City Council — July 2013

So, odds of a walk-on council motion this week to designate Honest Ed's a heritage property? https://nationalpost.com/category/news//2013/07/16/iconic-honest-eds-store-quietly-put-up-for-sale/

Hm, if Minnan-Wong votes against the subway plan, that makes the vote more interesting than I thought.

Here's an updated projection for today's vote. 23 pretty safe subway votes, but a lot can change. https://fordfortoronto.mattelliott.ca/misc/Council%20Scorecard%20-%20subway%202013.pdf (PDF)

Once again, #tocouncil demonstrates why showing up for the morning session on the first day of their meeting is unnecessary.

It is @JoshColle's birthday today. @mary_margaret32 wishes him a happy one from the council floor.

Whoa, oh, we're halfway there.

City Solicitor points to articling students "here to watch council in action." After which they will opt to never become city solicitors.

Subways subways subways.

(I'd suggest that Finch would probably end up dead too, as at that point the dream of an LRT network would be pretty well gone.)

Pennachetti running down subway funding options now. There are four scenarios, but the ones without fed money are pretty well impossible.

So Toronto's twitterati and @DenzilMW are on the same page today.

Councillor Moeser, maybe an important vote, asks about the federal contribution — any commitment? Nope, says Pennachetti.

City manager says feds are waiting until council decides whether they want LRT or subway before talking funding. So is province.

Coun. Moeser's line of questioning is interesting. I'm sensing skepticism. He asks about borrowing rates on the debt plan.

Finance staff say every 0.25% increase to interest rate would cost about $4 million per year in debt carrying costs.

I'm sensing a fair amount of skepticism from Scarborough councillor Ron Moeser with these questions to staff. Notable.

Coun Carroll asks if all the students at Centennial College -- would get an LRT stop but not a subway stop -- are factored into ridership.

Chief Planner @jen_keesmaat says potential for residential growth along subway route is limited -- goes through stable residential areas.

NOPE.

At this point, councillors claiming the LRT plan will reduce road capacity are just flat-out lying, aren't they?

Penachetti says a 0.25% property tax increase is about $6 per household. Debt will be 30 years, from maybe 2020.

if you want to terrify yourself, think about how old you will be in 2050. Time sucks.

Pennachetti says tax hit per household will be $45 per year without federal funding and just $1.4B from province.

"And this is all for a project you acknowledge is not in our top five priorities?" asks Matlow. Yes, says City Manager.

"The LRT option is in fact more desirable," says Chief Planner @jen_keesmaat.

Councillor Doug Ford asks Josh Matlow for an apology for his joke about Doug Holyday and Peter Milczyn earlier. Parker says nah.

We pay planning professionals for their expertise and advice. Which we then ignore because we like subways.

Janet Davis asks about council's debt limit, if we had $57 million per year to debt service costs. Finance staff says 0.7% - 1.5% increase.

Davis points out that LRT would have been complete in 2015 if not for those eighteen months of wasted time on Ford's subway thing.

The official idea is to just to throw $100 million at the SRT in the hope that will keep it running for another decade.

Rather conflicted about my alliance with @DenzilMW today. This is like those Fantastic Four team-ups with Doctor Doom.

Minnan-Wong asks if Pennachetti is uncomfortable with this process. Pennachetti says he only had ten days to put this together.

Perks presents a scenario in which the city loses both the subway and the LRT projects. LRT dies on August 2 without council endorsement...

...And then the subway could die if all the needed funding doesn't materialize.

Coun. Pasternak asks if transfers impact ridership - will more people be driving if there are transfers?

Byford says TTC should be aiming for as seamless an interchange as possible between lines and vehicles.

Nunziata reminds councillors to get their cookies from the bake sale downtown. "And please eat only your cookie." Good advice.

For @CP24, Ford claims borrowing money would be the "last last resort" for funding subways. But that's the plan?

Updated Subway-or-LRT vote projection based on what I'm hearing. Looking closer than expected. But much could change. https://fordfortoronto.mattelliott.ca/misc/subway-vote-projection3.pdf

If we end up sticking with LRT, someone should move a motion asking for a report on the merits of through-routing the Eglinton LRT with SRT.

"Ford said borrowing money is a 'last resort' and an option that he is not considering." Holy hell. https://www.cp24.com/news/ford-confident-toronto-will-secure-subway-funding-1.1368993

Arrived at council to hear Frank Di Giorgio asking questions of staff. He seems a little skeptical, too, from what I heard.

Updated projection because @joemihevc is a subway guy. 21 firm "yes" votes at the moment. https://fordfortoronto.mattelliott.ca/misc/subway-vote-projection4.pdf (PDF)

Mayor advises councillors to be patient with city manager who is dealing with piles of garbage in Etobicoke and other assorted storm debris.

Crisanti pulls the "isn't it true that other countries can build subways for super cheap?" card. Then the "subways last 100 years!" card.

I guess I should have made a Bingo game for this meeting too.

Layton puts up a map of the Scarborough-Malvern LRT, a top 5 priority project according to Planning Dept.

EA is completed for Scarborough-Malvern LRT. 22 million riders per year. Staff estimate it'd cost 1.5B today.

Yep. Surprising.

De Baeremaeker asks if a subway is a "wise investment." Byford says it is but both options have merit.

Councillor Robinson asks how all this will affect the DRL. Byford said it wouldn't want to a Scarborough subway at expense of DRL.

Byford says the DRL is his #1 priority. "It's mine too," says @JayeRobinson. Maybe she'll vote LRT?

Hearing that Councillor Di Giorgio is moving toward LRT. Puts us at maybe 20 subway votes. Political intrigue!

Bailão, sounding like a subway vote, asks Byford how long subways last. It's not a fair question, as components are replaced frequently.

David Shiner is bringing up the streetcar purchase for some reason. And now asks how the DRL will help people in the north part of the city.

Holyday asks about $85m in sunk costs, the ones he said he didn't think exist earlier today. Staff say there will be some throwaway costs.

Ainslie asks about possible 30% variation in TTC costs for the subway. Staff say variation is there because TTC has done "zero design."

Ainslie points out that a 30% upward variation on the subway cost would mean an extra billion dollars.

"Who was around in the 80s?" asks Nunziata. Councillor Thompson wants to know why Scarborough subway was priority back then.

Three councillors on the questions-to-staff list after Thompson: Wong-Tam, Vaughan and Berardinetti.

Councillor Thompson wants to know which mode people "prefer": subways or LRT. I prefer jetpacks. I was promised jetpacks.

Councillor Berardinetti asks about the cost of keeping the SRT operational through subway construction. Byford says it'll cost $12m/year.

Berardinetti then asks how many buses are required to carry SRT ridership during shutdown. Byford says 49, which includes spares.

Rob Ford is up to speak on this. See if you can guess what he'll say.

Ford has a three-page motion. But won't read it. Says the people of Scarborough want subways.

I'm not sure why we all started pluralizing "subways." It's one subway extension.

Ford: "We want to create the jobs, obviously. We know that subways create jobs. And we know that subways deliver rapid, reliable transit..."

Ford says the federal government is already committed to this subway plan, with $330 million. That's the Sheppard LRT funding amount.

Ford says today council can show that they are "fully committed to subways." Also they last 100 years.

"LRTs," Ford says, "are not an investment."

Ford says council voted for subways because they realized LRTs only last 25 years and not 100 years like subway tunnels.

Ford says the province and federal governments "assured me that they have the money." Said Flaherty pointed to $333m in an account.

Ford is indeed pushing a motion that calls for a 0.5% increase in 2014, as a phase-in for between 1.1% and 2.4% total. That's not $5 a house

"The good thing is both ministers are onside," says Ford. "They believe in subways."

Subways are kind of like fairies is that they can't exist at all if you don't believe in them.

"There's no guarantees is what you're saying," says Wong-Tam. Ford says the $333m is an account and is guaranteed for transit.

That $333m has to be the Sheppard LRT money, right? Am I crazy?

So council may be voting to cancel the Sheppard LRT today.

@GraphicMatt Yes, from Sheppard.

Ford's new amendment requests that city CFO investigate "alternative sources of funding" so that property tax increases can be reduced.

Matlow asks if Ford can confirm that his motion is about hiking property taxes and putting the city into further into debt.

Ford says his motion is straightforward, and is what the taxpayers want.

Ford says we first need to tell other governments that we want a subway. Figure out financing later.

Matlow asks if Ford didn't once say that the city has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. Ford says that's true.

Ford says he told people at Ford Fest that an LRT will cost people $3 per household. Matlow says LRT is funded.

"They still have to pay for it!" says Ford of the LRT.

Matlow asks how many LRTs the city has. Ford says we have one: the St. Clair line. "And it's a complete disaster!"

"I'm not an engineer," says Ford. "Mr. Mayor, do you know about the line we're debating today?" thunders Matlow.

"All I'm saying, councillor, is that I've listened loud and clear to the people of Scarborough," says Ford.

"They're saying, 'Rob, we want a subway.'" Then stuff about 'skin in the game', 'investment', and so on.

"Everywhere there's a subway line, there's development," says Ford. "And there's jobs." He should check out the Danforth.

"It does rip up traffic lanes," says Ford of the SRT. Matlow's head nearly explodes, because it DOESN'T.

"I wish I was as smart as you," shoots Ford. Matlow is very unhappy that Ford clearly has no idea what the LRT plan actually is.

Matlow asks again about lanes being torn up. "Absolutely they will be," says Ford. He is wrong. He is so wrong.

Lots of names on the list to question the mayor now. Hold on to your hats.

"When you have more than one station, I think that's 'subways'," says Ford, answering a question I had earlier.

Fletcher asks if Ford would consider cutting any programs to fund this subway. Ford says no. Looking at dev charges, surplus, 0.25% pro tax.

(By 'pro tax', I mean 'prop tax.' Of course.)

Ford continuing to indicate that councillors have "changed their minds" on subway-versus-LRT. Which sure isn't a way to win votes.

Councillor Moeser asks if Ford is saying federal Sheppard LRT money would be transferred to Scarborough subway. Ford confirms that's true.

Ford says federal money was committed to a Toronto transit project, not necessarily the Sheppard LRT.

"Now we're putting the Sheppard LRT at risk because of this process," says Councillor Moeser.

Ford says it's up to the city to decide where the federal contribution of $333m goes. So of course the city should defund the Sheppard LRT.

Keep nagging Joe.

Ford points to recommendation three in his motion, which is about alternative sources of revenue. Ford is very slowly reading the rec.

Mihevc asks if Ford would support a motion indicating that subway funding cannot be taken from the Sheppard LRT project.

"I don't support LRTs," says Ford in response.

Ford says he doesn't believe in the $80m sunk cost figure. "Have you read your report?" asks Davis, which indicates sunk costs.

"So you're prepared to borrow up to $1.4 billion?" asks Davis. Ford says city portion is surpluses, dev charges, "minimal" tax increases.

"I've never flip-flopped on this!" Ford says on his anti-LRT position. Won't specifically say that subway plan will threaten Sheppard LRT.

Ford has developed a strategy of answering councillor questions very slowly, so as to frustrate his colleagues.

And we're on recess after Nunziata banged her gavel. Well, that was weird.

Press release from May 15, 2009: "PM Announces Federal Support for Toronto's Sheppard Avenue LRT Line." http://bit.ly/15Dsu3o

They just showed him the map.

We're back. Perks still has time to question Ford. Councillor Lindsay Luby is next on the list.

Oh, I guess we're going straight to Councillor Lindsay Luby's questions to Ford.

Lindsay Luby asks if Ford still plans to reduce the land transfer tax by 10%. Ford says he still wants to do it, even with subway plan.

"So it's going to put dramatic pressure on our budget?" asks Lindsay Luby. Ford says he wouldn't use the word "dramatic."

Lindsay Luby asks if Ford has asked anyone in Etobicoke whether they want to pay more property tax to support the Scarborough subway.

Lindsay Luby asks if Ford would support a subway extension to Sherway Gardens. Ford: "I'll advocate as many subways as possible."

Filion tries to get admit that his plan actually needs to be extrapolated over 30 years. About $800 per household. Ford won't agree.

"You're talking 30 years. I'm talking four years," says Ford. He has yet to acknowledge this is a debt financing plan.

Layton asks how Ford would characterize his relationship with the federal finance minister. Nunziata tries to shut the question down.

"What money have we received from the federal government for infrastructure projects that you've requested?" Layton asks Ford.

Layton brings up Ford's opposition to all revenue tools in May. Ford says he still opposes them. But he is supporting dev charges/prop tax.

Layton brings up that Ford specifically opposed using development charges and property taxes to fund transit in May.

Councillor Cho is up to question Ford. He has concerns about whether subways are possible mathematically.

.@pbkwood points out the $333m fed funding was specifically allocated to the Shep LRT under the stimulus fund. https://www.toronto.ca/stimulus_fund/pdf/backgrounder_eng.pdf pdf

And now Adam Vaughan. The Moriarty to his Holmes.

"What happens if the province only transfers $1.4B?" asks Vaughan. "We're going to have a problem," admits Ford.

"How long are you willing to wait?" asks Vaughan. "Are you talking days, you talking to months?" asks Ford. "I'm asking you," says Vaughan.

"You're asking me these hypothetical questions," complains Ford. "This whole thing is hypothetical," says Vaughan.

McConnell: "I just want to go over the math, because the math doesn't make any sense to me."

Berardinetti asks if Ford's plan will touch the $333m for the Sheppard LRT. Now Ford is saying he can't touch that money. A change.

Ford apparently just hears most questions as "can you explain how 0.25 + 0.25 + 0.25 + 0.25 = 1?" Very thorough.

Nunziata asks if it is not true that the mayor's plan is great and totally workable. A bearded man in the gallery applauds.

(Security then comes by and shows the bearded man how to do the jazz hands.)

Nunziata then brings up the St. Clair project, asking if not the $100m council spent on that project could have paid for subways.

Councillor Glenn De Baeremaeker is speaking now. He thinks he has "a lot of credibility on this issue."

De Baeremaeker says comments made in the media and on Twitter are wrong. There is ridership to justify the subway, he says.

(I don't think anyone disputes that ridership approaches subway levels, but fits within LRT capacity too. For cheaper.)

"When we get the subway, we will open the floodgates to development," says De Baeremaeker. Oh, the community meetings he'll have.

Councillor Matlow is up. He has slides!

Also motions. Matlow wants council to approve the master agreement, or if council approves subway, to set a deadline of August 2 for money.

So if Matlow's motion passes, and the federal and provincial governments don't commit to subway money by August 2, the LRT plan will stay.

Matlow has a render showing that the Scarborough LRT is completely grade separated. Mayor is not here to see it, though.

Matlow brings up $85m in sunk engineering and design costs. "That's just wrong," he says, of dumping that kind of cash.

What residents are saying, Matlow says, "is just get the friggin' plan done." I'll drink to that.

Probably safe to award @JoshMatlow with the prestigious Councillor of the Week award. Regardless of outcome, no one can say he didn't try.

Carroll acknowledges she's a Liberal, but says she swore an oath to do right by taxpayer dollars. And this subway plan isn't doing that.

Mihevc has a motion, making support for the Scarborough subway contingent on $414m fed funding, $1.8B prov funding, and no harm to LRT plan.

Mihevc says the mayor's "subway subway subway" thing isn't helping the clause, but Scarborough subway is compelling idea.

Mihevc reiterates that his support for the subway is contingent on it being new money. He has dealbreakers.

Some confusion as MIhevc's motion left out a word. "There's a word missing, and it's 'no.'" Important word.

Mihevc acknowledges that there's more density with the LRT plan versus the subway plan. It is really not clear why he supports this.

"The only reason we're debating this now is because the SRT is crumbling. And we need to fix it now," says Mihevc. Again, confusing.

Fletcher sounds like she'll support the subway option today. She might be the key vote for the subway side.

I got 22-18 on the vote count, favouring the subway side. Unknowns are Augimeri, Perruzza, McMahon, Robinson, Parker. We'll see.

Minnan-Wong is next on the speakers' list, which should be interesting as today is opposite day.

"I don't want to account for the mayor's voices," explains Mihevc. "The voices that he hears."

Word is that the subway side had a clear vote advantage until the mayor started to talk. Now the LRT side is rallying.

Minnan-Wong stands to move a referral motion. He's asking for more study from the City Manager and a report back to council.

Minnan-Wong says we need a reasonable way to pay for subways, and this ten-day effort from city staff isn't it.

PG-13.

Minnan-Wong says he knows Scarborough councillors are under a lot of pressure to support this. But he'd caution them to be careful.

Minnan-Wong says @shelleycarroll was "quite correct" about getting provincial funding commitment ahead of time. Which is a first.

Minnan-Wong's motion would ensure Yet Another Scarborough Subway Debate. It'd be chapter four, I think. In Rocky 4, Rocky fought Communism.

Councillor Stintz asks questions of Minnan-Wong. She wants to know if he read the Metrolinx letter with the August 2 deadline.

Stintz says "shovels are down" from both LRT and subway if council doesn't respond by August 2.

"What do you support in this corridor?" Stintz asks. "If I see a plan that makes sense in terms of supporting a subway, I will," says DMW.

"The councillor has flip-flopped more than a boat of fish," says Minnan-Wong. Now an exchange about fish. Weird day.

Did Minnan-Wong say "boat of fish" or "boated fish"? Anglers, let me know which is the more common turn of phrase.

Minnan-Wong says he voted against using property taxes to fund transit, and stands by that.

Some reporters want a boat of fish while others are fiercely in support of a boated fish. Let's debate this for three years.

"I'm not ready to make a multi-billion dollar decision on a report that's incomplete," says Minnan-Wong.

Some councillors seem to believe they can switch to subway, size up the provincial and federal funding offers, then maybe go back to LRT.

If the federal $333m isn't committed to any project, what the hell was this? http://bit.ly/12I3Vj1

Harper: "By investing in key infrastructure initiatives like the Sheppard LRT line ... we are seizing opportunities" http://bit.ly/15Dsu3o

Perks announces @ddale8's news re: Flaherty and the Sheppard LRT on the council flood. Asks if Minnan-Wong will withdraw referral motion.

Minnan-Wong is "caught speechless" by this news that we might put the Sheppard LRT at risk. Says this changes the whole nature of the debate

"That's make a decision based on a Toronto Star article about what Minister Flaherty said about something," cracks Perruzza, sarcastically.

Now Councillor Moeser speaks about the news from Flaherty's office. "What you're doing now is killing the Sheppard LRT," he says bluntly.

Moeser amends Minnan-Wong's referral motion to set a target date of September. "I believe in subways, but this is no way to do business."

Question is called on referral motion. If this passes, vote to refer will be taken immediately.

Vote to end debate on the referral motion fails 26-18. We'll say at this for a while.

Matlow reminds council that Metrolinx requested clarity by August 2. And saying "hey, we'll get back to you" may not qualify as clarity.

Thompson also says he will not rely on the Toronto Star as a source of information impacting his decision. It was a direct quote.

Gloria Lindsay Luby says we should wait until tomorrow to vote on this, given the news out of Flaherty's office.

Perks: "This is the most farcical proposal I've ever seen in front of Toronto City Council." He is not in favour of it.

Perks says he'll vote to defer. But he can't wait for the "two-and-a-half years of torture we've all been put through to come to an end."

Councillor Parker indicates that he's an LRT vote with his remarks — he doesn't think the federal government will come up with funding.

It rhymes!

@JohnFilion23 says #TOCouncil needs "clarity from Flaherty"

We're almost at the referral vote. Janet Davis as an amendment that puts a timeline on it -- council will hold a special meeting in Sept.

Vote to amend referral motion fails 14-30. Referral motion will likely fail too. Here it comes.

Referral motion FAILS 12-32. Minnan-Wong, Robinson and left-leaning councillors in favour. Robinson vote is interesting.

Councillor Filion has motion to cap subway fund at $5 per household for the next four years, with additional funding coming from feds/prov.

Filion also has a motion that subway funding only come through a combination of new revenue tools, e.g. sales tax, gas tax, dev charges.

$5 per house for four years would raise about $20m total. That would not pay for any amount of subway. That's the point of FIlion's motion.

Scarborough Councillor Gary Crawford gives the subway stump speech. He says Scarborough transit riders have to go from bus-to-bus-to-bus.

(It is not clear how a three-stop subway extension will help most of those riding buses, but the thought is nice, I guess.)

Moeser is very concerned that a subway vote will threaten the Sheppard LRT. "What people are really saying is GET ON WITH SOMETHING."

Moeser again says we should at least wait until tomorrow to vote on this. To get clarity from Flaherty, verily.

Clarity is a rarity from Flaherty?

@GraphicMatt Clarity's a rarity.

Cho stands up and... says Ford is a great guy with this subway motion. I had heard he was leaning LRT. Guess not.

For those keeping score: Sheppard funding was to be reallocated for the Scarborough subway. Then it wasn't. Then it was. Then it wasn't.

"I'm not usually one who is considered a fiscal conservative," admits Councillor Davis. But here, she's concerned about spending money.

Someone stole @mfragedakis's cookie. Was it YOU?

@GraphicMatt Cookiegate?

An occasion too big to be contained by one day!

Shame! I was not involved at all!

Confession: me and a co-conspirator got @JoshMatlow in trouble with Nunziata.

Councillors on the left will likely have some long conversations with Paula Fletcher tonight.

And we're done. Come back tomorrow where we'll gaze into this abyss some more.

This video clip of yesterday's exchange between Josh Matlow and Rob Ford sure is worth watching, if you missed it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vCpKUNRBEw&sns=tw

So councillors like Stintz are banking on the notion that the province will stand by while the city tries on a subway plan. Right.

Nunziata is frustrated with the elevators to the Council Chamber. Wishes there were stairs. I agree. Stairs Stairs Stairs.

"There are certain modes that are appropriate for certain corridors," says Josh Colle. Believes subway makes sense here.

Pasternak is pushing the idea that subway construction should be constant. It's the tired "just build a kilometre a year!" argument.

Ever-shifting subway-versus-LRT vote projection for today. Fletcher, McConnell & Mihevc will clinch it for subway. https://fordfortoronto.mattelliott.ca/misc/subway-projection-wed.pdf

Councillor Lindsay Luby, who often comes to the right conclusions for the wrong reasons, seems like a safe LRT vote.

Councillor Bailão says it's good to see that council is "finally about to support a subway" that makes sense.

Bailão pushes the idea that subways last 75-100 years versus 40 for an LRT. This is such a misleading talking point.

Is the idea that LRTs explode after 40 years? That subways don't require any expensive refurbishment before 75? Neither is true.

That too.

@GraphicMatt or that if LRT breaks, Province pays. Subway breaks, City pays.

Bailão says this subway project doesn't threaten other projects because other projects are Big Move projects to be paid with rev tools.

Chin Lee is speaking. Important vote. Assumed pro-subway, but calls the subway business case "iffy."

Lee says he has to represent the majority view of his constituents. And the majority view is for a subway.

Councillor Berardinetti has a motion to audit the sunk costs for the LRT project, to make sure they're "accurate and valid." $85m.

Berardinetti says Scarborough has two funded transit lines planned but they're not happy about them so let's do a subway.

The revised Mihevc motion listed here is important. Now an amendment to Ford's motion. https://secure.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2013.CC37.17

Hey, that's a real nice chart @m_layton has there.

For those wondering, those charts just shown on the council floor are from my @metrotoronto article here: http://t.co/o9zBo0a6X9

Deputy mayor says LRTs are short-term thinking because "they cut the capacity of our roads." The LRT under discussion today does not.

Councillor Crisanti calls the three planned LRT lines "meagre." Says LRTs are "short-sighted." And so on.

"What will our children say? What will our grandchildren say? What will their children say?" asks Crisanti, re: non-underground transit.

Councillor Norm Kelly speaks for a while. Then he stops.

Councillor Milczyn says he'll support Mihevc's amendment to Ford's motion. If that amendment passes, things get real interesting.

Councillor McMahon is up. Interesting to hear her view. She starts by talking about trees and shades-of-grey politics.

"After weighing everything, I agree with Councillor De Baeremaeker that we need to unite the city," says McMahon. So: subway vote.

"What you're actually going to do today is vote that Scarborough gets nothing," says Councillor Perks.

People want to "travel travel travel" says Perks. People don't really care about technology, as long as it gets 'em around.

After vote looking tight yesterday, subway side is now creeping up toward 27 or 28 vote win. Helps that the mayor isn't talking anymore.

Shiner has a motion to put at least $25 million in land transfer tax revenue each year toward a Toronto Transit Expansion Reserve Account

Right-wing councillors who support federal party with no platform for municipal infrastructure demand federal money for infrastructure.

"Let's get moving on transit expansion in Toronto," declares Councillor Shiner. But that's what we were doing, before this meeting.

Shiner's transit expansion account idea is very similar to what Metrolinx was looking at with their transit revenue tools.

"So you will not support any reductions to the land transfer tax?" Davis asks Shiner. Shiner... won't say yes.

Okay, so if everyone is so confident the federal Sheppard LRT money is secure, what are the odds of the feds giving us another $400m?

Councillor Robinson says "too much is unknown about this proposal in its current state." Interesting.

"Clearly we all want subways, but what are the costs?" asks @JayeRobinson. One of her better speeches. Nicely done.

Di Giorgio says there's "savings to be had" because the Jane LRT will never happen. He is the budget chief.

Di Giorgio says easiest way to fund capital is to "jack up" capital-from-current. This is a ridiculous strategy.

"Just leave it to the budgeting process to put the actual priorities in place," says the budget chief. I can't wait for the 2014 budget.

Mike Layton has a point-of-order regarding the city manager's briefing note. He says it doesn't refer to the email from Flaherty's office.

Vaughan brings up the fact that with LRT, Metrolinx will pay maintenance costs. Subway maintenance costs will fall to the city.

In council chambers for these transit votes. A witness to history. Or something.

Molly Matlow is here with dad @JoshMatlow, taking an evidence-based approach to being a baby.

And we're back. Should get to votes on the subway/lrt motions pretty quickly.

Perruzza says this has been an engaging debate. "I believe that we are finally beginning to get to the nuts and bolts of it."

Perruzza says it's okay to look at building subways. "We've built a number of subways - we have!"

To come on the speakers' list: Doug Ford. That should cost the subway side a vote or two.

Paula Fletcher has a motion! She's been a subway vote thus far. Her motion puts a deadline on prov/fed funding: Sept 30, 2013.

Fletcher, I would assume, knows darn well that the federal government especially is not going to commit to $400m by that date.

Fletcher says she would have liked to have seen better numbers before making this kind of decision.

Fletcher says confusion with Sheppard LRT funding yesterday was indeed a "game-changer." She'll support the Mihevc amendment.

Fletcher has gotten a earful from constituents today regarding her support for the subway. Seems to be wavering a bit here.

Doug Ford is up. I am holding on to my hat.

Doug Ford says this issue is "bipartisan -- people from the left, people from the right, are agreeing." He thanks Karen Stintz (!).

Doug Ford also wants to thank "the great folks in Scarborough." He says he and Rob talk to the people in Scarborough a lot.

"When people say 'we want subways', we should be building subways," says Doug Ford, a politician who operates like a referendum.

Doug Ford says the idea that Sheppard funding might go to the Scarborough subway is a "misnomer."

Funding, Doug Ford says, will come via an application to the federal government for funding.

"I want to look forward to the future," says Doug Ford. Says this will make the transportation in Scarborough "fair and equitable."

Doug Ford says transit plan for the next 30 years should be really simple: build 2 kilometres of subway every year.

Doug Ford says his brother will be the biggest advocate to the federal government for subways.

Doug Ford says Rob will "stand outside at Parliament Hill all day" to get money from the feds.

"I'll be pulling out my sleeping bag!" says Doug, re: his and Rob's efforts to win federal money at Parliament Hill.

Doug Ford also urges councillors to support the Mihevc motion, which is an interesting twist.

Now Karen Stintz, who is the last speaker on this matter, she says. A smattering of applause.

Stintz's motion would see the TTC spend $10 million to begin working on the Scarborough subway immediately.

So, hey, add another $10 million to the $85 million in sunk costs as money the city may just set on fire.

"Scarborough residents don't feel like the voices have been heard," says Stintz. Feelings are the only facts.

"This is not Groundhog Day," says Stintz, saying that last year's transit debate was not a fight against subways.

"If we don't get this project built, then we have an LRT," says Stintz. In this debate, question anyone who seems confident about anything.

Scarborough Centre is the only city centre without subway access, Stintz says. Now Nunziata grants her a two minute extension.

Stintz asked for an extension because, under council bylaws, chairs of committees can still get speaking extensions.

Nunziata rules that Stintz cannot get a two minute extension, on advice from the City Clerk. Peace in our time.

Nunziata also rules Stintz's $10m motion out-of-order. Which is a good ruling, for once.

And now is the time on council when we vote.

Already, first we vote on Mihevc's amendment, which makes subway contingent on federal and provincial funding. This should pass.

An interesting clause in Mihevc's amending motion says that subway funding can't come from a "reallocation of existing City revenues."

Mihevc's amendment to the subway motion PASSES 40-4.

Motion #9, a Fragedakis motion to further safeguard existing LRT funding, PASSES 42-2. Moving on.

Some dispute now over whether Motion 11, which is a Vaughan motion asking that Master Agreement come back to council, is redundant.

Clerk Staff say that the Motion 11 is in fact redundant. Perks and Vaughan are not happy. Staff seem wrong on this one.

Perks challenges the ruling. Council will vote on whether to uphold the redundancy ruling. Passes 31-13.

Maybe!

Motion 10, which is a Shiner motion to reallocate $25m of annual LTT revenue to transit, fails 21-23. Very close.

Fletcher amendment setting a Sept 30, 2013 deadline for prov and passes 28-16. These pills are poison.

(The September 30, 2013 deadline is for provincial and federal funding commitments, of course - typos!)

Rob Ford subway motion, Part 3 is up to vote - this would have the city look at alternative funding sources. It fails 21-23. Interesting.

Remainder of Ford's let's-build-a-subway motion carries 28-16. So we're on to a subway.

Here's the vote on the subway, 28-16. http://t.co/F5GgjJ73LR

Very much so.

Berardinetti motion for a third party audit of the $85 sunk costs carries 27-17.

And item as amended carries 28-16. How's that for clarity, @Metrolinx?

The big news, other than the subway vote, is that Ford's 0.25% / $5-a-household funding strategy was voted against.

Specifically, councillors rejected this clause: http://t.co/LddS2kCJuM

Here's the vote on Ford's five-bucks-per-household funding plan. 21-23. http://t.co/dtU99S0TAB

Every day.

'gravy' & 'fiasco' are now trending in #Toronto http://t.co/4dzdRjpaPw

Karen Stintz stands behind Rob Ford at his press conference. We've come full circle.

Ford is jubilant. "A subway will seamlessly connect the residents of Scarborough to the rest of the city."

"Subways are an investment in our future." They will last over 100 years, says Ford.

Ford wants to thank the 28 councillors who voted for the subway option. "Folks, there's no turning back, but the fight is not over."

Ford wants all three levels of government at the table and fully committed. He "truly truly" believes that feds and province will fund.

Ford says if province and feds can't come up with their share of the cash, subway won't happen.

Ford says the deadline is September 30, for feds and province to come up with funding. Interesting.

Ford, who just voted to increase revenue as a tool to fund a subway, says he doesn't believe in transit revenue tools.

No mention from Ford of five-dollars-per-household or 0.25% property tax increases.

Well, it seems unlikely Murray would head out to Kennedy Station to announce anything less than $1.8 billion.

Doug Ford is questioning the city's integrity commissioner on his brother's conflict of interest court case.

The integrity commissioner reminds Doug that all the trouble could have been avoided had Rob Ford just listened to advice.

Politics is so political. It's all politics, these politics. Politics.

That's a pretty clear statement from the city's chief planner that the September 30 deadline attached to today's subway approval matters.

Good.

Scarborough residents, we are delighted to stand here today and announce that the promise of better transit has once again been delayed.

Glen Murray announces province will pay 2/3rds of the subway cost. That is $1.4 Billion.

$1.4 billion is not what council asked for. It is $400 million less than what council asked for.

Last week, Mayor Rob Ford said he would not accept a dime less than $1.8 billion.

So why exactly couldn't the province confirm they'd only contribute $1.4 billion prior to this week's council vote?

Yes.

@GraphicMatt didn't Mihevic's motion require 1.8 billion from the province?

This is RIDICULOUS. There's no reason the province couldn't have confirmed this funding amount YESTERDAY.

So council delegated authority to the city manager to renegotiate the master agreement, contingent on $1.8 billion provincial funding...

A literal reading of the motions passed yesterday would indicate that the subway is already dead. But it'll be more complicated than that.

A Glen Murray-Michael Thompson press conference. So many innocent words, tortured.

$1.4 billion rounds up to $1.8 billion, right? That's math?

To be fair, I guess, Metrolinx always stuck with the $1.4B number. But Murray was never clear until today.

$1.4 billion provincial funding means city would need $660 million in fed contribution, plus $57 million per year city debt service charge.

Oops correction: $57m a year debt payment is without federal cash. With $660m from feds, city debt payment is $38m per year.

Except for when they weren't?

"Maybe Karen Stintz should run in the byelection, then," says Murray when told of @karenstintz's comments re: $1.8 billion.

In other news, nearly 70,000 views on this YouTube video of Ford getting schooled by @JoshMatlow re: the LRT. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vCpKUNRBEw&feature=player_embedded

.@TorontoCouncil should upload Best of Council clips to YouTube and rake in some sweet monetization cash.

Of course De Baeremaeker isn't worried about the funding gap. It's just hundreds of millions of dollars. No big thing.

"Taxpayers Coalition president Matthew McGuire is joined by some members who help to 'cut' City Council in half." https://torontotaxpayer.ca/

Rob Ford speaking at council on this cutting-the-size-of-council-in-half silliness.

Ford has a motion! He wants to cut the number of councillors in half. And so on.

Ford reminds his colleagues that there are 22 MPs. And 22 MPPs. And 22 trustees. There are also 101 Dalmatians. But he doesn't say that.

A common Ford tactic is to argue that the world won't end if we do this, so why not do it?

"This just opens up the opportunity to get fresh blood down at this council." Fresh blood and skin in the game.

Ford is now claiming that Gord Perks tried to "stifle the debate" when he called the question. That's quite the claim.

Ford says it is "duplication and waste" when two councillors go to a community event attended by just one MP and one MPP.

Rob Ford says he knows how hard MPPs work as his father was an MPP. He also knows all about councillor code of conduct for same reason.

"I've never been in favour of the senate. Get rid of the senate!" says Mayor Rob Ford. "Talk about a gravy train - that's a gravy train!"

Ford also thinks our wards should be called ridings. He is a man with very strong views about very specific things.

Also Ford thinks we should get rid of school board trustees and just have council look after board issues.

"IF you know the game's not going to be played, why make up all the rules?" asks Ford. Philosophy.

Ford said he hasn't talked to the Toronto Taxpayers Coalition but I am pretty sure he had Matt McGuire on his radio show at least once.

Councillor Ron Moeser says his constituency office is between the liquor store and Kentucky Fried Chicken. "People like to drop in!"

"You know, folks," starts Doug Ford, as he mostly always does. He says this is about reducing the size and cost of government.

"This is about efficiencies!" says Doug Ford. He says city staff would prefer to not write 44 reports.

"They're all scared that they'll lose their jobs!" says Doug Ford of his colleagues who do not want to cut the size of council.

Doug Ford has seized on the phrase "feathering their nest" as a thing he is saying frequently on this topic.

"Mayor Ford, don't interrupt your brother," says Nunziata. Meanwhile, Doug says all of Toronto wants fewer politicians.

"This group could barely organize getting 500 names on a petition," says Adam Vaughan of @TorontoTaxpayer.

Motion to reject the @TorontoTaxpayer petition to cut council passes 25-13. Votes: http://t.co/8GO5aa8FFY

Wait, is Toronto City Council debating whether culs-de-sac are a good thing? Also did I pluralize cul-de-sac correctly?

Holy wow.

PIZZA RT @JoshColle @Mark_Grimes delivers for #TOcouncil! http://t.co/fMk7octpTp #TOpoli

Council goes forward with Parkdale bar cap, 22-10. Here's the vote. http://t.co/Zvbzhmcm7o