City Council meets today! We’ve got two main events: Mayor John Tory’s new housing plan, and Mayor John Tory’s strong mayor powers. Feistiness is assured. It’s streaming live here. I will compose tweets about it, in a very long thread, starting…. now. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqEKBGHrtgU
Tory’s housing strategy — including the legalization of rooming houses — has been designated to go first. Matlow has held the strong mayor power item for debate, so that’ll come sometime after. I previewed the agenda for @cityhallwatcher: https://toronto.cityhallwatcher.com/p/chw205
Because the housing strategy debate will come before the strong mayor debate, council risks giving Tory some amount of fuel for his arguments re: strong mayor powers. As I wrote in the Star this week: it’s a trap. https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2022/12/13/the-mayors-new-housing-plan-is-a-trap-toronto-councillors-shouldnt-take-the-bait.html
Council is rolling. To start, Mayor John Tory pays tribute to retiring city comms guy Brad Ross.
Tory praises Brad Ross for leading comms during the pandemic, then jokes Ross is “younger and better looking than me, but not by much in either category.”
Ross thanks members of the Toronto media for “writing that first draft of history.” He gets the customary scroll and mayoral photo.
Speaker Frances Nunziata says this one-day council meeting is now a two-day council meeting. Tory has scheduled his second key matter — a report on the implications of Bill 109 — for first-thing tomorrow morning.
Council votes via show of hands to name Councillor Paul Ainslie as the chair of the Zoo Board for another term.
Council votes in favour of a Councillor Jennifer McKelvie motion to consider the agenda item on strong mayor powers immediately after the vote on the mayor’s housing strategy. The plot, it thickens.
Order paper confirmed. There are 11 items held for debate, plus 16 member motions that’ll be dispensed with later. Up first: Tory’s Housing Action Plan. Are we calling it the HAP? http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2023.CC2.1
McKelvie asks staff from Toronto Fire if illegal rooming houses are a fire hazard. “Multi-tenant homes that are not in compliance with the Ontario Fire Code represent the overwhelming majority of our fatal fires and critical injury fires over the last decade,” staff say.
The licensing regime for rooming houses would see Toronto Fire get additional staff to conduct inspections and ensure compliance re: fire safety. Budget requests coming in 2024 in 2025 budgets, assuming council adopts the new multi-tenant housing bylaw.
In questions to staff, Deputy Mayor McKelvie indicates she has a motion coming requiring owners of rooming houses to provide a “parking plan.” Here’s the full list of amendments she’s told constituents she’ll bring forward.
Councillor Crawford asks staff how many illegal rooming houses are operating in the city. Staff can’t even provide an estimate. City often can’t even gain entry to help tenants in illegal rooming houses because tenants fear the building will be shut down and they’ll get evicted.
Newbie Councillor Lily Cheng sounding positive about rooming house licensing in questions to staff, asking about implementation details and ways to ensure the city doesn’t see a net reduction in units if landlords can’t afford renos to bring illegal rooming houses to compliance.
A Matlow motion to come on the housing plan, including looking at in-house construction management, escalating the land transfer tax, harmonzing multi-res prop tax with (lower) residential tax rate, and exploring parking tax for surface lots. https://x.com/JoshMatlow/status/1603057890323234817
Councillor Moise asks staff what they’re doing to get people out of tents in Allan Garden and into housing, saying that some people are refusing help. Gord Tanner says the plan right now is continue to engage people and build relationships and trust.
Holyday has questions for the mayor. He wants to know why Tory’s motion says city should “achieve or exceed the provincial housing target of 285,000.” Why would city want to exceed target? Tory says based on math of immigration and pop growth, makes sense to prepare for more.
“The population of this city is going to grow substantially and it is our responsibility — not just a nice thing to do — to make sure we have housing available,” says Tory.
Mayor John Tory is the first speaker on the housing item. He says it’s an amazing opportunity for Toronto that so many people want to come here. But to accommodate them, “we absolutely, positively, without doubt, need to expand housing options across the city.”
McKelvie’s motions on rooming houses have been advance circulated and are posted here. Most notable change: for rooming houses outside of the old city, a required minimum parking rate of 0.34 spaces per unit. Also sets cap of six units in inner suburbs. http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2023.CC2.1
Matlow asks Tory if he’s going to support the McKelvie amendments. Tory says he hasn’t seen the final version but is planning to support.
Councillor Matlow, blasts Tory for “not using his political currency to get his own deputy mayors to vote with him” during previous debates on licensing rooming houses. He says he believes this new council is more progressive than the last one, and is ready to meet the moment
Bradford to Matlow: “Was there a specific moment for you, when you found that newfound courage to support housing and change your position from the past eight years when you opposed housing?” Spicy. Matlow defends his record, citing support for multiplexes, nixing parking mins.
Councillor Fletcher jumps in, pointing out that Matlow didn’t request extra units for the Housing Now site in his ward. “I believe it’s the smallest Housing Now site in the city,” she says.
And it’s time for lunch. Nunziata tells councillors to head upstairs first because it’s council photo day. “I hope everyone smiles,” she adds. Back at 2 p.m.
Was wondering about this! Always appreciate a good technical fact check. https://x.com/HousingNowTO/status/1603082159941910530
Council voted in Dec 2021 to get rid of most residential parking minimums and replace them with parking maximums. If McKelvie’s motion passes, rooming houses — housing for the very poor — would be the only housing type to have a parking requirement. http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2021.PH29.3
And do low-income people need parking? As you’d expect, lots of them don’t even have cars.
Anyway, Council’s back! As they return, Councillor Paula Fletcher rises to apologize to Matlow for “getting a little rambunctious earlier.”
We also learn, via Councillor Lily Cheng, that there’s an organized council Secret Santa happening. Sounds like most but not all councillors participated. My DMs are open if anyone wants to leak a list of gifts and recipients.
Back on the housing debate, Councillor McKelvie formally introduces her motion, capping suburban rooming houses to six units and establishing the parking minimums. You can read the full motion and others here thanks to the quick work of @TorontoCouncil: http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2023.CC2.1
Councillor Dianne Saxe asks McKelvie about the parking minimums. McKelvie says still has communities in her ward that are “transit deserts” so people need cars, and the #1 complaint she gets about rooming houses is cars parked on lawns.
McKelvie also points out her ward doesn’t have on-street parking, though that seems like a problem that could be addressed more directly.
Asked by Matlow why parking minimums are needed in Scarborough, McKelvie says “Residents in Scarborough will hold onto their cars no matter what because it is that important to them … even if you are struggling financially, because it’s so important to have.”
Councillor Stephen Holyday tries to help, asking if McKelvie will agree that the “war on car has disproportionately impacted people of modest income.” She does not say that, but says it would be very difficult for a parent in Scarborough to get kids to daycare on transit.
Councillor Gord Perks also comes to McKelvie’s defence, pointing out that the parking requirement has historically existed for downtown rooming houses, and the committee of adjustment is there for landlords who need a variance.
Councillor Saxe has a couple of motions. On the housing plan, she moves to include info on how the HAP furthers Toronto’s climate goals. On rooming houses, she wants staff to work with councillors to go to the licensing tribunal if rooming house occupants are behaving badly.
Councillor Ausma Malik has a pair of motions. The first adds sections to Tory’s Housing Action Plan about ensuring preservation of the rental stock, and the second asks the city to use a database to track the demolition/replacement of rental units.
Councillors Holyday and Burnside have concerns about Malik’s rental replacement motion. They’re worried someone who converted their house to a rooming house wouldn’t be allowed to later convert it back to a regular single-family home. Malik says she just wants to protect tenants.
A pair of motions from Councillor Alejandra Bravo. The first asks for Open Door program to prioritize non-profit and co-op housing partners. The second asks for a report in January on extending shelter hotel leases.
Speaker Nunziata rules Bravo’s motion re: shelter hotel lease extensions out of order, saying the shelter hotels aren’t part of this report. Bravo argues that housing and homeless shelters shouldn’t be considered separate issues, but ultimately accepts the ruling.
Councillor Jamaal Myers has a motion for a report on protecting/expanding the Multi-Unit Residential Acquisition program and to explore the feasibility of establishing an Advisory Committee to review the bylaw and tribunal decisions re: rooming houses.
Councillor Stephen Holyday, who I totally forgot was named Deputy Speaker, briefly jumps into the chair so Nunziata can speak from the floor and urge councillors to pass the rooming house bylaw.
Councillor Lily Cheng has a pair of motions too. One asks for the HAP report to also look at accelerating infrastructure to match intensification. The other asks the Ford gov to expand inclusionary zoning beyond the areas around transit stations.
Councillor Gord Perks moves for the HAP report to also look at the implementation of the Office of the Housing Commissioner.
Perks says he has tried 12 times to get rooming houses licensed and allowed city-wide. Seems certain now that it will happen today. “We are now — I think — about to legalize rooming houses in the City of Toronto,” says Perks.
Councillor Paula Fletcher moves to request the province maximize density at LCBO sites, and use those sites to build affordable housing.
Fletcher says she’s happy Tory included the Port Lands in the HAP. She’s also moving for a report on the status of a previous request for more affordable housing in waterfront plans.
Councillor Stephen Holyday is up now. He laments what he calls “housing mania.” He moves to strike the words “or exceed” from Tory’s motion “to achieve or exceed the provincial housing target of 285,000 new homes.” Just meeting the target will be hard enough, he says.
Holyday says residents of the “post-war suburbs” are not “en masse ready to embrace multiplex housing.” He warns of developers buying up blocks on main streets. He’s concerned about the “pace of change.” Really just going for the speedrun record on full-card NIMBY Bingo.
Councillor Bradford, still feeling spicy, moves to specifically revisit and look at increasing the amount of density in the Merton Street Housing Now site in Matlow’s ward.
Bradford also moves to request the province not mess with Toronto’s rental replacement policy, and to exempt frats and sororities from the rooming house licensing bylaw. https://x.com/TorontoCouncil/status/1603134424454791169
Matlow says he’s fine with Bradford’s motion to look at increasing density at 140 Merton, but wants to make sure Bradford has talked to staff about it. Bradford says he has. “When I move motions I talk to staff first.”
Time to vote, at last. Matlow’s omnibus motion calling for assessment of in-house construction, harmonizing multi-res property tax rate with residential rate, escalating the land transfer tax, a surface parking lot tax for malls etc. FAILS 4-22.
McKelvie’s motion calling for maximum of six units in rooming houses in the inner suburbs CARRIES 23-3.
McKelvie’s motion calling for a parking minimum for rooming houses located outside the old City of Toronto CARRIES 23-3.
McKelvie’s motion to develop a comms strategy around rooming house regulations, licensing, enforcement, etc CARRIES 23-3.
Saxe’s motion to consider how the Housing Action Plan can further Toronto’s climate goals CARRIES 25-1. Holyday is the lonely vote.
Malik’s motion to add preservation of affordable rental housing stock to the mayor’s Housing Action Plan CARRIES 21-5.
Malik’s motion to track rental demolition and replacement in a database as part of the Housing Action Plan CARRIES 25-1. Holyday only opposition, again.
Bravo’s motion to prioritize partnerships with non-profits and co-ops in the Open Door housing program CARRIES 25-1.
Cheng’s motion to look at accelerating infrastructure development to match housing intensification CARRIES 26-0.
Perks’ motion to include the implementation of the Housing Commissioner function as part of the HAP FAILS 9-17.
Holyday’s motion to make sure the city doesn’t exceed the provincial housing target with the Housing Action Plan FAILS 6-20.
Bradford’s. motion to look specifically at increasing the density of the Housing Now project in Matlow’s motion CARRIES 23-3.
McKelvie’s motion for annual reports about the implementation of the rooming house regulations, to provide info via open data, etc CARRIES 25-1. They didn’t show the vote result but you could probably guess.
Saxe’s motion to have staff work with councillors to take badly-behaving rooming house tenants to the tribunal CARRIES 24-2.
Councillor Jamaal Myers’ motion to report on ways to expand the MURA program CARRIES 24-2.
Cheng’s motion to ask the province to expand inclusionary zoning beyond transit station areas CARRIES 22-4.
Fletcher’s motion to ask the province to maximize density at LCBO sites and build affordable housing CARRIES 25-1. Holyday, again.
Fletcher’s motion for a February report on the status of a request to increase the amount of affordable housing on Villier’s Island CARRIES 26-0.
Holyday’s motion for a report on increased rebates on the land transfer tax for first-time buyers CARRIES 21-5.
Bradford’s motion to exempt frats and sororities from the rooming house bylaw CARRIES 19-6.
Bradford’s motion to request the province not mess with Toronto’s rental replacement requirement CARRIES 26-0.
Mayor John Tory’s request for a report in March on a 2023 Housing Action Plan, loosening zoning permissions and increasing density across the city, CARRIES 23-3.
A new rooming house bylaw for Toronto, licensing and regulating multi-tenant homes city-wide, CARRIES 18-8.
Guess you can cross “legalizing rooming houses” and “densifying the yellow belt” off the list of reasons John Tory supposedly needs strong mayor powers.
Council has moved to the 2nd main event of the meeting: a debate over Tory’s new “strong mayor” powers. Unfortunately, there’s not much info on the implications of Bill 39 — the power to pass stuff with one-third — due to the lack of provincial regulations http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2023.CC2.3
City Solicitor Wendy Walberg clarifies that if Tory wants to pass something with just one-third support he’ll need to indicate that in advance. He can’t go back and declare a failed vote that got less than ½ (but more than 1/3) as passed.
Really important question from Councillor Jamaal Myers to the City Clerk: Does Bill 39 make any changes to what constitutes quorum? The clerk says no. Neither Bill 3 or Bill 39 change what constitutes quorum.
Councillor Lily Cheng asks the city solicitor if she will speculate about what would happen under Bill 39 if an ‘evil tyrant’ became Mayor of Toronto. The solicitor declines to speculate.
Council breaks for the night. Tomorrow morning they’ll skip to a debate on the implications of Bill 109 — hiring more planning staff! — before coming back to the strong mayor item. See you back in this thread at 9:30 a.m.
Council is back, and so am I. They’re kicking things off with the mayor’s second key item: the implications of Bill 109, the “More Homes for Everyone Act.” After this, they’ll come back to the strong mayor powers item. Streaming live here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M345gFGoBq4
One of the goals of Bill 109 was speeding up the process for development applications. Here’s a graphic put together by City Planning showing the old process versus the new. Note the number of days: 100+ days versus 40-45 days. http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2023.EX1.4
To handle tighter deadlines, though, staff are recommending Council approve 150 new permanent positions — about half of them in the planning department. The aim is to pay for the new hires with increased application fees.
Perks makes the point that looking up development applications on the City’s AIC — the Application Information Centre — is incredibly frustrating, because it is badly designed and slow. Chief Planner says people can email or call if they have trouble accessing materials.
Here’s a direct link to the AIC. I do not like it. Just give me a list of development applications in reverse chronological order, with logical and permanent URLs for each one. https://secure.toronto.ca/AIC/index.do
As it is, you type in an address and get... lots of dots. Tiny blue dots. That’s here. That’s home. That us. That’s… super annoying to try to click on the right one.
Councillors are lamenting the state of the AIC because the new Bill 109-motivated planning process will mean no more preliminary reports about developments. Instead, people who want to learn about a dev in their neighbourhood will need to look up the primary documents online.
Tory on Bill 109’s changes to speed up the dev app process: “I think we can clean up our act. And the industry can clean up its act, to some extent. And the provincial government could maybe sit down and talk to us once in a while about what they’re going to do before they act.”
“Elected officials are not the ones who are blocking development and building in this city. When you look at the blockages, it’s aging infrastructure. Why can’t we update the infrastructure? We don’t have the money,” explains Councillor James Pasternak.
(I think he might consider that infrastructure maintenance and setting & collecting city revenues are also things in the purview of the elected city government.)
Councillor Mike Colle compares the recent series of provincial changes to the planning process to the “province playing whac-a-mole with people’s homes.”
Councillor Robinson, who is not happy about any of this, moves for staff to make improvements to the AIC. https://x.com/TorontoCouncil/status/1603425760865357842
Councillor Perks moves to eliminate the staff recommendation to get rid of preliminary development reports. He also moves to post a notice on the front page of the AIC telling people that provincial changes make it impossible to provide timely info and to contact Steve Clark.
Real resurgence of motions designed to troll at this council meeting. I’m in favour of it. The trollier the better.
Councillor Brad Bradford has a motion calling for a report on a range of enhancements to the city’s online application information centre, due back in February.
Bradford also cautions colleagues against supporting the Perks motion to still produce preliminary reports on development applications. He says these reports take a huge amount of staff time and resources to produce — faster processes are needed given Bill 109 deadlines.
Council votes to shorten the lunch break. They’ll come back at 1:30 to finish off this item and return to the strong mayor debate.
Council is back! There are 23 items left on the agenda, though most of them are member motions. They should finish up this Bill 109 debate shortly. http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2023.EX1.4
Councillor Lily Cheng moves for a report on replacing preliminary planning reports with a “simplified summary” of development applications. She also moves for the Chief Planner to post an explainer about the new legislation on the AIC.
Perks says Cheng has done a better job of capturing the spirit of what he wanted to do, so he withdraws both his motions.
Robinson’s motion to improve the AIC system by adding more data and stats CARRIES on a show of hands. So does Bradford’s motion for a report on enhancements to AIC, and Cheng’s motions for a simple summary in place of prelim reports and a notice about changes on the AIC.
Councillor Gord Perks has requested recorded votes on a bunch of the recommendations, so they’re splitting them up.
Staff recommendation to have the City Planner come up with an Official Plan Amendment to incorporate policy changes brought about by Bill 109 CARRIES 19-7.
Staff recommendation to remove the authority of councillors to request site plan applications go to community council and city council CARRIES 14-12.
Staff recommendation to delegate authority to the chief planner to determine whether a development application is complete or incomplete CARRIES 22-4.
Staff recommendation to remove the authority of councillors to request consultations on planning applications FAILS 13-13. Loses on a tie!
Staff recommendation to do away with preliminary reports on development application CARRIES 20-6.
Staff recommendation to remove the authority of councillors to request the chief planner submit draft plans for condo applications to community council and council for approval CARRIES 17-9.
Staff recommendation to review review ways to streamlining permit access to right-of-way and make other improvements CARRIES 21-5.
And the balance of the Bill 109 item CARRIES via show of hands. http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2023.EX1.4
Up now: Perks wants to talk about the capital variance report. He makes the point that the city is being “penny wise and pound foolish” with reductions in state-of-good-repair spending. Staff confirm it’ll cost more due to inflation to catch up later. http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2023.EX1.6
Moving over to the operating variance, Perks asks staff if it’s true that a lot of the savings achieved this year is due to the city not filling vacant (but approved) positions. Staff say it’s true that vacant positions were responsible for “tens of millions” in underspending.
On the operating budget variance, Mayor John Tory has a motion requesting the feds provide money to cover the year-end budget shortfall. If they fail, he wants the city to include a notice on property tax bills about the lack of support.
In a very Tory move, he also moves for notices to be included on 2023 property tax bills acknowledging the federal and provincial governments for the Toronto bailout money — if the money comes through.
(The microphone catches Tory muttering “oh god” as Councillor Josh Matlow rises to ask questions about his budget motion.)
Matlow asks Tory if he thinks it’d be a good idea to also talk about the financial impact of the province’s Bill 23 on these hypothetical name-and-shame property tax notices. “Why would we let them off the hook so soon?” Tory says his motion is focused on the COVID shortfall.
Tory says he’s been doing separate advocacy with QP on Bill 23, and says it’s led to a commitment that they’ll make Toronto whole. Tory says he knows Matlow likes to make “great theatre” but now’s not the time. The “great theatre” remark does not go over well with Matlow.
Tory is also fired up, saying Matlow’s attempt to put Bill 23 into this motion undermines his efforts to negotiate. “People just can’t resist getting up and trying to score a point against the provincial government, even if they deserve it which they don’t on this one — yet.”
Nunziata pushes forward and calls for a vote on Tory’s motion on the operating budget variance, which calls for a name-and-shame approach via property tax notices if the Trudeau gov doesn’t provide Toronto needed bailout funds. That CARRIES 23-2.
Okay. Now they’re back to the strong mayor stuff. Matlow asks if it’s true now, because of Bill 3, that every bylaw needs mayoral approval. Clerk says bylaws are passed automatically after 2 days. Mayor giving approval skips the two-day waiting period. http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2023.CC2.3
Matlow asks if there’s precedent for a one-third vote being enough to pass things in a democratic government system. “I am not aware of one, but I cannot claim to have researched the entire world,” says City lawyer Wendy Walberg.
Councillor Dianne Saxe asks if it’d be possible for the mayor to pass a zoning bylaw for a specific address with one-third support. Walberg says yes, that would be possible.
Councillor Josh Matlow moves for Tory and all future mayors to commit to not using powers to pass things with less than majority support.
Matlow says if Tory admits he made a mistake requesting the one-third power, then he thinks councillors should provide him a “respectful and supportive” exit ramp and applaud the mayor for changing his mind.
Councillor Amber Morley moves to request the province repeal Bill 39 — the strong mayor superpower to pass stuff with just a one-third vote.
Councillor Bravo moves to have council reaffirm its commitment to democratic principles as laid out in the municipal code.
“We know that Bill 39 is not about housing — it’s an attack on democracy,” says Councillor Malik. She notes yesterday’s vote on rooming houses was about housing, and it passed democratically.
Councillor Pasternak moves to request the province write in a sunset clause into Bill 39, so that it has to be reenacted for each new municipal term.
Pasternak argues that some of the same councillors opposing Bill 39 were previously calling for a declaration of a state of emergency over homelessness, which could have allowed for Tory to act without council approval. Weird point!
Pasternak calls for the mayor and council to “move forward cautiously.” “It is not ideal. It is not our first choice. And it may not work. But let us give it a try, keep a close eye on it, and continue to do the important life-saving work that we are sent here to do.”
Pasternak says he’s talked to the mayor’s office about his sunset clause motion, and says they think it’s reasonable. Matlow: “Sorry, the mayor’s office agrees…?” Pasternak: “I’m counting on their votes.”
Councillor Anthony Perruzza calls Toronto Council the “cradle of democracy locally — without a doubt.” It’s “the closest thing that we will ever have to Old Athens.” He may be overselling it a bit.
Perruzza asks us to imagine a scenario where the King of England overturned the result of a World Cup match. “Who would accept that?! Not a single person.” “It’s about justice.”
Councillor Gord Perks moves to refer the strong mayor item to the Exec Committee for consideration. He argues that there’s a bunch of parts of this legislation that the city doesn’t yet understand. He thinks it makes sense to wait until regulations are released with more detail.
Myers confirms with Perks that referring this matter to Exec Committee is the only way to give the public a chance to speak on it, via deputations.
Perks’ motion to refer the strong mayor item to executive committee for public deputations and to allow time to get more information about the legislation FAILS 9-15.
Deputy Mayor McKelvie moves the same motion she moved last term, requesting the province provide “strong city powers” to do things like implement new revenue tools.
Councillor Stephen Holyday is immediately concerned that McKelvie’s request for new revenue powers would open the door to Tory implementing new revenue tools with just one-third support.
Have to tap out of this thread for a bit because it’s my kid’s birthday. He’s one year old! I’ll be back later to summarize the rest of this debate and the remainder of the meeting. Can we get a “happy birthday Freddie” going in the chat.
I’m back! We had cake. Freddie got a train set. Watching the rest of the council meeting at 1.75x speed to complete this thread. Don’t spoil the end for me. Councillor Stephen Holyday moves to request the province consult with council before setting “provincial priorities.”
Councillor Paula Fletcher, harkening back to Bill 3 — the province’s first crack at strong mayor powers — moves to request the mayor delegate his new power to appoint (and fire) the city solicitor — the city’s lawyer — to council.
Fletcher says she’s heard from thousands of people who are opposed to Bill 39. “The people in East York in particular, because they had their whole burrough taken away from them, and they are very strong people in East York.” Noted!
Councillor Mike Colle moves to amend the McKelvie motion to request the province actually consult with the city (for once!) before making any further changes to city governance.
Councillor Matlow’s motion requesting Tory and all future mayors NOT use any power that lets them skip the requirement of getting majority support at council CARRIES 14-11. (Mantas was also a “no.”)
Councillor Amber Morley’s motion requesting the province repeal the strong mayor sections of Bill 39 CARRIES 17-8.
Councillor Alejandra Bravo’s motion that council reaffirm its commitment to the principles of democracy CARRIES 20-5.
Councillor James Pasternak’s motion that council request the province put a sunset clause into Bill 39, set for six months before the next municipal election, CARRIES 24-1.
Councillor Jennifer McKelvie’s motion requesting the province provide “strong city” powers like revenue tools CARRIES 24-2.
Councillor Stephen Holyday’s motion that the province consult with the city before setting “provincial priorities” CARRIES 26-0.
Councillor Fletcher’s motion requesting that Tory delegate to council his new power to appoint (and fire) the city solicitor CARRIES 25-1.
Council votes 21-5 to add a Colle & Matlow member motion about requesting a public inquiry on the Eglinton Crosstown delays to the agenda. It gets held down for debate, so they’ll come back to it. http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2023.MM2.1
Councillor Dianne Saxe’s motion, seconded by Councillor Jennifer McKelvie, to report in March on ways to improve safety along the Bloor Street bike lanes during construction projects CARRIES 25-1. http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2023.MM2.14
On the Eglinton Crosstown item, Councillor Paula Fletcher moves to request an “independent third party review” of the project, instead of a “public inquiry.”
Councillor Stephen Holyday moves to amend the motion so that the review of the Crosstown project take place after the project is complete. “That could be 50 years!” someone comments.
On the Crosstown item, Fletcher’s motion to request a third-party review (instead of a costly public inquiry) CARRIES via a show of hands. Holyday’s motion to conduct the review only after the project is finished CARRIES 14-12.
Council votes 20-5 to drop the city’s appeal over a Committee of Adjustment decision to allow for a bingo hall at 360 Evans Ave. Some councillors were concerned about the fact much of the land is zoned for core employment, not bingo. http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2023.MM2.5
And that’s all! The final council meeting of 2022 is complete. If you enjoyed this thread and found it useful, I’d sure appreciate it if you considered subscribing to @cityhallwatcher — my weekly newsletter about various municipal government shenanigans. https://toronto.cityhallwatcher.com/subscribe
’Tis the season. If you’re looking to get someone a gift to celebrate the holidays, you can buy a gift subscription to @cityhallwatcher here. https://toronto.cityhallwatcher.com/subscribe?gift=true