if Toronto could just keep that money. They’re gonna say no. secure.toronto.ca/council/agen...
Perruzza’s motion to ask the provincial government if they’ll give Toronto $2.2 billion this year and in future years FAILS 7-15.
On item about updating Official Plan, councillors Perks, Cheng and Saxe introduce motions asking for greater consideration of Black communities, faith-based groups, and reducing fossil fuel consumption. All carry via show of hands. Item CARRIES 21-1. secure.toronto.ca/council/agen...
Council votes 21-1 to continue to allow pedal pubs to pedal around on Toronto streets. Still no booze allowed on board, of course. secure.toronto.ca/council/agen...
Up now: updates to short-term regulations governing Airbnb and similar services. Councillor Gord Perks, the Chair of Planning & Housing, has a looong motion with changes. secure.toronto.ca/council/agen...
The biggest change in this motion is probably that it would require anyone who registers to offer an Airbnb or similar listing in Toronto to tell the city whether they are offering a “whole home” or “partial unit” (room) listing. No switching back and forth.
Perks’ Airbnb motion CARRIES via show of hands, as does the item as amended. There were lots of signs that this was going to be an acrimonious debate, but a compromise was reached. Peace in our time.
Up now: updates to the policy for rental demolitions — specifically the “rent gap payments” developers have to make to displaced tenants who need to find new homes when buildings are demolished. secure.toronto.ca/council/agen...
Councillor Chris Moise moves to consult about using a new formula for calculating rent gap payments, based on CMHC average rent data for newer buildings (post-2015) instead of all buildings.
Council votes 18-1 to ADOPT a staff recommendation to use rental data based on buildings constructed in 2015 and later when calculating rental gap assistance for tenants displaced by demolition.
Council votes 18-1 to APPROVE a request to the provincial government reintroduce rent control on units constructed after 2018.
Council votes to direct staff to look at applying the new rent gap formula to current projects without a finalized agreement, 20-1.
Up now: a development at 171-175 Lowther Avenue in the Annex. Residents have concerns. secure.toronto.ca/council/agen...
Councillor Dianne Saxe has moved a long motion about the proposal. Staff say the big changes are a reduction in height (from 11 storeys to eight) and a reduction in parking.
Councillor Mike Colle asks how planning staff feel about reducing the height. Staff say they stand by their original recommendation, which was to approve 11 storeys here.
Debates that get this granular about height always fascinate me. Can you tell the difference between 8 and 11 storeys when you walk by a building? Does it make a meaningful difference?
There is some scrambling going on to work out a deal on this one Annex building. It’s the last item. Staff need 15 minutes to put a revised motion together. No wants to do that. There’s a prov deadline that means the item can’t be deferred. Sound the Procedural Confusion alarm.
Councillor Gord Perks moves to adopt the original staff recommendations on the Annex project, allowing for 11 storeys. Perks says Saxe and council simply can’t write a zoning bylaw on-the-fly, so he will oppose her motion. “I hope that a lesson is learned,” he says.
Apparently the big problem with what Saxe is trying to do is that, if the project gets appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal, Toronto’s planners wouldn’t be in a position to defend these changes, because they didn’t make them.
Councillor Stephen Holyday says he will support Councillor Saxe’s motion to reduce the height. He doesn’t like it when council overrules a local councillor, and thinks Saxe has a right to make these changes in response to a group of very angry residents.
Holyday says he wishes he brought his framed photo of Chow getting a giant cheque for meeting last year’s housing target. He laments the “housing housing housing” approach that overrules local communities, because city is already meeting its housing targets.
This council meeting is way off the rails. Like so far removed from the rails that the rails are just a wisp of a memory, barely visible. Maybe the rails were just a myth. Maybe the rails were never real.
Councillor Dianne Saxe’s motion to make changes to official plan amendment and zoning for 171-175 Lowther Ave to reduce allowable height FAILS 4-15.
Councillor Gord Perks’ motion to stick with original 11-storey staff recommendations for 171-175 Lowther CARRIES 18-1.
And that will do it. Blue bins were sold. Parking tickets were hiked. Bike lanes were added. Airbnb regulations were further regulated. The vacant home tax was fixed. (They hope!) There will be more beer in more parks. And an 11-storey building in the Annex. The end.
If you enjoyed this thread about the April 2024 meeting of Toronto City Council, consider a subscription to my newsletter, City Hall Watcher. It helps supports independent coverage just like this — of each and every council meeting. toronto.cityhallwatcher.com/subscribe