City of Toronto, City Council Legislative Documents



	Accessing City Hall
	Mayor
	Councillors
	Meeting Schedules

City of Toronto Council and Committees

All Council and Committee documents are available from the City of Toronto Clerk's office. Please e-mail clerk@city.toronto.on.ca.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

REPORTS OF THE STANDING COMMITTEES

AND OTHER COMMITTEES

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998

STRATEGIC POLICIES AND PRIORITIES COMMITTEE

REPORT No. 3

Clause Page

1 Toronto 2008 - The Olympic Bid 948

2 Process to Develop Property Tax Implementation Plan 982

3 Reassessment and Tax Policy Information andCommunications Plan 987

4 Seniors Property Tax Credit 996

5 1998 Operating and Capital Budgets- Revised Meeting Schedule 1000

6 Acquisition for a Multi-Service Community Facility -495 Sherbourne Street (Ward 25 - Don River) 1004

7 Fire Vehicle Standardization - 1998 Interim Capital Budget 1012

8 Acquisition of Replacement Ambulance 1014

9 High-Speed Network for the City of Toronto 1018

10 Tax Manager 2000 - Purchase/Upgrade of Desktops 1027

11 Renewal of Leases for Child Care Centres- O=Connor, Emery and Shoreham Public Schoolsin the Former City of North York 1034

12 The Metropolitan Toronto Police Benefit Fund -Amendment to Metropolitan By-law No. 181-81 1037

13 Workers= Compensation - Transfer of the Former City of Yorkfrom Schedule 1 to Schedule 2 1038

14 Canada Day and Celebrate Toronto Street Festival 1042

15 Municipal Grants Review Committee 1051

16 Business Education Tax Rate - Communications Plan 1059

17 Other Items Considered by the Committee 1070

City of Toronto

REPORT No. 3

OF THE STRATEGIC POLICIES AND PRIORITIES COMMITTEE

(from its meeting on February 24, 1998,

submitted by Mayor Mel Lastman , Chair)

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998

Toronto 2008 - The Olympic Bid

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, amended the foregoing Clause by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that:

(1) the report dated March 3, 1998, from the Chief Administrative Officer, headed 'Toronto 2008 - The Olympic Bid - Supplementary Report', embodying the following recommendation, be adopted:

'It is recommended that Council direct staff to receive and act upon the motions of Councillors Ashton, Holyday and Layton; and the written submissions of Maureen Orton, John Sewell and Michael Shapcott, as set out and discussed in this report and to assess the questions and issues raised therein, and other issues that may arise, at all phases in the development of the bid, and to include such assessments in periodic reports to Council over the next 15 months.';

(2) the actions and principles embodied in the aforementioned report dated March 3, 1998, from the Chief Administrative Officer, be adopted by City Council, viz.:

'That the 2008 Toronto Olympic Bid Corporation (BIDCO) develop a financial strategy during the next six months which is realistic and attainable and which does not impact negatively on the tax rate, and that this strategy be available for public consultation. Furthermore, that the City and BIDCO enter into discussions on the development of suitable financial accountability mechanisms between them and provide Council with accountability options to ensure protection for taxpayers and the City.

That City Council and the Olympic Bid Corporation agree to develop and commit to a set of "Olympic Principles" which would update the Olympic Commitment approved during the previous Bid. That the Olympic Principles would be developed during the next six months and be subject to broad public consultation. These principles should embody the following:

(1) The Olympic Bid process will include a full and open public debate and provide a variety of consultation processes to ensure wide public participation and input into the bid.

(2) The Olympic Bid process will be fully and widely advertised and make available materials to assist the public participation process.

(3) The Olympic Bid process will seek opportunities to dialogue with individuals and groups who have contributions to make that will assist in addressing social, equity, environmental and financial issues.

(4) The Olympic Bid process will undertake to address all issues and requirements related with the Paralympics which are associated with the Games and normally held immediately following.

(5) The Olympic Bid process will seek to be inclusive of all the people of Toronto.

That the Olympic Bid Corporation enter discussions with the Toronto Transit Commission on ways and means of increasing public transit use during the Games and minimizing vehicular traffic. These discussions to be extended to include consultation with the Gardiner Lakeshore Task Force to achieve a transportation plan to support the Olympic requirements. A report on these consultations to be available within the next nine months.

That the Olympic Bid work with all stakeholders in the housing and construction industry during the next six months to develop options to ensure that the opportunities for long term affordable housing are maximized from the accommodation to be built for the Games. That particular attention be paid to ensure that all accommodation is constructed to the highest environmental standards possible.

That the Bid Corporation work with social planning agencies and City staff to determine the best method to develop a full social impact assessment process for the Games and that this be prepared within the next six months.

That the Bid Corporation work with these same agencies and consider the opportunity and viability of establishing a social investment fund from the Games. Such fund to be provided within the context of a financially responsible Games;' and

(3) the following motions be referred to the Chief Administrative Officer:

Moved by Councillor Berardinetti:

'It is further recommended that all motions submitted by Members of Council in regard to the Olympic Bid with the exception of Motion (2) by Councillor Pantalone, and Motion (5) by Councillor Bussin, be referred to the Chief Administrative Officer, with a request that the concerns raised therein be addressed in future reports in this regard.'

Moved by Councillor Bussin, seconded by Councillor Altobello:

'It is further recommended that the following motion be referred to the Toronto Transit Commission for consideration and report thereon to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee:

"It is recommended that a light rail system along the Lake Shore East Transportation Corridor be included in the infrastructure planning and budget for the 2008 Olympic Bid for consideration and approval by City Council." '

Moved by Councillor Davis:

'It is further recommended that the Chief Administrative Officer be requested to investigate with the Board of Trade the issue of the City's participation in Toronto 2000 as a means of showcasing the City of Toronto as part of the Olympic bid process.'

Moved by Councillor Johnston:

'It is further recommended that the Chief Administrative Officer be requested to submit a report providing more detail on improvements which will be made to present facilities for persons with disabilities, such report to be prepared in conjunction with organizers of the Paralympics which would follow the games.'

Moved by Councillor Layton:

'It is further recommended that BIDCO be requested to include in its due diligence process, an arms-length financial check for each stage of the process to obtain the 2008 Olympics.'

Moved by Councillor Miller:

'It is further recommended that City Council's final support of the Olympic bid be contingent, in part, upon the provision of satisfactory guarantees by other levels of government, the private sector or otherwise, for the City's liability under Section 40 of the Olympic Charter.'

Moved by Councillor Walker:

'WHEREAS the mandate of this Council and the Mayor is to protect this new City against the adverse effects of reassessment, downloading, amalgamation and redevelopment; and

WHEREAS the additional burdens of a bid for the Summer Olympic Games in the year 2008 will exacerbate those effects already being evidenced; and

WHEREAS the social and economic effects of reassessment and downloading may render the municipality unable to meet the commitments it makes;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT City Council endorse, in principle, the bid for the 2008 Summer Olympic Games upon acceptance and implementation of the following conditions:

- that the 1992 Rent Control Act, Landlord and Tenant Act, and the Rental Housing Protection Act, be reinstated at least for the City of Toronto and preferably for the whole Province until at least the year 2010;

- that the Federal and Provincial governments suspend all privatizations of co-operative apartments and units and other forms of social housing within the Greater Toronto Area until at least the year 2010; and

- that, given the potential for extreme instability in assessment because of redevelopment related to the Olympic Games, Provincial legislation confer upon the City of Toronto a system of Unit Assessment (U.A.) to remain in effect until at least the year 2010.' ")

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the report (February 9, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer, subject to adding to Recommendation No. (1) the following:

"and also that Council adopt, in principle, that the 2008 Olympic Bid be socially and fiscally responsible".

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having:

(1) referred the submissions of the deputants and the following motions submitted by Members of Council at the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee meeting on February 24, 1998, to the Chief Administrative Officer for a report to Council on March 4, 1998, on how these submissions will be considered as the Bid process continues; and

(2) also referred the aforementioned motions submitted by Members of Council to the Chief Administrative Officer for a report on any questions/conditions that must be included in the Bid prior to the City's final commitment to the Bid:

Motion submitted by Councillor Layton:

"(a) That the Bid Committee develop a strategy to ensure that people without homes, socially isolated people or people in rental accommodation in the City are not negatively affected by the staging of the Olympic Games in Toronto, such strategy to be developed with the help of the Advisory Committee on Homeless and Socially Isolated Persons;

(b) That the Bid Committee develop a financial strategy for the games which will not impact negatively on the tax rate;

(c) That City Council and the Olympic Bid Committee consult widely with the community and develop a document similar to the Olympic Commitment which was adopted during the bid for the 1996 Games and that the new Commitment be the subject of full deputations and debate within one year. The Olympic Commitment shall address, among others, the following areas: environmental issues, equity and accessibility, fair wage policies, financial accountability;

(d) That the Bid Committee be encouraged to develop a bid which will establish any Olympic Buildings as the most environmentally advanced group of buildings ever built. That Toronto's design community be engaged in the process of achieving this objective;

(e) That the Olympics include a strategy to maximize rapid transit use and minimize automobile use during the games;

(f) That the Olympic Bid shall include a strategy for ensuring that the housing produced for the Olympic Village is available to address the housing crisis in Toronto;

(g) That City Council develop a series of standards against which the evolution of the bid to its final stage can be measured and that Council review the bid periodically to ensure that the standards are being met. Many of these standards will be embodied in the Olympic Commitment;

(h) That an independent financial audit be conducted, as in the previous bid process for the 1996 games. A process for funding and selecting the auditing firm should be developed by the Chief Administrative Officer and submitted for approval by Council. This audit should examine the bid at various stages of development so that challenges can be identified early enough to be addressed fully;

(i) That the Olympic Bid Committee be required to submit a complete financial plan for the Olympic Games in Toronto no later that six months from now and that Council be provided with a complete update every six months, documenting and justifying changes which may have been made;

(j) That no City funds which would have been used to retain municipal employees to ensure a continued level of service to the citizens of Toronto be used in the preparation or staging of the Olympic Games;

(k) That the Gardiner Lakeshore Task Force and appropriate City officials immediately embark on a process to re-make the Gardiner Lakeshore corridor into an advanced transportation corridor emphasizing and facilitating public transit, providing adequate road capacity and creating redevelopment possibilities;

(l) That the Chief Administrative Officer consult with the Bid Committee, Councillors and the public to ensure the development and execution of a suitable process that ensures effective public participation (including appropriate intervenor funding). This public participation plan to be brought forward within three months; and

(m) That the Bid Committee and City staff, working with appropriate social planning agencies in Toronto, develop a full and open independent social impact assessment process for the Games and that this be submitted for Council review and approval within six months."

Motion submitted by Councillor Holyday:

"(a) That the Chief Administrative Officer obtain information quantifying the benefits experienced by Los Angeles, Seoul, Barcelona, Atlanta, and any other cities that have recently hosted the Olympics."

Motion submitted by Councillor Ashton:

"(a) That the Mayor report to Council in the context of the agreement between the City of Toronto, the Canadian Olympic Association and the 2008 Toronto Olympic Bid Corporation (BIDCO) on the establishment and compensation of a Special Committee to guide staff in the preparation of the Final Bid Book and the formal presentation to the International Olympic Committee; and

(b) That City staff meet with the Board of Governors of Exhibition Place to discuss a process to integrate the Olympic venue into a legacy vision for Exhibition Place grounds."

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following report (February 9, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer:

Purpose:

Seek Council's endorsement in principle, of the application to be submitted by the 2008 Toronto Olympic Bid Corporation (BIDCO) to the Canadian Olympic Association (COA), to have the City of Toronto chosen as the Canadian Candidate.

Financial Implications:

There are no immediate financial impacts, other than staff resources with respect to proceeding with the bid to hosting the 2008 Olympic Games in Toronto as outlined in this report. The preparation of this bid will be fully funded from private sector contributions. A report detailing the full financial implications of hosting the Olympics will be presented to Council in the months to follow.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the City of Toronto endorse, in principle, the application to be submitted by BIDCO and City of Toronto representatives to the Canadian Olympic Association (COA), to have the City of Toronto chosen as the Canadian Candidate in the competition to host the 2008 Olympic Games, according to the principles and directions outlined in this report;

(2) authority be granted to City staff to negotiate an agreement between the City of Toronto, the COA and BIDCO to define the relationship, roles and responsibilities of each in bidding for the 2008 Olympic Games in Toronto. The form and content of this agreement will be subject to the approval of Toronto City Council;

(3) staff be authorized to participate in negotiations, community consultations and planning refinements to develop the Bid; that quarterly progress reports be submitted; and a full report on all the aspects of the Bid, including the financial and social implications, be submitted to Council for approval no later than June 1999; and

(4) the appropriate City staff be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

Comments:

The attached report provides an overview of the process and lay principles of the Toronto 2008 Olympic Bid.

Contact Name:

Joe Halstead,

Functional Lead, Parks and Recreation

Telephone: (416) 395-6188

Fax: (416) 395-0105

e-mail: JAHALSTE@city.north-york.on.ca.

________

Toronto 2008 -- The Olympic Bid

Table of Contents

Report

(A) Introduction

(B) Why Toronto?

(D) Impacts and Legacies

(E) Current Status of the Bid

(F) The City of Toronto Olympic Work Group

(G) Where would the Games be staged?

(H) Next Steps

(I) Critical Dates

(J) Recommendations

(K) Conclusion

Appendix 1: Background

(A) Toronto's ability to host the Games

(B) Other factors to Toronto's advantage

Appendix 2: Staging the Games

(A) The Toronto Waterfront Concept

(B) Infrastructure

(D) Venues

(E) Olympic Villages

Appendix 3: The Cultural Component

Appendix 4: Economic Benefits

Appendix 5: The Financial Plan

(A) Overview

(B) Preliminary Budget Estimates

(D) Costs

Appendix 6: Social Benefits

Appendix 7: Toronto Waterfront Location Plan

Report:

(A) Introduction:

The Olympic Games are the world's premier sporting and cultural event. The Games provide a unique opportunity to unite the people of the world in a spirit of competition and celebration.

Conceived by Baron Pierre de Coubertin, the Olympic Games were designed to promote Olympism as the guiding principle of the Olympic Movement.

"The goal of the Olympic Movement is to contribute to building a peaceful and better world by educating youth through sport practiced without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play." The Olympic Charter

These words could come to life for Torontonians and for all Canadians, especially our youth, should Toronto be awarded the right to organize and host an inclusive 2008 Olympic Games guided by the principles of responsible management. That management would reflect the City's social and economic priorities in such key areas as housing, social equity, environment, health and fitness, transportation, infrastructure, economic development and tourism.

(B) Why Toronto?:

(I) Toronto's Attributes:

Toronto's reputation as a thriving urban centre is recognized internationally. Already, Toronto opens its doors regularly to thousands of participants in a wide variety of national and international sporting and cultural events. The City's attributes are distinctive and compelling, making Toronto an ideal Olympic host:

(1) at 2.3 million, it is Canada's largest municipality;

(2) one of the most multicultural cities in the world;

(3) Canada's financial and commercial hub;

(4) a major world travel destination and transfer point;

(5) a leading sports centre;

(6) the foremost entertainment, communications and cultural centre;

(7) high quality urban environment and transportation infrastructure; and

(8) strong security record for hosting international events.

(II) Opportunity and Timing:

The opportunity to bid to host the Olympic Games only occurs realistically every 12 to 20 years. The privilege of hosting the Games, along with the accompanying multi-year Cultural Festival and the Paralympics, occurs once in an average lifetime.

Twelve years ago, Toronto City Council authorized a bid in its name to host the 1996 Games. That bid fell short but not before firmly establishing with the International Olympic Committee (IOC) the City's impressive credentials as a potential host. That fact, added to the lessons learned from the experience and the likelihood of being the only North American candidate, provide a solid base on which to mount an even better Toronto bid to host the 2008 Olympic Games.

Given its international reputation, Toronto is poised to be a leading 2008 contender. Toronto could well be the strongest 2008 contender. At present, Beijing or Shanghai, Buenos Aires, Istanbul and Cape Town are being touted as possible competitors.

At this early stage of the planning process, it is difficult to predict the extent of operating revenues and expenses associated with the staging of the 2008 Olympics with a high degree of certainty. Certain operating revenues and expenses can and will vary over the next decade.

The following financial principles have been adopted in compiling the preliminary budget estimates for the 2008 Olympic Games:

(1) no load on the municipal tax base;

(2) minimize new capital expenditures while emphasizing upgrading of existing facilities;

(3) newly constructed facilities, including housing, communications and athletic buildings, should have significant residual commercial or social value;

(4) revenue-generating programs for the 2008 Olympic Games should allow for the maximum level of corporate contributions;

(5) maximize other private-sector revenues including:

(i) broadcast rights, ticket revenues, and corporate sponsorship;

(ii) licencing, official sponsorship and supplier programs; and

(6) maximize opportunities for public/private partnerships for capital construction and operating costs in the post Olympic period.

A preliminary financial plan has been developed based upon the foregoing principles and the actual financial results of the 1996 Games in Atlanta, the details of which are provided in Appendix 5.

(D) Impacts and Legacies:

(I) Economic Impacts:

The activity associated with preparing for and hosting the Olympics Games will have a major impact on the Toronto and Ontario economy during the years leading up to 2008 and for several years afterwards.

The financial data outlined in Appendix 5, and information from past Olympic Games, suggests:

(1) a $2.7 billion impact from planning and construction activity, from the operation of the Olympics and the visitors who come to Ontario for the Games;

(2) 30,000 person years of employment in the 3 to 5 years leading up to and through the Games;

(3) 20,000 jobs associated with the Olympic Games predominately in the tourist, entertainment, retail and restaurant sectors; and

(4) an additional $3.3 billion in the Ontario economy by "induced and indirect" activities associated with the Olympics, creating another 60,000 person years of employment.

The total economic benefits associated with hosting the Olympics is estimated to a $6 billion infusion into the Ontario economy and about 90,000 person years of employment between 1998 and 2008.

(II) Legacies:

A defining value of Toronto's bid is the City's readiness to include residents, the corporate sector and community agencies in the planning process. Furthermore, the City would consider a number of measures to maximize the benefits of the Olympics to the community, while minimizing negative impacts. Among the social benefits to hosting the possible Olympics are:

(1) increased additional affordable, mixed-housing;

(2) upgraded existing and new, community recreational facilities throughout the City;

(3) improved public transit; and

(4) significant job opportunities, particularly for youth.

The Games should also promote:

(1) enhanced fitness awareness promoting wellness lifestyles across the whole community resulting in significant savings in health care;

(2) multiculturalism, artistic recognition and opportunities, and public participation, through the Cultural Festival; and

(3) increased collaboration among all groups in our society, reinforcing the City's multicultural character and engendering a greater spirit of volunteerism.

Given the experience of previous Olympic hosts, Toronto's commitment to an open and inclusive process will maximize the City's opportunity to capitalize on the potential benefits of the Games.

(E) Current Status of the Bid:

In May of 1996, David Crombie filed a letter with the COA expressing interest in having the 2008 Olympic Games hosted in the Toronto area. Since then, a core group of individuals working with Mr. Crombie (referred to in this report as BIDCO) have initiated and led the development of the bid proposal.

Numerous volunteers including communities and corporate participants have joined the early bid development. A number of individual groups and stakeholders have been consulted in developing the proposal thus far. The response from those consulted has been positive. These consultations and discussions will be broadened.

To date the proposal has been developed through the informal co-operation of many groups and individuals, brought together by their interest in and dedication to the idea of bring the 2008 Olympic Games to Toronto, and responding Mr. Crombie's initiative.

Included in these groups are more than 30 provincial and national sports organizations with whom BIDCO has worked in close co-operation to develop a strong technical proposal. The Site Review Committee (SRC) of the COA reviewed this proposal in November 1997 and reported favourably.

If the City of Toronto is chosen as the Canadian Candidate in the competition to host the 2008 Olympic Games, then an agreement will have to be negotiated between the City of Toronto, the COA and BIDCO to incorporate a not-for-profit company whose objectives will include the funding, preparation, organization and presentation of the bid to host the 2008 Olympic Games. In discussions with representatives from Mr. Crombie's office it appears that, in November 1996 such a corporation was created, but has not been active. Recent legal advice indicates that it will be preferable to incorporate a new company with appropriate membership, directors, officers, etc. as agreed upon between the relevant parties.

The proposal, as developed to date by BIDCO, will be presented to the COA by representatives of the City of Toronto and BIDCO.

(F) The City of Toronto Staff Olympic Work Group:

The City of Toronto Staff Olympic Work Group has recently begun to consider all aspects of BIDCO's proposal and its implications for the City. The Work Group includes representatives from Parks and Recreation, Finance, Planning, Social Development, Housing, Legal, Economic Development and Culture. The Work Group membership will be augmented to include representatives from other departments as needed.

(G) Where would the Games be staged?:

BIDCO has concluded that the key to a successful bid is a compact, waterfront-centred location for both the sports venues and the Olympic village and media accommodation. Existing venues such as the Metro Toronto Convention Centre, the National Trade Centre, the Air Canada Centre, and SkyDome would be used where possible. The draft Bid book, prepared by BIDCO, proposes that most of the new sports venues required, including the 80,000 seat stadium for the opening and closing ceremonies and track and field events, a new velodrome and aquatic centre, would be located at Exhibition Place. Further, the Bid book shows the location for the 15,000 person Olympic Village in the Port Industrial area and the 5,000 person media village in the Garrison Common north area, north of the mainline rail tracks, west of Strachan Avenue. The attached map shows the proposed locations of these facilities. (See Appendix 7)

(H) Next Steps:

February 24, 1998 Draft Report on 2008 Olympic Bid is submitted to Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee for review and consideration.

March 4, 1998 Council considers/endorses request to approve, in principle, the City of Toronto 2008 Olympic Bid.

March 17, 1998 City of Toronto informs the Canadian Olympic Association (COA) of its approval in principle, to host the 2008 Olympics.

April 17 - 19, 1998 City and BIDCO make presentation to the COA in Calgary at COA Annual General Meeting.

Council's representation in this process will need to be identified and formalized.

(I) Critical Dates:

May 1998 - Nov. 1999 Final Bid book preparation, staff analysis, community consultation and input, additional planning.

December 1999 City and BIDCO make formal Bid presentation to IOC.

Spring of 2001 IOC announces its shortlist of four candidate cities.

Fall of 2001 IOC announces the winning city at its Annual Congress in Moscow.

(J) Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(4) the appropriate City staff be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

(K) Conclusion:

For most athletes as for cities, the Olympic Games are a once in a lifetime opportunity. It represents the culmination of years of practice and effort. It is the highest expression of readiness.

Only a few can compete but where there is the talent, the ability, and the drive it would be a terrible failure not to try. The object is to win; the success is in the trying to one's ultimate.

Toronto is now ready as it has never been. The Olympics can serve as a positive focal point in the creation of the new Toronto. The values of the Olympic movement are the same as those we have espoused and shared with the world. They are the values which have made us a world leader in the quality of life offered to our citizens.

The Olympics and its strong values will serve to guide the City as it plans, builds, and delivers this wonderful sporting event based on friendship and equality of all people. It will provide an unprecedented opportunity to accelerate the creation of infrastructure as well as to stage an arts and cultural festival further building and binding our communities.

The next ten years will not be without challenges. The benefits are, however, very large. In the short term; thousands of jobs will be created, youth will receive training and work experience, individuals and communities will be involved, the social environment will be enhanced and over 2.5 billion dollars will be brought into the economy. In the long term, the City will be left with the legacy of new facilities and infrastructure, there will be increased national and international recognition, and business will benefit from the worldwide exposure.

Appendix 1: Background:

(A) Toronto's ability to host the Games:

The responsibility of hosting the Games is, without question, enormous. However, the potential opportunities and benefits derived from staging the Games are unparalleled. As a result, competition among the great cities of the world to host the Games is intense. The City of Toronto is among this group and is recognized within the Olympic community as a potentially successful Olympic City.

Canada has demonstrated its ability to host the Olympics through the operationally successful 1976 Olympics in Montreal and the 1988 Winter Games in Calgary. Following in these great Olympic traditions, and with the goal of strengthening the Olympic Movement in this country and throughout the world, Toronto is well positioned to return the Games to Canada.

The 1996 Toronto Bid by the Toronto Ontario Olympic Council, which saw Toronto finish third in voting, firmly established Toronto as an Olympic City with a wide range of support within the International Olympic Committee (IOC).

As the home of major league sports teams, and the host of many international sporting championships, Toronto has proven its ability over many years to support and organize the largest of sporting events.

A significant number of the required venues are already in place in Toronto and capable of hosting the Olympic sporting events. In addition, Toronto has abundant accommodation for visitors with more than 30,000 hotel rooms and an excellent transportation system. Our comprehensive communications infrastructure exceeds the requirements needed to bring the Games to the rest of the world.

Beyond the City's capability to meet the IOC's technical requirements is the depth and strength of Toronto's cultural and ethnic diversity. Toronto is home to more than 500 ethnic or multicultural organizations representing over 80 nationalities.

Toronto is noted for its cultural activity. It is Canada's leading entertainment and cultural centre, with the country's largest concentration of artists, arts organizations and arts-related industries.

As Canada's largest city and financial/commercial capital, Toronto's private sector has strength to support the Games.

Toronto is highly accessible by all means of travel from anywhere in the world. As host to numerous international conventions and special events year-round, the City is accustomed to hosting the world. In 1996, more than 2 million tourists and convention participants were welcomed to Toronto.

(B) Other factors to Toronto's advantage:

A number of outside influences could impact favourably on a Toronto bid:

(1) Sydney, Australia is hosting the 2000 Games followed by Athens, Greece in 2004. As such, it may be time to return to North America for 2008. The United States Olympic Committee has decided not to compete for the 2008 Games, leaving Toronto as the sole North American contender.

(2) Returning the Games of 2008 to the Eastern Time Zone and its large market, holds strong appeal to both the IOC and its biggest television partner, NBC.

(3) Thus far, Buenos Aires is the only other City in the Eastern time zone to express an interest to bid for 2008.

The size and magnitude of an Olympic Games in Toronto in 2008 is significant:

(1) 19 days of sports and cultural celebrations between July and August 2008;

(2) 15,000+ athletes and coaches from 197 countries;

(3) 500,000 visitors over a 3-week period;

(4) 15,000 media personnel from 200 countries;

(5) 45,000 volunteers required;

(6) a 4-year, City-wide cultural festival culminating at the Opening Ceremonies; and

(7) 20,000 jobs created during the Olympics.

Appendix 2: Staging the Games:

(A) The Toronto waterfront concept:

BIDCO's technical team, comprised of representatives of the construction, architectural, engineering, sports and community sectors, identified three concepts for the location of Olympic venues and facilities:

(1) A GTA-wide concept;

(2) York University/Downsview; and

(3) the Toronto waterfront.

In August 1997, the COA's Site Review Committee (SRC) reviewed the three Olympic possibilities and recommended that BIDCO develop the waterfront concept more fully. The reasons:

(1) the IOC favours bids that cluster venues and facilities within 2-5 kilometres of the Olympic Village; and

(2) Toronto's waterfront is already known by the IOC as an attractive and appealing Olympic Games centerpiece. As such, its adoption would enhance the bid much more than the other options.

Consequently, the waterfront Olympic concept will form the basis of the presentation to the COA Board in April 1998. Additional recreational and sports venues would have to be located throughout Toronto and the GTA to meet the training and preliminary events of the Olympic athletes. This would require upgrades to existing and/or the construction of new facilities.

This plan could facilitate the integration of the waterfront into the fabric of the City. Toronto residents and tourists could live, work and participate in a growing number of sporting and cultural activities that are so much a part of the waterfront.

Within the past five years the City, in cooperation with the Provincial and Federal governments, has supported significant developments near Lake Ontario which contribute to the waterfront's importance to Toronto. The waterfront component of the 1996 Bid was one of its most attractive features. That feature has been significantly enhanced in the current bid by the development which has taken place since that time.

(1) Metropolitan Toronto Convention Centre expansion and new 15-acre park.

(2) National Trade Centre at Exhibition Place.

(3) Air Canada Centre (new 22,000 seat arena now under construction).

(4) Imminent development of the Railway Lands to the west of SkyDome, primarily for housing.

(5) Residential development in the King/Spadina and King/Parliament areas

(6) York Street Gateway.

(7) Upgrading the Martin Goodman Trail and integration with the Lake Ontario Greenway.

(8) Transfer of 40 acres of waterfront parkland from the Federal Government to the City of Toronto.

In addition, many proposals are approved or under consideration:

(1) up to 2,000 new residential units under construction in Harbourfront by late 1998;

(2) Front Street extension (Environmental Assessment approved);

(3) CN Tower expansion;

(4) Toronto Bay Initiative (cleaning up the waters of the Inner Harbour);

(5) Toronto Port greening and revitalization;

(6) fixed link to the Toronto City Centre Airport;

(7) development of the recently transferred 40 acres of waterfront parkland;

(8) Waterfront transit extension west and east; and

(9) planned dismantling of the eastern portion of the Gardiner Expressway; proposed dismantling and realignment of the central portion of the Gardiner Expressway.

Collectively, these initiatives represent a significant investment in the quality of life of Toronto's waterfront. It must be noted that these initiatives are not dependent on the Olympics, nor are the Games contingent on them; however, the Games could provide the catalyst for new partnerships to accelerate their implementation.

(B) Infrastructure:

New physical infrastructure is often an important component of an Olympic bid. There is an opportunity to create a single timetable for a number of significant infrastructure improvements which have been considered by the City . City-wide and waterfront infrastructure initiatives have already been mentioned above.

These improvements are desirable and could help to make the City's bid for the 2008 Olympics a successful one. However, the costs of all of these infrastructure elements would be in the billions of dollars. This cannot be paid for out of the budget for the Olympics, and would require support from senior levels of government and the private sector.

The true test for assessing these infrastructure improvements should be their contribution to the economic health and improved quality of life for the City.

They should make sense and stand on their own merits, regardless of the success of Toronto's Olympic bid.

Staff should begin analysing the transportation requirements for the 2008 Olympics, to separate the infrastructure required for a successful Olympic bid from that which is needed in the long term to support other downtown and waterfront development.

As with proposed infrastructure, the Olympics provide an opportunity to take a number of previously proposed environmental initiatives and implement them in a single time frame.

Current environmental initiatives in the City and the Waterfront include cleaning up the waters of the Inner Harbour, restoration of the Don River, the Garrison Creek linkage project, and the greening and revitalization of the Toronto port.

Significant environmental legacies would be derived from the Games in proportion to their likely impact on fulfilment of these initiatives.

(D) Venues:

The draft Bid book proposes that a number of existing waterfront facilities be used as venues for Olympic events. The Bid book also proposes that a new Olympic Stadium, aquatics centre and velodrome be located at Exhibition Place/Ontario Place. The construction of these new sport venues provides the opportunity for a legacy of sports facilities at the waterfront, and revitalizes the Exhibition Place/Ontario Place area as a year-round destination.

These proposed venues must be considered in the context of a master plan for revitalizing the area -- the location of open space, the preservation of heritage buildings and the compatibility with the Toronto Maple Leaf's proposal.

Over the coming months, staff should consult with the Board of Governors of Exhibition Place, Heritage Toronto, Maple Leaf Gardens Ltd. and the public to ensure that the Olympic venues are accommodated while taking into account City concerns and issues.

(E) Olympic Villages:

The draft Bid book proposes that the Olympic Village, also known as the Athletes' Village, be located in the Port area west of Cherry Street, and the media accommodation be located in Garrison Common North. Additional housing would be provided for up to 1,000 Games' officials and is proposed in the Railway Lands West as required. This would result in approximately 4,000 new housing units.

All three locations are on former industrial lands. The introduction of new neighbourhoods on a comprehensive basis, such as the Olympic Bid proposes, provides the opportunity to create mixed income residential neighbourhoods with all the appropriate community facilities in place at the start. For years, politicians, planners, landowners, and potential developers have speculated on creating a residential neighbourhood in the Port area. Views to the downtown and the islands from the lands west of Cherry Street are spectacular. Given the proximity to the downtown, other residential neighbourhoods, and the advantage of a lake or City view, the residential potential in this area is compelling.

As with Harbourfront, the Railway Lands, Bathurst/Strachan and other former industrial areas, it is not easy to convert large "brown fields" to new residential neighbourhoods especially when there are active industrial and commercial landowners and tenants in the area.

Residential development in East Bayfront or the Port Industrial area is only feasible on a scale that could financially justify a full range of services and amenities that would be required by the new residents. Introducing residential uses into the area would also require revisions to the City's industrial strategy, which would show how industries in the Port area could coexist with an emerging residential neighbourhood. This initiative would involve extensive discussions with the stakeholders in the area.

Over the coming months, staff should commence these discussions, as well as the necessary land use, design, and transportation studies, to determine the feasibility of an Olympic Village in the Port area and its impact on the surrounding industrial land.

Appendix 3: The Cultural Component:

An integral part of the bid is an Olympic Arts and Cultural Festival for the period 2004 to 2008. The cultural component provides the opportunity to showcase Canadian culture to a world-wide audience, while presenting international artists for the benefit of local residents. Given the increasing importance of arts and cultural industries to the City's economy, this festival would provide artists and companies with an unrivalled opportunity to develop and enhance existing culture and heritage attractions.

The development of a cultural component for the Games would draw upon Toronto's growing reputation as an international cultural centre and its experience hosting major cultural events such as the Toronto International Film Festival and the International Festival of Authors. Toronto has an existing network of superb cultural facilities on or near the waterfront, such as Ontario Place, Roy Thomson Hall, the St. Lawrence and Hummingbird Centres, Harbourfront Centre, the Design Exchange, The Pier Project and Fort York, and others.

The cultural festival must find the right balance of local and international programming. It must also complement or enhance existing cultural programming and festivals, without diverting resources and public attention. A strong coalition of public, not-for-profit and commercial arts and entertainment organizations will help BIDCO develop the cultural component of the bid. The coalition should draw upon the large number of Toronto-based cultural enterprises with global contracts and experience.

Appendix 4: Economic Benefits:

The activity associated with preparing for and hosting the Olympics Games would have a major impact on the Toronto and Ontario economy in the years leading up to 2008 and for several years afterwards. The financial data outlined in the report and information on past Olympics suggests that the associated planning and construction activity, the operation of the Games, and the possible visitors to Ontario for the Games would inject about $2.7 billion into the Ontario economy. The equivalent of about 30,000 person years of employment would be created. During 2008, it might be expected that 20,000 people would find employment associated with the Olympics Games. Many of these people would be young adults employed at the Games and in the tourist, entertainment, retail and restaurant sectors.

It is estimated that "induced and indirect" activities associated with the Olympics would generate an additional $3.3 billion to the Ontario economy. There would be two major sources of indirect and induced expenditures:

(1) tourists would decide to visit Toronto during the months preceding and after the Olympics because of the positive publicity the City receives from being an Olympic host. The positive impact of "induced tourism" has been documented in other cities, and it is reasonable to expect that a significant increase in tourist visits and expenditures also would be experienced in Toronto; and

(2) the money injected into the economy by Olympics-related activities would in turn stimulate increased expenditures throughout Ontario as businesses and employees increase production and spend the additional money they earn.

The $3.3 billion induced and indirect expenditures would create about another 60,000 person years of employment. Thus, the total economic benefits associated with hosting the Olympics is estimated at $6 billion infusion with 90,000 person years of employment between 1998 and 2008. These figures do not factor the impact of infrastructure improvements which are still to be planned.

It is not possible yet to estimate the additional tax revenue likely to be generated. Clearly many millions of additional income and sales tax revenue would be produced for the Provincial and Federal governments. Municipal property tax assessment bases may also be increased by new development and enhanced property values.

The positive publicity and greater name recognition associated with being an Olympics host has increased the attractiveness of many cities as a tourist destination, and has made them more competitive in drawing future special and sporting events, conventions, new business locations and investment.

Local businesses also have been shown to benefit by their increased exposure to Olympics-based contracts and by export opportunities for many years following the Games.

These more sustained benefits are more difficult to isolate and quantify than the short-term expenditures directly associated with the Games. However they are nonetheless real, and may in fact significantly exceed the direct benefits.

Appendix 5: The Financial Plan:

(A) Overview:

At this early stage in the planning process, it is difficult to conclusively forecast the financial implications of staging the 2008 Olympics.

Factors such as inflation, interest and foreign exchange rates can and will vary over the next decade. These, in turn, will impact the operating revenues and expenses now broadly projected.

Moreover, at this point and time, a variety of details which have consequential financial implications have yet to be finalized. Among them, the exact plans for venues, Athletes' Village and media accommodation locations and detailed infrastructure requirements needed to accommodate the staging of the Games.

With these qualifications and cautions in mind, staff of the City's Finance Department and BIDCO, in consultation with KPMG, have prepared preliminary budget estimates for staging the 2008 Olympics. The estimates are summarized in the following chart and described in more detail in the rest of this section. The financial results of the 1996 Atlanta Olympic Games, as at September 30, 1997, are included for comparison purposes.

________

Preliminary Budget Estimates

($ Millions)

All revenue estimates in the chart and following pages have been adjusted to reflect present value 1998 Canadian dollars.

(I) Admission Tickets - $656 million:

The admission revenues are based on sold-out capacities for the opening and closing ceremonies and 60 percent paid attendance at all sports events. The Atlanta Games sold 71 percent of its ticket inventory. To allow for low income families to attend as spectators, lower percentages were used. The ticketing plan would include measures to ensure that citizens of all income levels are able to attend events. Budgeted admission revenues represent 95 percent of the total admission revenues as 5 percent is paid to the IOC.

(II) Broadcast Rights - $913 million:

The estimates for broadcast revenues are based on the signed contracts with NBC (U.S.), EBU (Europe), OTI (Latin America), and broadcasters in Japan and Australia. Revenue from these contractual commitments represents 93 percent of the projected total broadcast revenues. The balance is projected from other broadcast organizations that have yet to enter into agreements with the IOC.

Broadcast revenues shown in the preceding chart represent the Organizing Committee's 49 percent share of the worldwide broadcasting rights received from the OC. Contractual arrangements with the IOC will provide for a payment stream of broadcast revenues commencing as early as four years prior to the Opening Ceremonies. Revenue payment streams have been discounted to appropriately reflect 1998 dollars.

(III) Corporate Sponsorship - $468 million:

Projections for corporate sponsorship revenue are based upon (i) The Olympic Programme (TOP) - a worldwide sponsor program coordinated by the IOC and (ii) local corporate sponsorship. The Organizing Committee share of revenues from TOP are conservatively estimated at US$125 million (CDN$180 million) and are based upon actual revenues received from the Atlanta Olympic Games and estimates from the Sydney 2000 and Athens 2004 Olympic Budgets.

A further US$200 million (CDN$288 million), net of COA participation (est.CDN$70 million) is projected through local sponsorship. This projection is conservative relative to Atlanta's local sponsorship program which generated US$360 million (CDN$518 million) and Sydney's actual commitments to date of US$450 million (CDN$648 million).

(IV) Licensing and Other Revenues - $310 million:

Licensing and other revenues are strictly based upon Atlanta actuals. This is a conservative estimate, projecting only 75 percent of the actual revenues generated from these sources.

Other revenues include merchandising, disposal of assets, coin program, interest income, Media Rate Card, parking and a variety of other promotional programs.

(D) Costs:

(I) Capital Costs:

Preliminary estimates for temporary and permanent facility construction costs have been prepared by PCL Constructors Canada Inc. Total capital costs are estimated at $448.3 million and do not include construction costs for the Olympic Village and media accommodations.

These facilities will have significant residual value in the post-Olympic period. It is therefore not unreasonable to expect a substantial recovery of their capital costs. In that regard, we are currently exploring a number of opportunities for joint funding and capital cost recovery.

Four new facilities would have to be built - the aquatics centre, the velodrome, a beach volleyball complex and the Olympic Stadium - at a total estimated cost of $141.3 million. Another estimated $307 million would be required for the purposes of upgrading existing property and facilities. These include an Olympic Plaza, a field hockey complex and upgrades to other facilities.

15 percent has been added to the PCL's estimates to cover such items as engineering and design, furniture, fixtures and equipment, landscaping and contingencies.

(II) Operating Costs:

In developing the preliminary operating cost estimates, BIDCO also reviewed the proposed operating budgets of the 2004 bid cities. The Sydney 2000 approved budget, dated May 21, 1997, was also reviewed in detail. After some deliberation, it was determined that the most appropriate and meaningful basis for estimating operating costs involved using actual data from the Atlanta Games. In the interest of conservatism, these costs were inflated by 5 percent.

(III) Public Infrastructure:

For the purpose of this report, "infrastructure" refers to those public utilities and transportation facilities, within the City and the GTA, which may be impacted by the Olympic Games. It does not include infrastructure which is so site-specific to an Olympic venue that it would be included in the capital costs of the venue itself.

There may be a temptation to load on a wish list of infrastructure improvements that are needed or desired to stage the Olympics. A growing list of potential improvements include:

(1) Waterfront transit extensions east and west;

(2) Gardiner Expressway take down through the central part of the City;

(3) Front Street extension; and

(4) Transit link to Pearson Airport.

Many of these improvements are desirable and may increase the chances of a successful bid. However, the costs of these and other infrastructure elements would be in the billions of dollars and could not be reasonably funded from the Olympic budget. The City, with its own budget pressures, has limited capacity to absorb the funding of these improvements and would have to look for partnerships with the senior levels of government and the private sector.

Appendix 6: Social Benefits:

Hosting an event the scale of the Olympics will create significant social opportunities and challenges for the community and all levels of the government. Maximizing these opportunities and meeting these challenges would require a wide-reaching community consultation process; a full inventory of possible impacts; an analysis of the impacts of previous Olympics; and a strong commitment to a program of social benefits for all members of the community.

Initial indications suggest that the social benefits of hosting the Games could include increasing housing supply, creation of a new mixed-income neighbourhood, construction of new sports venues, upgrading of existing community recreation facilities, transportation improvements, environmental improvements to the waterfront, introduction of environmentally friendly practices, and many new job opportunities. Other significant social benefits would come from involving the community in organizing the Games, and the resulting community pride in hosting the world.

The Games should also develop an enhanced fitness awareness resulting in significant savings in health care while the Cultural Festival will promote multiculturalism, artistic recognition, and public participation. The demands of hosting the Games should promote increased co-operation among all groups in our society, reinforcing the City's multicultural character and engendering a greater spirit of volunteerism.

To successfully host the Games, it would be necessary to approach the social challenges with the same level of creativity and energy as the Olympics themselves. Residents, businesses and community groups should be involved in the planning long before, during and after the Games. Based on the experiences of the cities, it would be necessary to implement mitigating measures to reduce and eliminate undesired impacts. Some examples include measures to prevent negative market impacts on tenants and rental housing supply; implementing operational planning and security procedures which are sensitive to the needs of the homeless, and waste disposal planning which includes aggressive recycling programs.

Appendix 7: Map of Proposed Locations:

(A copy of Appendix 7, referred to in the foregoing report dated February 9, 1998, from the Chief Administrative Officer, was forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee for its meeting on February 24, 1998, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the following communication (February 18, 1998) from Mr. John Sewell:

I understand that at its next meeting on February 24 the Committee will be considering a request by David Crombie, and a staff report, that the Committee recommend to the Council meeting on March 4 that the City endorse a bid for the 2008 Olympics.

I wish to speak to the Committee on this matter.

Whether or not the City should make a bid for the Olympics is something that requires considerable public debate. That debate should obviously happen before Council makes a decision, not after. This Committee meeting is the only opportunity for public input before the March 4 Council meeting, hence I would ask that I be listed as a speaker.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the following communication (February 24, 1998) from Councillor Layton:

I would request that the following motions be referred to staff for a report directly to Council on March 4, 1998.

These motions outline a possible process for addressing a range of issues focusing on equity and environment as well as policies regarding financial accountability.

Recommendation:

That the attached motions be referred to the Chief Administrative Officer and the Olympic Bid Committee for a detail response for Council on March 4, 1998.

(The aforementioned motions from Councillor Layton are shown following the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee's recommendations at the beginning of the Clause).

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the following joint communication (February 23, 1998) from Messrs. R. Ross Dunsmore, Chair and M. Elyse Allan, President and Chief Executive Officer, The Board of Trade of Metropolitan Toronto:

The Toronto Board of Trade urges the City of Toronto to endorse, in principle, the bid to be submitted by the 2008 Toronto Olympic Bid Corporation (BIDCO) to the Canadian Olympic Association (COA) to have Toronto chosen as the Canadian Candidate.

The City of Toronto would be an ideal Olympic host and The Toronto Board of Trade supports, in principle, this application. We believe that the work required to bring the Olympics to Toronto would be well worth the effort. The games present many potential opportunities and could result in substantial direct and indirect benefits for the business community and the people of Toronto.

We look forward to seeing this bid move successfully forward and we encourage you to support the application. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you require assistance or further information.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the following communication (February 19, 1998) from Mr. Michael Shapcott, Bread Not Circuses Coalition:

I am writing on behalf of the Bread Not Circuses Coalition to request to make a deputation to the Strategic Priorities and Policies Committee on Tuesday, February 24, 1998. I wish to address the item on the bid for the 2008 Olympics, which you have advised me is scheduled for 9:30 a.m.

I would also like to receive a copy of any written materials that will be tabled for consideration by the Committee.

Please call me at the above number to confirm my request for a deputation and to advise as to where and when I can pick up the information.

Thank you for your consideration of this request.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the following communication (February 19, 1998) from Ms. Kathleen Wynne:

I understand that at its next meeting on February 24, 1998, the Committee will be considering a request by David Crombie, and a staff report, that the Committee recommend endorsement of a bid for the 2008 Olympics to the full Council meeting on March 4, 1998.

I believe that this is a matter of crucial importance in the life of the City at this time and as such requires careful consideration by citizens and politicians alike. Since there will be no other opportunity for public input before the March 4 Council, I ask to be listed as a speaker next Tuesday. I understand that this item is expected to arise in the morning. If it is possible for me to speak, please advise me of the time and place at the number below.

________

The Strategic Policies and Priorities reports, for the information of Council, having viewed an overhead presentation respecting Toronto 2008 - The Olympic Bid given by Mr. Joe Halstead, Interim Lead, Parks and Recreation.

The following persons appeared before the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

- Mr. Michael Shapcott, on behalf of Bread Not Circuses Coalition, who also submitted a written presentation

- Ms. Kathleen Wynne

- Ms. Maureen Orton, who also submitted a written presentation

- Mr. Stefan Kipfer, on behalf of the Steering committee, Metro Network for Social Justice

- Mr. John Sewell

The following Members of Council appeared before the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

- Councillor Moscoe, Ward 8, North York-Spadina

- Councillor Korwin-Kuczynski, Ward 19, High Park

- Councillor Layton, Ward 25, Don River

- Councillor Holyday, Ward 4, Markland-Centennial

- Councillor Ashton, Ward 13, Scarborough Bluffs

- Councillor Duguid, Ward 15, Scarborough City Centre

- Councillor Johnston, Ward 22, North Toronto

(Written presentations submitted by Mr. Michael Shapcott, on behalf of Bread Not Circuses Coalition, and by Ms. Maureen Orton, referred to above, have been forwarded to all Members of Council under separate cover on February 26, 1998, and copies thereof are also on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (March 3, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer:

Purpose

To supplement the Toronto 2008 -- The Olympic Bid Report to address the motions and submissions of deputants as directed by Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee.

Background

At its meeting of February 24, 1998, the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee considered a report from the Chief Administrative Officer respecting the City's potential candidacy to host the 2008 Olympic Games. The committee received submissions from deputants, and from Councillors. The Committee referred the deputations and motions to staff for a report. The Committee unanimously approved the recommendations contained in the February 9, report, subject to the following amendment to Recommendation No. (1) of the report:

" and also that Council adopt, in principle, that the 2008 Olympic Bid be socially and fiscally responsible"

Financial Implications:

Not applicable

Recommendation:

It is recommended that Council direct staff to receive and act upon the motions of Councillors Ashton, Holyday and Layton; and the written submissions of Maureen Orton, John Sewell and Michael Shapcott as set out and discussed in this report and to assess the questions and issues raised therein, and other issues that may arise, at all phases in the development of the bid and to include such assessments in periodic reports to Council over the next 15 months.

Motions

(I) Motion by Councillor Layton:

Councillor Layton's comprehensive motion focuses on equity, environmental and financial accountability issues in the development of a Toronto Olympic bid. These concerns reflect the essence of the Toronto Olympic Commitment adopted unanimously by Toronto City Council during the bid for the 1996 Olympic Games.

Staff Comments:

Given the merit and applicability of the Motion, it would be appropriate for Council to support a number of Councillor Layton's suggestions and confirm a schedule for undertaking these initiatives. They include:

(1) The development of a strategy concerning the homeless and tenants in consultation with the City of Toronto Advisory Committee on Homeless and Isolated Persons. Our report on the issues and mechanisms to ensure the Games do not negatively impact on the homeless, isolated persons and tenants be made to Council within six months.

(2) That the 2008 Toronto Olympic Bid Corporation (BIDCO) develop a financial strategy during the next six months which is realistic and attainable and which does not impact negatively on the tax rate. And that this strategy be available for public consultation. Furthermore, that the City and BIDCO enter into discussions on the development of suitable financial accountability mechanisms between them and provide Council with accountability options to ensure protection for taxpayers and the City.

(3) That City Council and the Olympic Bid Corporation agree to develop and commit to a set of "Olympic Principles" which would update the Olympic Commitment approved during the previous Bid. That the Olympic Principles would be developed during the next six months and be subject to broad public consultation. These principles should embody the following:

(a) The Olympic Bid process will include a full and open public debate and provide a variety of consultation processes to ensure wide public participation and input into the bid.

(b) The Olympic Bid process will be fully and widely advertised and make available materials to assist the public participation process.

(c) The Olympic Bid process will seek opportunities to dialogue with individuals and groups who have contributions to make that will assist in addressing social, equity, environmental and financial issues.

(d) The Olympic Bid process will undertake to address all issues and requirements related with the Paralympics which are associated with the Games and normally held immediately following.

(e) The Olympic Bid process will seek to be inclusive of all the people of Toronto.

(4) That the Olympic Bid Corporation enter discussions with the Toronto Transit Commission on ways and means of increasing public transit use during the Games and minimizing vehicular traffic. These discussions to be extended to include consultation with the Gardiner Lakeshore Task Force to achieve a transportation plan to support the Olympic requirements. A report on these consultations to be available within the next nine months.

(5) That the Olympic Bid work with all stakeholders in the housing and construction industry during the next six months to develop options to ensure that the opportunities for long term affordable housing are maximized from the accommodation to be built for the Games. That particular attention be paid to ensure that all accommodation is constructed to the highest environmental standards possible.

(6) That the Bid Corporation work with social planning agencies and City staff to determine the best method to develop a full social impact assessment process for the Games and that this be prepared within the next six months.

(7) That the Bid Corporation work with these same agencies and consider the opportunity and viability of establishing a social investment fund from the Games. Such fund to be provided within the context of a financially responsible Games.

(II) Motion by Councillor Holyday:

Councillor Holyday's motion requests information quantifying the benefits experienced by former host cities.

Staff Comments:

Various studies on the benefits deriving from recent Games generally reflect increased economic activity, new job creation, new levels of tourism, development of athletic facilities, and the creation of new permanent housing. Specifically, the experience of recent Summer Games can be summarized as follows (stated in equivalent Canadian dollars):

(1) Atlanta -- 1996 Summer Games:

- $6.9 billion economic impact in the State of Georgia economy over the period of 1991-1997;

- 77,000 new temporary and permanent jobs in the State of Georgia representing $2.5 billion in salary dollars; and

- $341 million in upgrades to public and private universities, and new student accommodation at the State of Georgia University.

(Source: The University of Georgia Selig Center for Economic Growth, 1995)

(2) Barcelona - 1992 Summer Games:

- $8.9 billion in economic investment to host the Games;

- 65 percent increase in the number of tourists to Barcelona within three years of hosting the Games; and

- athletes accommodation was converted to permanent housing.

(Source: Official Report of the Games of the XXV Olympiad Barcelona, 1992)

(3) Seoul - 1988 Summer Games:

- 63% increase in the number of tourists to Korea within three years of hosting the Games;

- $446 million contributed by the Seoul Olympic Organizing Committee on the Seoul Olympic Sports Promotion Foundation; and

- 10,00 new apartment units as a legacy from the Olympic accommodation.

(Source: Official Report of the Seoul Olympic Organizing Committee, September 1989)

(4) Los Angeles -- 1984 Summer Games

- 37,500 new jobs created and additional work for 37,500 existing employees;

- $ billion economic impact resulting from the Games; and

- Over $100 million donated by the Los Angeles Olympic Organizing Committee to the Amateur Athletic Foundation.

(Source: Los Angeles Olympic Organizing Committee, June 1986.)

(III) Motion by Councillor Ashton:

Councillor Ashton's Motion requests that the Mayor report on the establishment of a Special Committee in the context of the agreement between the City of Toronto, the Canadian Olympic Association (COA) and BIDCO. In addition, he requests that staff meet with the Board of Governors of Exhibition Place to discuss a process to integrate the Olympic venue into a legacy vision for Exhibition Place.

Staff Comments:

The integration of all committees will be considered as part of the tripartite agreement between the City, BIDCO, and the COA subject to a report by staff and approval of Toronto City Council. As well, the agreement will define staff responsibilities with respect to discussions with all venue owners and management including for example, the Board of Governors of Exhibition Place.

(IV) Submission by Maureen Orton:

Ms. Orton expressed concern about the cost of amalgamation and downloading. She proposes that Council only proceed with the bid if the corporate sponsors obtain a signed agreement from the Government of Ontario to cover the costs of these two provincial actions.

When the precondition is met, she suggests that Council:

(1) set out conditions for a full public process to consider and monitor the bid;

(2) specify conditions for implementing the Games if Toronto is selected by the International Olympic Committee (IOC); and

(3) commit to no financial contribution or liability for the City; and

(4) specify a percentage of gross revenues from the Games to be paid to the City.

Staff Comments:

The precondition would likely be difficult to obtain with sufficient time for discussion and negotiations. At this point, when corporate sponsors are just being identified and approached and with only six weeks to the COA decision, we doubt that it can be met.

The other suggestions should be fed into our proposed public consultation process. Modifications may emerge in a City of Toronto Olympic Commitment that we see Council considering and adopting as part of the bid document that will be forwarded to the IOC.

(V) Submission by John Sewell:

Mr. Sewell's concerns focused on diversion of resources. As well, Mr. Sewell requested that the COA be asked to delay its decision on a Canadian city until June 1998.

Staff Comments:

Staff's view is that the development of a sound, comprehensive management plan will allow that investment in the Olympics and investment in the City's social and infrastructure needs are not mutually exclusive. The bid will more likely provide an opportunity to advantageously merge these investments.

Staff recommends that a comprehensive and inclusive consultation process on all aspects of the bid be undertaken over the next 18 months. The goal of this process is to incorporate the perspectives of all Torontonians into the bid before Council finalizes and adopts the document for submission to the IOC.

We would be concerned about the quality of the process that could occur if this period were to be made shorter. Secondly, we envision an evolution and consensus building process resulting in a bid that enjoys wide community support. Therefore, we cannot endorse the suggestion for a deferment until June 1998.

(VI) Submission by Michael Shapcott:

Mr. Shapcott expressed concern that "while all the people of Toronto will share in the costs, without proper planning, any benefits will not be shared equally." He raises issues from the past Olympics about: affordable housing; the homeless; the environment; public control and accountability. He also echos Mr. Sewell's concern that "the bid will divert public attention and resources from the real needs of Toronto.

He recommends that the City adopt a clear set of standards for the bid and has proposed 52 standards that he believes will result in "a socially responsible Games".

Staff Comments:

The issues identified by Mr. Shapcott are consistent with the Olympic Commitment developed by the former City of Toronto Council for the 1996 Toronto Bid. They provide a solid framework for a plan which will include broad-based public consultation and will optimize the social and fiscal benefits to be derived from the Games.

There are three that we disagree with:

(1) that the IOC share the financial risks;

(2) an independent watchdog for the bid and organizing Committees; and

(3) withdrawal of the bid if the standards are not met.

The IOC's position is clear on financial risks. If we impose this condition our bid will not be considered. The idea of additional level of scrutiny, organizational and contractual agreements strikes us as redundant and could impair the conduct of a successful bid. In place of the third, we recommend that if an Olympic Commitment is violated, inadvertently or otherwise, we address the problem rather than summarily cancelling the bid.

Oral submissions were also presented by Stefan Kipfer, on behalf of the Metro Network of Social Justice Steering Committee and Ms. Kathleen Wynne on behalf of Citizens for Local Democracy.

Conclusion:

Staff foresees a comprehensive and inclusive consultation process on all aspects of the bid being undertaken over the next 18 months. The goal of this process is to incorporate the perspective of all Torontonians into the bid before Council finalizes and adopts the document for submission to the International Olympic Committee. The Toronto Olympic Commitment represents a set of goals and commitments that we will abide by should we be selected to host the Games. It will be an integral part of the bid document.

Contact Name:

Joe Halstead, Functional Lead, Parks & Recreation

Telephone: (416) 395-6188

Fax: (416) 395-0105

e-mail: JHALSTEAD@city.north-york.on.ca.)

(City Council also had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, communications from the following individuals submitting comments regarding the Toronto 2008 Olympic Bid:

(i) (February 26, 1998) from Mr. B. Grace, B & G Casting Associates;

(ii) (March 3, 1998) from Ms. L. Corbett, Executive Director, Toronto Environmental Alliance;

(iii) (March 3, 1998) from Mr. Tony O'Donohue, Toronto, Ontario; and

(iv) March 3, 1998) from Mr. Erkki Pukonen, President and Chief Executive Officer, City of Toronto Economic Development Corporation.)

Process to Develop Property Tax Implementation Plan

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, amended this Clause, by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer be requested to submit a report to the Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force, for its meeting scheduled to be held on March 23, 1998, outlining:

(1) the criteria that was used in defining industrial and commercial properties; and

(2) the feasibility of including an additional classification for small commercial businesses.")

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends that:

(1) the joint report (February 10, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer be adopted; and

(2) future reports prepared by City staff on the property tax implementation plan be addressed and forwarded to the Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force for consideration.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following joint report (February 10, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:

Purpose:

This report proposes a process and timeframe for the development and consideration of a property tax implementation plan by Council. The activities comprising the process address the various tax policies required of Council pursuant to the Fair Municipal Finance Act, 1997 (Nos. 1 and 2) - the Act.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The new Ontario Fair Assessment System and taxation reforms contained in the Act will affect property taxes paid by all residents and businesses throughout the City of Toronto. The process to study and analyze tax policy options does not require special funding beyond currently budgeted staff resources. The companion report contains an information and communication plan that identifies a budget for anticipated information dissemination activities and communications to the public.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) Council adopt the process outlined in this report to develop the taxation policies and administrative details necessary to support a tax implementation plan for its consideration;

(2) Council establish a task force or committee on taxation policy and approve the related terms of reference identified in this report; and

(3) the appropriate City of Toronto officials be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto.

Background:

The Act establishes that property taxes in Ontario starting in 1998 will be based on the new Ontario Fair Assessment System (OFAS). Municipal councils, as part of the significant taxation reforms contained in the legislation, are required to determine several new policies that affect property taxes in general as well as specific types of properties and taxpayers. The new decisions and policies that Council is required to make include the following.

In terms of establishing tax burdens among property classes, Council must:

(i) decide how to recoup, through taxation of the various property classes, tax revenues previously derived from the Business Occupancy Tax;

(ii) develop tax ratios to establish how the overall tax burden is distributed among property classes, while addressing the issue of current inequities between the residential class and all other property classes;

(iii) for each property class, decide whether to adopt the transition ratio (i.e. maintain existing tax burdens) or move closer to the provincially-determined range of tax ratios; and

(iv) set a tax rate for each separate property class; and decide whether to opt for a new multiple residential property class.

With respect to managing the tax burden within the commercial property class, Council must:

(i) decide how many bands of assessment to create within the commercial property class;

(ii) establish threshold values between these bands of assessment; and

(iii) determine the tax rate for each band.

In providing a program of tax relief for low-income seniors and low-income persons with disabilities from tax increases resulting from assessment, Council must:

(i) determine the form of relief it will provide;

(ii) determine the method of financing the relief program; and

(iii) if a tax deferral program is chosen, a by-law must be passed to define "low-income" and "persons with disabilities" to determine eligibility.

Other assessment and taxation matters for Council's review include:

(i) pass a by-law, if phase-in property options to tax changes related to assessment are proposed, that identifies the number of years over which tax changes are phased-in as well as the amount of allowable tax increases and decreases each year;

(ii) develop a policy and a by-law on assistance to eligible charitable and similar organizations in the form of tax rebates; and

(iii) decide whether to opt for regulations providing that, in specific cases, the current value of eligible land be based on its current use.

The policies and details required to address the above issues must be adopted prior to the issuance of the final tax bills expected in May or June.

Discussion:

The next two months represent a very intensive period of activity in the design and development of the necessary details to consider as part of a proposed tax implementation plan. The development of the tax plan involves a process that consists of the activities shown in Exhibit 1. The final tax rate approval date of May 13 already established as part of this year's budget process, requires that the tax plan be presented to Council in just over two months. A delay in Council's approval of the tax plan beyond mid-May will delay the issuing of final tax bills. In addition, the Minister of Finance has set May 15 as the date by which municipalities must adopt transition ratios. This adds further importance to Council's approval of the tax implementation plan no later than that date.

________

Exhibit 1

Process to Develop Tax Implementation Plan

Activity	Date
Report to Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee/Council - Task Force established	February 24/March 4
Develop and review tax policies (e.g. graduated commercial tax rates; phase-in plan; tax relief plan for low-income seniors and low-income persons with disabilities; assistance for charitable or similar organizations	March through April
Stakeholder consultations	April
Final assessment roll received	April 30
Task Force finalizes proposed plan	First week in May
Task Force reports to Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee	First week in May
Council approves tax plan and sets tax rates	Second week in May
Final tax bills distributed	End of May
Communication to tenants with tax decreases	Fall

In order to ensure that the proposed tax implementation plan is both reviewed in a timely manner and receives sufficient direction and input from Council and the public, a task force or committee of Council members should be established. The monthly meeting cycle of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee limits its ability to consider tax policy options on a timely basis. Alternatively, a task force/committee could meet more frequently in an informal basis and as well, could dedicate its time and focus on the specific issues as required. The task force approach is consistent with the motion adopted by Council at its meeting on February 4 and 5, 1998, which recommended the establishment of a task force to address tax policy matters.

The mandate of the task force/committee would be directed by the following terms of reference.

(1) To meet informally as a working reference group to provide political direction to finance officials in the preparation of the tax policies and administrative details pursuant to the Fair Municipal Finance Act, 1997 (Nos. 1 and 2) for Council's consideration, including:

(i) determine the tax burden for each property class by establishing its transition ratio;

(ii) develop tax rates for each property class (pending final budgetary considerations);

(iii) determine how the Business Occupancy tax will be replaced;

(iv) develop multi-tier tax rates for the commercial property class;

(v) establish tax assistance for eligible charities or similar organizations;

(vi) develop a phase-in plan of tax increases and decreases for each property class; and

(vii) develop a program of tax relief for low-income seniors and low-income persons with disabilities.

(2) To develop a process to consult interested stakeholders on tax policy proposals included in the tax implementation plan.

(3) To report back to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and recommend a tax implementation plan for its consideration, and subsequent submission to Council, no later than by the first week in May.

The finalization of the task force/committee's proposed plan is dependent upon the return of the final assessment roll. Any delay in the delivery of the final roll will equally delay the task force/committee, and subsequently Council, from considering a proposed tax implementation plan in a timely manner.

Conclusions:

The process identified in the report provides an action plan and timeframe in which to develop and review the details comprising a tax implementation plan. The timeframe in which to approve the tax plan is very limited, with final tax rates to be established by mid-May. A task force or committee is recommended to assist staff develop a proposed tax plan and to expedite the process.

Contact Names:

Ed Desousa 394-8205

Bill Wong 392-9148

Ed Zamparo 392-8641

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the following report (February 20, 1998) from the Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force:

Recommendations:

The Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force, on February 19, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee:

(1) the adoption of the report (February 10, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer respecting a Process to Develop a Property Tax Implementation Plan; and

(2) that future reports on the property tax implementation plan be addressed and forwarded to the Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force for consideration.

Background:

The Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force had before it a report (February 10, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer respecting a Process to Develop a Property Tax Implementation Plan.

(A copy of a communication dated February 20, 1998, from Nigel F. Byars, The Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants , was forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee meeting of February 24, 1998, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following communications from small business owners expressing opposition to the new property tax assessment and levy, submitted by Councillor Adams:

(i) (March 4, 1998) from Mr. Bill Reynolds, Manager, Real Estate Services, The UCS Group, operating under the banner of La Maison de la Presse Internationale;

(ii) (March 4, 1998) from Terry Ritcey Salon, and attaching a copy of a communication from the landlord, York Row Limited, indicating the proposed tax increase for 1998; and

(iii) (undated) from Mr. Sidney Chelsky, Careful Consulting Services.)

Reassessment and Tax Policy Information and

Communications Plan

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, amended this Clause by:

(1) amending Recommendation No. (3) of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee by:

(a) inserting in Recommendation No. (3)(i), after the words "make public", the words "and provide to the City of Toronto", and adding at the end thereof the words ", the boundaries of the homogeneous neighbourhood areas within which it applies regression analysis and the database upon which its regression analysis and other calculations are based";

(b) inserting in Recommendation No. (3)(ii), after the words "make public", the words "and provide to the City of Toronto";

(c) inserting in Recommendation No. (3)(iii), prior to the words "provide to the City of Toronto", the words "make public and", and adding thereto the words ", specifically including the comparability and interchangeability of the differing assessment methodologies used to determine the value of commercial buildings (e.g. the income method used to assess office towers versus the arms-length sales/regression analysis method used for strip retail)";

(d) adding the following new Recommendation No. (3)(iv):

"(iv) because many businesses and homeowners have found their tax assessment was based on faulty data; and because many businesses have found that their tax assessments were based on most lucrative use, rather than current use; and because even where the errors are obvious, there is no guarantee that the appeal will be completed before taxes are charged; and, because, some of the erroneous assessments would lead to taxes high enough to destroy the business in question, and force the homeowner to sell their home, Council request the Province of Ontario to undertake an arms-length review of the quality and accuracy of the current reassessment in the City of Toronto."; and

(e) adding at the end of Recommendation No. (3) of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee the words "and that the information be readable under Microsoft Access; include Property Class Code and Postal Codes, and each Member of Council receive a copy of the CD Rom version of the final assessment roll";

so that Recommendation No. (3) of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee shall now read as follows:

. "The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends that:

(3) the Property Assessment Division of the Ministry of Finance be requested to:

(i) make public and provide to the City of Toronto the valuation models used, neighbourhood by neighbourhood, to value residential properties in the City of Toronto, including any statistical regression equations that were used, the boundaries of the homogeneous neighbourhood areas within which it applies regression analysis and the database upon which its regression analysis and other calculations are based;

(ii) make public and provide to the City of Toronto the quality control studies that were used to evaluate the accuracy of these valuation models, including assessment-to-sale ratios, coefficients of variation and dispersion, and full listing of property characteristics for properties in the ratio studies (including addresses and roll number);

(iii) make public and provide to the City of Toronto, in as much detail as possible, information on the valuation models used to assess properties in the other property classes (multi-residential, commercial and industrial) along with results of accuracy tests used for these classes, specifically including the comparability and interchangeability of the differing assessment methodologies used to determine the value of commercial buildings (e.g. the income method used to assess office towers versus the arms-length sales/regression analysis method used for strip retail); and

(iv) because many businesses and homeowners have found their tax assessment was based on faulty data; and because many businesses have found that their tax assessments were based on most lucrative use, rather than current use; and because even where the errors are obvious, there is no guarantee that the appeal will be completed before taxes are charged; and, because, some of the erroneous assessments would lead to taxes high enough to destroy the business in question, and force the homeowner to sell their home, Council request the Province of Ontario to undertake an arms-length review of the quality and accuracy of the current reassessment in the City of Toronto;

and that the information be readable under Microsoft Access; include Property Class Code and Postal Codes, and each Member of Council receive a copy of the CD-ROM version of the final assessment roll."; and

(2) adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that City Council request the Province of Ontario to provide available assessment information necessary to determine assessments based on current value in current use.")

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends that:

(1) the joint report (February 10, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer be adopted;

(2) the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer circulate the preliminary estimated tax impact data to other City Departments and Agencies for input in determining the tax implementation plan, for example, the commercial and industrial data to the Economic Development Department, residential data to the Housing Department and commercial and industrial data to the Culture Officer and the Toronto Arts Council;

(3) the Property Assessment Division of the Ministry of Finance be requested to:

(i) make public the valuation models used, neighbourhood by neighbourhood, to value residential properties in the City of Toronto, including any statistical regression equations that were used;

(ii) make public the quality control studies that were used to evaluate the accuracy of these valuation models, including assessment-to-sale ratios, coefficients of variation and dispersion, and full listing of property characteristics for properties in the ratio studies (including addresses and roll number); and

(iii) provide to the City of Toronto, in as much detail as possible, information on the valuation models used to assess properties in the other property classes (multi-residential, commercial and industrial) along with the results of accuracy tests used for these classes.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following joint report (February 10, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:

Purpose:

This report outlines a proposed information and communication strategy that supports both a public education campaign that informs the public of the tax reform issues related to reassessment and a plan detailing the distribution of the preliminary estimated tax impacts on a property by property basis.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The reassessment and property taxation reforms affect all taxpayers in the city and represent major undertakings requiring Council to keep residents and businesses informed of the related key issues and Council's decisions and their subsequent impact on taxpayers. Funding in the amount of $250,000.00 will need to be budgeted for the information and communication activities contained in the report.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) Council approve the information and communication activities outlined in this report which are budgeted in the amount of $250,000.00;

(2) Council direct that printed copies of the preliminary estimated tax impact data be placed in all City of Toronto public libraries;

(3) Council approve the privacy and protection measures outlined in this report respecting the use of the CD version of the preliminary estimated tax impact data; and

(5) the appropriate City of Toronto officials be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto.

Background:

The Fair Municipal Finance Act, 1997 (Nos. 1 and 2) which was passed by the Ontario Legislature in 1997 introduces major reforms to the property assessment and taxation system in Ontario. The reforms require Council to make several important decisions about tax policies and tax rates in the next couple of months. This report identifies a number of activities that Council can pursue to communicate information specific to reassessment and taxation reform as part of keeping taxpayers informed.

Discussion:

In preparation of providing the public with details related to reassessment, staff responsible for developing tax policy proposals on property taxation reform, have worked with the corporate information and communication group to develop this information and communication strategy. The reassessment and tax policy information and communications plan consists of four phases.

Phase I - Interim Tax Bill Information Campaign:

The purpose of Phase I is to advise taxpayers in general, and more specifically businesses, of impending changes to the assessment and taxation system. This information has been communicated primarily through newspaper advertisements and inserts contained in the interim tax bills. The interim levy by-law was adopted by Council at its meeting on January 6 and 8, 1998.

Taxpayers have also been advised that the tax changes will not appear on the interim tax bill, but will be included in the final tax bill. However, businesses are advised that the interim tax bill is adjusted to raise more than 50 percent of last year's taxes (as is normally the practice) in order to replace foregone business occupancy tax revenues. Consequently, interim taxes for commercial and industrial properties are generally calculated as 50 percent of both 1997 realty and business taxes. Exhibit 1 provides an outline of the communication activities planned that comprise Phase I. The Phase I component of the plan has been completed.

Phase II - Preliminary Estimated Tax Impacts:

The activities that constitute Phase II are intended to disseminate information pertaining to the preliminary estimated tax impacts on a property by property basis. The estimated tax impacts are developed from the preliminary assessment data provided by the Province in early February. In addition to the public release of the tax estimates, information packages summarizing the estimated tax changes will be provided to Council and will also be made available to the public. The tax impacts represent initial estimates and are subject to change as Council reviews alternative implementation scenarios all of which are subject to revision pending final budgetary considerations and the final assessment roll which is to be delivered by April 30. The preliminary status of the estimates will be emphasized throughout the information and communication campaign.

The Province has authority and is required under the Assessment Act to establish the final assessment roll as a public record. The preliminary assessment data provided by the Province to the City combined with the tax estimates and potential impacts, results in creation of a record which has not been established under statute as a public record. This new record of information is subject to the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Accordingly, it is appropriate to balance the need for broad public dissemination of the information with reasonable measures to protect privacy.

The Director of Corporate Access and Privacy, Toronto Clerk's Department, has advised the Ontario Information and Privacy Commissioner (the Commissioner) of the proposed plans and privacy protection measures for disseminating the tax estimates and potential impacts. The Commissioner appreciates the privacy protective approach proposed by the City. However, this cannot be interpreted as a final decision related to any privacy complaints or access request appeals, which may be made and subsequently adjudicated by the Commissioner. Notwithstanding the result of an adjudication process, privacy is an issue of increasing public concern and a conservative approach appears warranted in these circumstances.

Phase II, as does the entire information and communications plan, supports the dissemination of data to inform the public of tax details and potential impacts in a manner that respects privacy. Only the assessment roll number or municipal address is required to allow property owners to identify the tax details and potential impact on each property. To protect privacy, the names of individual property owners will not be listed and electronic copies will not be publicly distributed. Unlike paper records, information disseminated in electronic form is subject to computer matching and subsequent uses beyond those for which the data was provided to the City. Printed copies of the estimated tax impact information will be made available in publicly accessible locations including municipal libraries and the existing civic centres.

Members of Council will be provided with a CD version of the detailed preliminary tax impact estimates for their own ward to facilitate liaison with constituents on the matter of tax reform. To protect privacy, Councillors are requested not to make copies of the CD version of the estimated preliminary tax data. Councillors are also requested to return the CD diskettes upon implementation of Council's tax plan later in the spring. Any requests for copies of the CD diskettes or data in an electronic format from the public are to be referred to the Director of Corporate Access and Privacy. This report recommends that Council approve these measures to protect the privacy of property owners.

The estimated tax data, albeit preliminary, ensures that taxpayers will be informed, particularly should they attend the information sessions conducted by the Province which commence in late February and continue throughout March. The assessment notices mailed in early February contain the new estimated current value assessments. Together, the assessment information from the Province and the estimated tax data from the City will provide taxpayers with sufficient information to know how they are affected by the reassessment.

A public consultation component has not been identified as part of the information and communication plan in this report per se. A public consultation process plays a vital role. However, it is considered appropriate that such a consultation process should be developed by the task force or committee that is recommended to be established in the companion report.

Phase III - Proposed Tax Implementation Plan:

Phase III informs the public of the details of the proposed tax implementation plan to be considered by Council. The information would be communicated in newspaper advertisements prior to Council's meeting to be scheduled in mid-May. The ads would provide a summary of the proposed tax rates, so taxpayers could calculate the impact of the plan on their property, as well as details about phase-in and tax relief programs. Copies of the summary information would also be made available through the civic centres. Details of Phase III activities are shown in Exhibit 3.

Phase IV - Final Tax Implementation Plan:

Phase IV advises taxpayers of the details of the property tax plan approved by Council. This information will be communicated primarily through a brochure. Council will also advise residential taxpayers of its tax relief plan for low-income seniors and low-income persons with disabilities and stipulate eligibility criteria and other program details. The brochure and information on a tax relief plan will be included with the final tax bill.

In the fall, Council will notify by way of general communications to landlords and tenants in apartment buildings, which experience more than a provincially established level of tax decrease, that rents effective January 1999 should be reduced as a result of reassessment. The City is required to send such notices under the new Tenant Protection Act. The activities that make-up Phase IV are outlined in Exhibit 4.

Conclusions:

The proposed information and communications strategy supports key Council actions to inform the public of the changes to their taxes resulting from reassessment and tax policy decisions. An estimated $250,000.00 is required to fund the planned activities (excluding notices to landlords and tenants which will be the subject of a later report).

Contact Names:

Ed Desousa 394-8205

Bill Wong 392-9148

Ed Zamparo 392-8641

_________

EXHIBIT 1

OUTLINE OF PHASE I - INTERIM TAX BILL INFORMATION CAMPAIGN ACTIVITIES

Information Product/Activity	Purpose/Content	Communication Date
Fact sheet for business property owners and business tenants	Concise, easy-to-understand fact sheet for businesses that describes how property owners and tenants will be affected by changes to tax policies. Intended to answer the most frequently asked questions.	January 2
Newspaper ad	To introduce major changes to assessment and taxation systems and to prepare taxpayers for interim tax bills.	January 15 - 18
Detailed material on internet website	A "Special News About Your Property Taxes" section included in the City of Toronto website. This will include the complete text of any current property tax newspaper ads, brochures or flyers.	January 19
Standard brochure for all taxpayers	Similar text that appears in the newspaper ad described above.	January 12 - 19
Newspaper ad	Newspaper ad will identify the due dates plus other related payment-related information for former area municipalities.	January 30 - 31

EXHIBIT 2

OUTLINE OF PHASE II - PRELIMINARY ESTIMATED TAX IMPACTS ACTIVITIES

Information Product/Activity	Purpose/Content	Communication Date
Preliminary Estimated Tax Impacts by Property	To make publicly available on a property by property basis the preliminary tax impact estimates. Printed copies provided to councillors and placed in public libraries and civic centres. Councillors will also be provided with a CD version to facilitate access to data and liaison with the public.	Available late February/early March
Councillors' Kit/Media Information	Members of Council and the media will be provided with an information package containing summary data that describes the magnitude of tax changes both across the city and for their individual wards. Councillors will also be provided with a copy of questions and answers and a background document explaining the changes to the assessment and taxation system. Much of this information will be posted on the City of Toronto website.	Available late February/early March

EXHIBIT 3

OUTLINE OF PHASE III - PROPOSED TAX IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ACTIVITIES

	Purpose/Content	Communication Date
Newspaper Ad	Advertisement containing a summary of the details of the proposed tax implementation plan.	Early May
Summary of Proposed Tax Plan	Brochure type document outlining details of proposed tax implementation plan available as information at civic centres.	Early May

EXHIBIT 4

OUTLINE OF PHASE IV - FINAL TAX IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ACTIVITIES

Information Product/Activity	Purpose/Content	Communication Date
Standard brochure for inclusion with final tax bill	A single brochure inserted with the final tax bill describing the details of Council's approved tax plan.	Late May
Newspaper Ad	Advertisement identifying due dates for final tax bill plus other payment-related information.	Late May
Tax Relief Brochure	Brief fact sheet advising residential taxpayers of eligibility criteria for tax relief mechanisms such as tax deferral and instructions on how to apply. To be included with final tax bill.	Late May
Notice to Landlords and Tenants	As required by the new Tenant Protection Act, the City is to send to landlords and tenants in prescribed residential buildings experiencing tax decreases greater than a prescribed amount advising of a rent reduction beginning in 1999 as a result of a tax decrease due to reassessment.	Late fall

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the following report (February 20, 1998) from the Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force:

Recommendations:

The Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force, on February 19, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee:

(1) the adoption of the report (February 10, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer respecting Reassessment and Tax Policy Information and Communications Plan;

(2) that the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer circulate the preliminary estimated tax impact data to other City departments and agencies for input in determining the tax implementation plan, for e.g., the commercial and industrial data to the Economic Development Department, residential data to the Housing Department and commercial and industrial data to the Culture Office and the Toronto Arts Council;

(3) that the Property Assessment Division of the Ministry of Finance be requested to:

(i) make public the valuation models used, neighbourhood by neighbourhood, to value residential properties in the City of Toronto, including any statistical regression equations that were used;

Background:

The Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force had before it a report (February 10, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer and Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer respecting a Reassessment and Tax Policy Information and Communications Plan.

Seniors Property Tax Credit

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, amended this Clause by adding thereto the following

"It is further recommended that the following motion be referred to the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer with a request that she submit a report thereon to the Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force as soon as possible, such report to address whether similar programs to those previously provided can be provided, whether or not an individual's home assessment increases:

Moved by Councillor Davis:

'That the foregoing Clause be amended by adding to Recommendation No. (1) embodied in the report dated February 10, 1998, from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, the words "and that such new program not provide benefits that are less than the benefits previously in existence".' ")

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (February 10, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:

Purpose:

To review the appropriateness of continuing the Seniors Tax Credit Program and the Tax Deferral Programs provided by the new City of Toronto's former local municipalities, given that assessment reform mandates that a new tax policy be developed and adopted by Council. The new policy, to be considered in May of this year, and must include reference to financial relief for low income seniors and low income persons with disabilities.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The former City of Toronto provided a $100.00 tax credit against the local portion of realty taxes of eligible seniors. In 1997, there were 4,138 eligible applicants, representing $413,800.00 in local taxes forgone and borne by all taxpayers in the City. Extending this program to an estimated 16,000 to 18,000 low income senior homeowners in the new City of Toronto would result in an estimated $1.2 million to $1.4 million in additional budget pressure for 1998.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the Seniors Tax Credit Program and the Seniors Tax Deferral Program be cancelled and a new tax policy respecting property tax relief for low income seniors and low income persons with disabilities be considered and adopted by Council pursuant to the Fair Municipal Finance Act, 1997. The new policy must be implemented with the final tax billing;

(2) residents be advised of the cancellation of the program as part of a forthcoming communication by the new City of Toronto respecting changes to the property assessment and taxation system, and that they be advised of the new procedure in applying for the new tax relief program; and

(3) the appropriate City of Toronto officials be given the necessary authority to give effect thereto.

Background:

The former City of Toronto was the only former local municipality with a program to provide a property tax credit in the amount of $100.00 against the City portion of realty taxes of eligible seniors. This program was initiated in 1974 through enactment of the Municipal Elderly Resident's Assistance Act, and subsequent City of Toronto by-law. In order to qualify, seniors must be 65 years of age or over, have owned and occupied a home in the City for the past five years, and must receive a monthly Guaranteed Income Supplement under the Old Age Security Act. In 1997, there were 4,138 eligible applicants in the City, for which a total of $413,800.00 was refunded as a credit against the final tax bill.

The former Cities of Etobicoke and York provided an alternate form of financial relief for low income seniors. Etobicoke offered a $600.00 annual tax deferral program, while York offered a $150.00 annual tax deferral program. The eligibility criteria was identical to that of the Toronto program, with the exception that the residency requirement was only three years. However, this program differed in that the amount deferred was treated as a lien against the property, to be repaid without interest when the property changed title. As of 1997, there were 159 liens in Etobicoke, with a total amount receivable of $285,800.00, and 43 liens registered in York, with the receivable being $25,800.00.

In addition to these programs, the Province of Ontario under its Ontario Pensioners Property Tax Assistance Act provides eligible seniors with a grant of up to $600.00 annually towards their property taxes, however, this grant would be offset by any municipal credit. Thus, eligible seniors would still receive up to the maximum $600.00 grant entitlement even if the Tax Credit program were cancelled.

In each case, the application form for the Tax Credit or Tax Deferral program must be submitted each year by the 31st of December in order to obtain the relief. At this time, applications have already been received for the 1998 taxation year, however, none have been processed as this is usually done as part of the final tax billing.

Discussion:

Based on Statistics Canada's 1995 Income data, it is estimated that, in the new City of Toronto there are approximately 195,000 owner-occupant households where the owner is 65 years of age or older. Of these, it estimated that there may be approximately 16,000 to 18,000 potentially eligible households who meet the criteria of a household income from under $15,000-$25,000 per year, based on extrapolation of historic experience. While the definition of low income may be the subject of debate, and given the foregoing, it is estimated that to extend the $100.00 Tax Credit Program to eligible seniors may necessitate funding in the range of $1.6 million to $1.8 million from the new City of Toronto.

With respect to tax relief for low income seniors, the Fair Municipal Finance Act mandates that the council of a municipality must pass a by-law providing for the "deferrals or cancellation of, or other relief in respect of, all or part of assessment-related tax increases on property in the residential/farm property class for owners who are or whose spouses are" low income seniors as defined in the by-law, or low-income persons with disabilities as defined in the by-law. The deferral or cancellation of the assessment related increases must be effected beginning in the 1998 taxation year, with the deferral or cancellation appearing in the final tax bill.

As the financial impact of property assessment and tax reform for seniors is not known at this time, it may be prudent to cancel the aforementioned programs, since a new tax policy as part of the tax implementation plan will be considered by Council in May of this year.

Conclusions:

The former City of Toronto was the only municipality offering a $100.00 tax credit refund to low income seniors. In 1997, approximately 4,138 eligible applicants received refunds totalling $413,800.00 in funding by the City. It is estimated that, to extend this program to the 16,000 to 18,000 potentially eligible seniors in the new City of Toronto would require new funding in the range of $1.6 million to $1.8 million. The cities of Etobicoke and York offered an interest free tax deferral program, however, the amount deferred was taken as a lien against the property.

Given the impending changes to the property assessment and taxation system, it is recommended that the existing Tax Credit and Tax Deferral programs be cancelled. A new policy, which will include consideration for the deferral or cancellation of assessment related tax increases for low income seniors and persons with disabilities, and any other mechanism for financial relief as deemed appropriate for such a policy, must be considered and adopted by Council as part of its Current Value Assessment responsibilities.

Contact Name:

E. DeSousa, Tax Revenue, telephone: 394-8324; fax: 394-5555

A. Gupta, Budget and Financial Planning: 392-8071; fax 392-3649

W. Wong, Tax Revenue: 394-9148; fax 392-3649

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the following report (February 20, 1998) from the Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force:

Recommendation:

The Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force, on February 19, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee the adoption of the report (February 10, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer respecting Seniors Property Tax Credit.

The Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force reports having requested the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer to provide the following to the Task Force:

(a) an estimate of the extent of assessment-related tax increases on property owners who are low income seniors or low income persons with disabilities;

(b) a report on the effect of various seniors' tax relief or tax deferral measures on other taxpayers;

(d) a report on fraud-prevention measures that may be necessary for seniors' tax relief programs.

Background:

The Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force had before it a report (February 10, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer respecting a Seniors Property Tax Credit.

________

At the meeting of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee on February 24, 1998, Councillor Pantalone, Ward 20 - Trinity-Niagara, declared his interest in the foregoing matter in that his father has been a recipient of the $100.00 Seniors Property Tax Credit.

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, an information notice to residents from the former City of Etobicoke on how to pay the 1998 interim tax bill and referring to the discontinuance of the tax deferral for senior citizens, submitted by Councillor Kinahan.)

(Councillor Pantalone, at the meeting of City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, declared his interest in the foregoing Clause, in that his father has been a recipient of the $100.00 Seniors Property Tax Credit.)

1998 Operating and Capital Budgets

- Revised Meeting Schedule

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, amended this Clause:

(1) to provide that the special Scarborough Community Council Meeting to be held on Monday, March 23, 1998, to review the Capital Budget, be held at 7:00 p.m. instead of 6:00 p.m.; and

(2) by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that the meetings of the Budget Committee which are scheduled to be held on March 9, 10, 11 and 12, 1998, be located in Committee Room 'A', at Metro Hall.")

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (February 23, 1998) from the Chair of the Budget Committee:

Recommendations:

(1) that my earlier report (February 19, 1998) be adopted;

(2) that, in order to accommodate the Special Meetings of Council in Committee of the Whole on April 14 and 15 to hear deputations from the public, the regular Council meeting scheduled on Wednesday, April 15 be rescheduled to begin on Thursday, April 16;

(3) that, in order to accommodate the Special Meetings of City Council on April 28 through May 1 to consider the 1998 Operating and Capital Budgets:

(a) the regular business meeting of the Budget Committee on Tuesday, April 28 be cancelled; and

(b) the regular meetings of the Community Councils on Wednesday, April 29 and Thursday, April 30 be rescheduled to Wednesday, May 6 and Thursday, May 7.

Discussion:

In my earlier report (February 19, 1998), I submitted on behalf of senior management and the Budget Committee, a revised Operating and Capital Budget schedule, necessitated by this year's unprecedented budget pressures. In order to accommodate the revised schedule, I would request that Council agree to the cancellation and rescheduling of certain meetings as outlined in the recommendations above.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the following report (February 19, 1998) from the Chair of the Budget Committee:

Recommendations:

(1) That the attached meeting schedule be circulated immediately to Members of Council;

(2) that the meetings of the Committee of the Whole of Council scheduled the week of March 2, 1998, be cancelled and that Council concur with this action at its next meeting;

(3) that the attached meeting schedule be adopted and that the necessary arrangements be made where meetings conflict with previously scheduled Committee meetings.

Discussion:

At its meeting on February 4, 1998, City Council adopted a meeting schedule for the completion of the 1998 Operating and Capital Budgets. However, due to the unusual circumstances of this year's financial situation and the significance of the budgetary pressures facing the new City, it is necessary to amend the earlier meeting schedule.

Senior management and the Budget Committee members have been consulted on the attached revised schedule. The schedule is necessarily ambitious and we respectfully request the cooperation and the concurrence of Members of Council with the changes proposed.

In order to accommodate the revised schedule, it will be necessary to cancel the upcoming meetings of the Committee of the Whole of City Council, scheduled the week of March 2. As well, it will be necessary for Council to agree to changes to other regularly scheduled meetings. We are also requesting that special meetings be called, including special meetings of the Community Councils the week of March 23, to enable public deputations on the Capital Budget. Given that the Standing Committees meet earlier in the day the week of March 23, we would ask for the cooperation of the respective Chairs and Members in ensuring that those Members who need to attend the special Community Council meetings scheduled later that day, are in a position to comfortably do so.

Lastly, I would like to thank Members of Council and staff for their cooperation and assistance with respect to the challenging task ahead of us.

Budget Committee

1998 Capital and Operating Budgets

Committee Meeting Schedule

(I) Week of March 9 - Special Meetings of the Budget Committee (Respecting Capital and Operating Budgets)

Monday, March 9: 9:30 a.m.

Tuesday, March 10: 9:30 a.m.

Wednesday, March 11: 9:30 a.m.

Thursday, March 12: 9:30 a.m.

(II) Week of March 23 - Review by Standing Committees at Their Regularly-scheduled Meetings

(III) Week of March 23 - (Special) Community Council Meetings - Capital Budget

Monday, March 23: 6:00 p.m.:

(1) Scarborough Community Council

(Budget Committee Attendees: Balkissoon; Jakobek; Kinahan)

(2) East York Community Council

(Budget Committee Attendees: Chow; Ootes; Shiner)

Wednesday, March 25: 6:00 p.m.:

(3) York Community Council

(Budget Committee Attendees: Chow; Ootes; Shiner)

(4) Etobicoke Community Council

(Budget Committee Attendees: Balkissoon; Jakobek; Kinahan)

Thursday, March 26: 2:00 p.m.:

(5) North York Community Council

(Budget Committee Attendees: All)

Friday, March 27: 2:00 p.m.:

(6) Toronto Community Council

(Budget Committee Attendees: All)

(IV) Week of April 13 - Deputations at Committee of the Whole of City Council

Tuesday, April 14: 9:30 a.m. - Special Budget Committee Meeting to

Confirm and Transmit Budgets

Tuesday, April 14: 1:30 p.m. - Special Strategic Policies and Priorities

Committee Meeting to Transmit Budgets

Tuesday, April 14: 2:00 p.m. - Committee of the Whole of City Council

Wed., April 15: 9:30 a.m. - Committee of the Whole of City Council

(V) Week of April 27 - Special Meetings of City Council for the Purposes of Consideration/approval of the 1998 Operating and Capital Budgets

Tuesday, April 28: 9:30 a.m.

Wednesday, April 29: 9:30 a.m.

Thursday, April 30: 9:30 a.m.

Friday, May 1: 9:30 a.m.

Acquisition for a Multi-Service Community Facility -

495 Sherbourne Street (Ward 25 - Don River)

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget Committee embodied in the following transmittal letter (February 18, 1998) from the Budget Committee:

Recommendations:

The Budget Committee on February 17, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, and Council, that:

(1) the report (January 29, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services be deferred and considered during the Capital Budget process;

(2) the Mayor be requested to write to the President of the Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC) advising that Council continues to be interested in the acquisition of the subject property, considers it a high priority, requests that it not be sold to anyone else until such time as it has made its final decision, (which is expected to take place shortly), and requests that the ORC respond immediately to the City's request;

(3) the Chief Administrator Officer and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer submit a comprehensive report on both the capital and operating costs of this proposal and how it can be dealt with within the context of the five-year budget plan; and

(4) the Commissioner of Corporate Services report on the:

(a) negotiations of the lane closings, east of Bay Street; and

(b) details of the appraised values of the property and the lanes.

Background:

The Budget Committee on February 17, 1998 had before it a letter of transmittal (February 16, 1998) from the Corporate Services Committee advising that the Committee on February 16, 1998 recommended to the Budget Committee, and Council, the adoption of the report (January 29, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services regarding the acquisition for a multi-service community facility at 495 Sherbourne Street.

The following persons appeared before the Budget Committee in connection with this matter:

- Councillor Pam McConnell, Don River;

- Councillor Ron Moeser, Scarborough Highland Creek;

- Councillor Doug Holyday, Markland-Centennial; and

- Councillor Jack Layton, Don River.

________

(Transmittal letter dated February 16, 1998, addressed to the

Budget Committee from

the Corporate Services Committee)

Recommendation:

The Corporate Services Committee on February 16, 1998, recommended to the Budget Committee, and Council, the adoption of the report (January 29, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services.

Background:

The Corporate Services Committee on February 16, 1998, had before it a report (January 29, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services recommending that:

(1) the acquisition of 495 Sherbourne Street from Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC) in the amount of $2.5 million be approved, subject to the terms and conditions as set out in this report;

(2) the City Solicitor, in consultation with the Director, Property Services (Toronto Region), prepare and have executed an Agreement of Purchase and Sale with ORC, incorporating a closing date in the first quarter of 1999 and the terms and conditions elaborated in the body of this report, other terms and conditions deemed necessary by the Commissioner of Corporate Services and prepared in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor;

(3) the City Solicitor complete this real estate transaction and pay to ORC or to whomever may be entitled to receive it, the sum of $2.5 million and pay any expenses incurred for the closing of the real property transaction, including the payment of Land Transfer Tax and General Service Tax (GST) in the estimated amount of $221,500.00;

(4) the appropriate Civic Official be instructed to furnish the necessary legal description and prepare a survey suitable for the closing;

(5) the Commissioner of Corporate Services be instructed to continue to pursue all opportunities for additional amounts owed by the Province to the City which could be utilized to be set-off against the purchase price of 495 Sherbourne Street and that these opportunities be presented to City Council for approval; and

(6) the lands being acquired be placed under the jurisdiction of the Director, Property Services (Toronto Region), on closing, for property management/maintenance purposes, until such time as the lands are to be developed as a multi-service community facility and that the lands be operated on an interim basis as a parking lot with the revenue being utilized to offset the cost of acquisition.

Councillor Pam McConnell, Don River, appeared before the Corporate Services Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

_______

(Report dated January 29, 1998, addressed to the

Corporate Services Committee from the

Commissioner of Corporate Services)

Purpose:

To have City Council approve the acquisition of the property municipally known as 495 Sherbourne Street with the closing to be in the first quarter of 1999. This proposed acquisition was approved in principle by the former City of Toronto Council on December 8, 1997.

Financial Implications:

Acquisition price of $2.5 million plus Land Transfer Tax, GST and related closing costs in the estimated amount of $221,500.00. A set-off of approximately $1.15 million from the East of Bay lane closings is to be applied against the purchase price with other set-off opportunities to be pursued up to closing and failing other opportunities being identified, the balance of the funds being provided in the 1999 Capital Budget.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the acquisition of 495 Sherbourne Street from Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC) in the amount of $2.5 million be approved, subject to the terms and conditions as set out in this report;

(4) the appropriate Civic Official be instructed to furnish the necessary legal description and prepare a survey suitable for the closing;

(6) the lands being acquired be placed under the jurisdiction of the Director, Property Services (Toronto Region), on closing for property management/maintenance purposes, until such time the lands are to be developed as a multi-service community facility and that the lands be operated on an interim basis as a parking lot with the revenue being utilized to offset the cost of acquisition.

Background:

The former Toronto City Council, at its meeting held on December 8, 1997, endorsed in principle the acquisition of 495 Sherbourne Street and instructed the Commissioner, Corporate Services, to report back to the new City Council as early as possible in January, 1998 for approval to acquire 495 Sherbourne Street and secondly, that staff explore all financing options to acquire the property, including a set-off with the Province of Ontario for monies owed to the Municipality.

St. James Town is a community that has experienced a 23 percent increase in population over the past ten years, even though no new housing has been built. This increase has exacerbated the pressure on community services and facilities for area residents. In reaffirming the need for additional and improved community services and facilities in St. James Town, the former City Council had adopted a number of reports. On April 1, 1996, it approved a motion to indicate Municipal interest in 495 Sherbourne Street for the provision of community facilities and open space and a process to coordinate the St. James Town community needs assessment and the acquisition of 495 Sherbourne Street. On July 2, 1996, (Clause No. 26 of Report No. 11 of The Neighbourhoods Committee) it adopted a report from the Commissioner of Planning and Development as the St. James Town Community Services Strategic Plan. One recommendation in this report was that immediate discussion commence with the Province around the acquisition of 495 Sherbourne Street for community services purposes. On September 22, 1997, it approved the "St. James Town 2000: A Community Action Plan" (Clause No. 49 of Report No. 21 of The Executive Committee). The report recommended that the Commissioner, Corporate Services, re-initiate negotiations with the Province for the acquisition of Parcel E municipally known as 495 Sherbourne Street, located at the northeast corner of Sherbourne Street and Wellesley Street East, for the purpose of a multi-service community facility for St. James Town.

One of the key initiatives approved by the former Council is the establishment of a multi-service community facility which would serve as a focal point for the community offering a full range of services. The community facility would have an approximate size of 65,810 square feet and contain three main components - a recreation centre (50,090 square feet), a neighbourhood library (10,000 square feet) and a 52-space daycare centre (5,720 square feet). Other initiatives proposed in the Community Action Plan include: a Parks and Open Space Improvement Strategy to provide for improved parkland and open spaces within St. James Town; a Community Planning Review to look at planning mechanisms to restrict future residential development in the St. James Town area until sufficient community services and facilities are in place; together with a Building Conservation Strategy to preserve the high-rise rental stock in the area.

In order to implement the various initiatives contained within the Community Action Plan, the former Council has approved a capital works program of $11.313 million to build the multi-service community facility, including the recreation centre and daycare centre components as part of the 5-year capital budget submission for Community Services. As well, $60,000.00 will be included in the City's 1998 Capital Budget to begin the feasibility study and design work for the new community facility. The former Council also approved $3,376,800.00 as part of the Toronto Public Library Board's 1999 capital works projections for the construction of the library component of the facility. None of the approved funding for capital costs was allocated for land acquisition costs.

Establishment of the key initiatives was largely a result of resident input received through the St. James Town Community Facilities Working Group process. This Community Working Group was created to formulate and guide a revitalization strategy for St. James Town. The group has met six times in 1997 and will be meeting again in February 1998 with additional community members. Since the adoption of the St. James Town Community Service Strategic Plan, community interest respecting the initiatives has increased significantly. It appears that residents are feeling optimistic that improvements will finally be made in their community. As such, some partnerships between the City, residents, service agencies as well as property owners are now emerging as implementation of the community action plan is underway.

Comments:

After reviewing the St. James Town catchment area, City staff and Community Working Committees decided that 495 Sherbourne Street was the most suitable and only practical site for the proposed multi-service facility.

The site characteristics are as follows:

Location: Northeast corner of Sherbourne Street and Wellesley Street East

Site Area: 1.756 acres (76,491 sq.ft.) approximately

Zoning: R3 Z2 (42,315 sq. ft.)

R3 Z1 (34,176 sq. ft.)

Official Plan: High Density Residential Area

Legal Description: Parts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, Reference Plan 64R-14978, subject to a right-of-way

The site, shown in heavy outline on Map 1, is owned by the Province of Ontario under the jurisdiction of the Ontario Realty Corporation. It is presently used as a paved public parking lot to service the immediate area including the Wellesley Central Hospital facilities located at the northwest corner of Sherbourne Street and Wellesley Street East. There is also an old two-storey boarded-up brick house on the site that was previously used by the Princess Margaret Hospital.

Due to the Provincial Government's reorganization of the health facilities in Ontario, the Wellesley Central Hospital, located on the opposite side of Sherbourne Street to 495 Sherbourne Street, is affected by the decision of the Health Services Restructuring Commission's (HSRC) recommendation to transfer Wellesley Central Hospital's programs and services to St. Michael's Hospital. The hospital site will alternatively be used for an ambulatory care centre for AIDS/HIV services among others.

The Wellesley Central Hospital appealed the recommendations of the HSRC, but the Ontario Court has ruled in favour of the Commission. As a result, the hospital will eventually close, reducing the requirement for parking at 495 Sherbourne Street. Therefore, due to the City's interest in the site and ORC's polling results that showed little interest in the site at this time, ORC agreed to re-initiate negotiations with City staff respecting the sale of the site to the City.

Both ORC and City staff decided that negotiations for the sale of 495 Sherbourne Street would be contingent on having appraisal reports prepared by outside qualified appraisers in order to establish the current market value of the site. Upon analysis of the site's development potential, both ORC and City staff have, in consultation with their respective appraisers, agreed that the fair and reasonable value of the property is $2.5 million on a clean site basis.

Terms and Conditions of Purchase:

City and ORC staff have agreed that the transaction is subject to the following basic terms and conditions:

Acquisition Price: $2.5 million payable on closing subject to usual real estate adjustments plus Land Transfer Tax and GST.

Environmental Testing: Standard ORC policy is to sell its properties on a clean basis. ORC staff have advised that they will be pursuing the preparation of a Phase 1 Environmental Study and, should the results of this study indicate potential contamination, a detailed Phase 2 Audit will be conducted. ORC will share these studies with City staff in order to ensure that the environmental condition of the site is known prior to closing.

Completion Date: ORC staff have advised that they are prepared to close this transaction in late 1998 or early 1999.

Leaseback Option: The City and ORC have agreed that, if necessary, the site will be leased back to ORC at market rent so that ORC can maintain the surface parking lot until the parking lot is no longer required by Wellesley Hospital or until June 30, 1999, whichever is earlier.

Possession Date: The City will receive vacant possession of the site either on closing or upon termination of the leaseback which will be no later than June 30, 1999.

Financing Options:

When City Council endorsed this acquisition on December 8, 1997, it requested staff to explore all financing options to acquire this site as soon as possible, including a set-off with the Province of Ontario for monies owed to the Municipality. Staff have explored the opportunities available and there are currently two situations where the Province will owe monies to the City.

The first is a lane closing transaction to facilitate the East of Bay Development on the east side of Bay Street between Wellesley Street West and Breadalbane Avenue. It is anticipated that this transaction will be completed in approximately three to four months and ORC staff have agreed that the compensation for these lanes which is currently estimated to be in the amount of approximately $1.15 million, together with interest at the rate of prime plus 1 percent from the closing of the lane conveyance to the closing of 495 Sherbourne Street, can be set-off against the acquisition cost of 495 Sherbourne Street.

The second situation is an ongoing legal action respecting compensation due the City as a result of the Provincial cancellation of the social housing program. This action is currently ongoing and Provincial staff are reluctant to agree to any set-off pending the resolution of this matter. It may also be that the compensation will be allocated for housing purposes.

It is imperative to ensure City ownership of this site as soon as possible, but possession of the site is not required until 1999. There currently appears to be only one opportunity to set-off funds to be received from the Province against this acquisition. However, during the balance of 1998 other opportunities including the resolution of the social housing action may be presented. Accordingly, the most prudent action would be to close this transaction in the first quarter of 1999 on a date to be mutually agreed by ORC and the Commissioner of Corporate Services. The Agreement of Purchase and Sale would include provisions to set-off the funds, including interest, flowing from the East of Bay lane closings and a further provision that additional set-offs be considered up to closing of the transaction as opportunities are presented. These opportunities would, of course, be presented to City Council for approval. Should no further satisfactory set-off opportunities be identified the balance of the funds required to acquire this property would be included in the 1999 Capital Budget submission.

Conclusion:

The former City of Toronto Council endorsed the acquisition of 495 Sherbourne Street which showed its commitment to establish a multi-service community facility in St. James Town to serve the needs of the St. James Town community.

The purchase price of 495 Sherbourne Street as set out in this report is considered fair and reasonable on the assumption that the lands are not impacted from an environmental perspective. There is no other suitable development site for the St. James Town multi-service community facility. Failure to acquire 495 Sherbourne Street will result in the loss of the only opportunity to solve St. James Town's long standing community needs. Agreement to purchase the property should be finalized now, with provision for funding to be resolved prior to the 1999 Capital Budget submission.

Contact Name:

Peter Aziz, Telephone No. 392-1856, Fax No. 392-1880, E-Mail - paziz@city.toronto.on.ca (cs98002.wpd)

________

Councillor Pam McConnell, Don River, appeared before the Corporate Services Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

(Map 1 referred to in the foregoing report was forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee for its meeting on February 24, 1998, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

Fire Vehicle Standardization - 1998 Interim Capital Budget

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendation of the Budget Committee embodied in the following transmittal letter (February 18, 1998) from the Budget Committee:

Recommendation:

The Budget Committee on February 17, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, and Council, the adoption of the report (February 3, 1998) from the Fire Chief subject to the funds in the amount of $18,870.00 for the alteration of the two pumper vehicles being allocated from the Fire Department's 1998 Operating Budget.

Background:

The Budget Committee on February 17, 1998 had before it a letter of transmittal (February 11, 1998) from the Emergency and Protective Services Committee advising that the Committee on February 10, 1998 recommended to the Budget Committee, and Council, the adoption of the report dated February 3, 1998 from the Fire Chief.

________

(Transmittal letter dated February 11, 1998, addressed to the

Budget Committee from the

Emergency and Protective Services Committee)

Recommendations:

The Emergency and Protective Services Committee on February 10, 1998, recommended to the Budget Committee, and Council, the adoption of the report dated February 3, 1998, from the Fire Chief, wherein it is recommended that:

"(1) the amount of $170,130.00 be deleted inclusive of GST from the $189,000.00 requested in the 1998 Capital Budget, for the conversion of the aerial ladder vehicles; and

(2) the balance of $18,870.00 be requested for the alteration of two pumper vehicles under construction by General Safety Equipment of White Bear, Minnesota. The alterations to the design will allow for the continuation of the multi-purpose rescue/pumper concept of the Department in 1998."

Background:

The Emergency and Protective Services Committee had before it a report (February 3, 1998) from the Fire Chief regarding Fire Vehicle Standardization - 1998 Interim Capital Budget.

_______

(Report dated February 3, 1998, addressed to the

Emergency and Protective Services Committee

from the Fire Chief)

Purpose:

The Fire Station Location Study will assist the Department in the future, in determining appropriate vehicle locations across the City. Staff will conduct a further review upon completion of the Fire Station Location Study and the re-distribution of apparatus, pending Council approval.

Background:

The Budget Committee deferred the Urgent Capital request, pending further information on vehicle standardization for the Department.

Staff have reviewed the possibility of redesigning three aerial ladder vehicles presently under contract to Smeal Fire Apparatus Limited of Snyder, Nebraska. Presently, a number of fire station locations in the former City of Toronto will not accommodate a rear mounted Quint Aerial device, due to the overhead door opening heights. Significant station renovations or apparatus bay additions would be required to house the larger vehicles.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that the amount of $170,130.00 be deleted inclusive of GST from the $189,000.00 requested in the 1998 Capital Budget, for the conversion of the aerial ladder vehicles.

It is also recommended that the balance of $18,870.00 be requested for the alteration of two pumper vehicles under construction by General Safety Equipment of White Bear, Minnesota. The alterations to the design will allow for the continuation of the multi-purpose rescue/pumper concept of the Department in 1998.

Justification

Fort Gary Fire Industries of Winnipeg, Manitoba is currently building six pumpers. Staff have confirmed that five vehicles can be altered within the terms of the contract price to accommodate the multi-purpose rescue pumper concept, with the sixth vehicle almost completed as specified in the original contract.

Contact Name:

Alan Speed, 395-7241

(A copy of Appendix A, referred to in the foregoing report, was forwarded to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Emergency and Protective Services Committee meeting of February 10, 1998, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

Acquisition of Replacement Ambulance

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

Recommendations:

The Budget Committee on February 17, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, and Council:

(1) the adoption of the recommendations of the Emergency and Protective Services Committee wherein it is recommended that the report (January 27, 1998) from the Commissioner, Toronto Ambulance, be adopted;

(2) that the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer report on the feasibility of funding these vehicles from the existing reserves for vehicle replacement;

(3) that the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer report on the savings that can be achieved on ambulance vehicle maintenance; and further that the report also include details of the extra costs required as a result of the hospital restructuring; and

(4) that the Province be requested to confirm the cost of transferring patients between hospitals will be paid by OHIP and until such time as confirmation is received, the City be reimbursed for the cost of 12 ambulances.

Background:

Councillor Ron Moeser, Scarborough Highland Creek, appeared before the Budget Committee in connection with this matter.

________

(Transmittal letter dated February 11, 1998, addressed to

the Budget Committee from

the Emergency and Protective Services Committee)

Recommendations:

The Emergency and Protective Services Committee on February 10, 1998, recommended to the Budget Committee, and Council, the adoption of the report dated January 27, 1998, from the Commissioner, Toronto Ambulance, wherein it is recommended that:

"(1) the Emergency and Protective Services Committee approve the Department's request for the acquisition of 24 ambulances through the Ministry of Health;

(2) the cost of the acquisition inclusive of the purchase of the vehicles and any conversion charges not exceed $1.948 million;

(3) the Budget Committee be requested to recommend pre-authorization of the amount; and

(4) the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto."

Background:

The Emergency and Protective Services Committee had before it a report (January 27, 1998) from the Commissioner, Toronto Ambulance, regarding the acquisition of replacement ambulances.

_______

(Report dated January 27, 1998, addressed to the

Emergency and Protective Services Committee from the

Commissioner of the Toronto Ambulance)

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to seek the approval of Toronto Council to proceed with the purchase of twenty-four (24) new ambulance vehicles in 1998, through a bulk order with the Ministry of Health. These vehicles are necessary to ensure the continued service and mechanical integrity of the ambulance vehicle fleet.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The funding source for this purchase will be the Department's 1998 Operating Budget, in the amount of $1.948 million. The Department faces difficulty with the timing of the purchase since it is our understanding that the budget approval process is not scheduled to be completed until April 15, 1998. The funds the Department has allocated for this purchase represent a portion of an increase it is requesting over its 1997 approved operating budget.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the Emergency and Protective Services Committee approve the Department's request for the acquisition of 24 ambulances through the Ministry of Health;

(2) the cost of the acquisition inclusive of the purchase of the vehicles and any conversion charges not exceed $1.948 million;

(3) the Budget Committee be requested to recommend pre-authorization of the amount; and

(4) the appropriate City Officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Toronto Ambulance deploys an emergency fleet consisting of 130 ambulances, of various ages and usage. Because of the extremely high volumes of emergency medical calls in Toronto, the ambulances undergo extensive travel, and a great deal of wear and tear. As such, the Ministry of Health requires that there be regular, standardized maintenance and service programs carried out to so as ensure the ambulances' safe and reliable operation.

In addition, the Department, at the direction of the Ministry, maintains a replacement cycle which allows for the scheduled replacement of aging vehicles. "Age" is determined by years, or by kilometrage (or in some cases by state of repair). When an ambulance reaches either sixty months or 180,000 kilometres, whichever comes first, it is deemed necessary to be replaced. It should be noted that this replacement cycle is longer than the cycle which existed up until 1993, when it was forty-eight months, or 120,000 kilometres. The replacement cycle was increased in that year, in the face of increasing budgetary constraints, and in an attempt to reduce operating costs.

To not replace the ambulances will lead to situations where there will be increasing numbers of vehicle breakdowns, which will likely result in incidents where there are delays in the delivery of emergency pre-hospital care. This could result in unnecessary patient suffering and, in some cases, unnecessary mortality. In addition, non-replacement of ambulances will result in higher maintenance and repair costs, to the point where operating ambulances will be cost-inefficient

Over the last several years, Toronto Ambulance has been replacing its ambulance vehicles at the rate of approximately 24 - 30 per year. Prior to 1992, the cost associated with their purchase came out of its annual operating budgets. However, since 1992 all of the Department's ambulances had been supplied directly by the Ministry of Health. The cost of the vehicles had been borne entirely by the Ministry, and was not captured as part of either the Ministry's or Metro's portion of (roughly equal) funding of Toronto's ambulance service. This translated into millions of dollars in budgetary savings over that period of time.

The provincial downloading of ambulance services to municipalities has resulted in a funding problem which had not been anticipated. The Ministry of Health has announced that it is no longer going to supply ambulances to Toronto every year. This is a downloading cost over which the Department has no control (a similar downloading pressure is that of approximately $500 thousand per year worth of equipment and supplies that the Ministry had also provided at no cost to Toronto since 1992).

However, the Ministry has approached us asking that we participate with them in a joint bulk purchase of ambulances for 1998. As such, the cost for 24 replacement ambulances will be $1.948 million in 1998, which will be lower than the price we will have to pay should we purchase the vehicles ourselves. Based on the service necessity of replacing the vehicles, as well as the purchase savings which will be realized by the city, we have agreed, - subject to Council approval, - to participate with the Ministry. The price, though, is contingent on receiving delivery of the ambulances by March 31, 1998, with payment to the supplier to follow within 10 days thereafter. If delivery is not accepted by March 31, 1998, the cost of purchasing the ambulances will go up by two percent per month, for every month of delay.

The Department's original 1998 Operating Budget submission was prepared in July, 1997, for the Metropolitan Toronto government. It was premised on maintaining a 'zero' percent increase over the 1997 budget amount. In response to downloading and other financial pressures, though, it has been forced to seek an increase in it's 1998 Operating Budget request. Part of the increase is necessary to permit the purchase of the 24 replacement ambulances.

Council is not expected to confer final approval of the City's operating budgets until April 15, 1998. This will fall after the date the Department will be able to purchase replacement vehicles at its presently estimated price. Therefore, based on the savings which will be available, the Department seeks the approval of Council for this item in advance of the regularly scheduled 1998 budget approval process.

Conclusions:

Toronto Ambulance must replace 24 of its existing ambulances in 1998. This is part of a normal annual cycle of replacement of ambulance vehicles, and is necessary to ensure that there is no compromise to the levels of emergency care and medical transportation which is currently being provided to the citizens of Toronto.

The Department has not purchased any of its own ambulances since 1992. The ambulances supplied at no cost by the Ministry of Health since that time have proved of assistance to the financial circumstances of both the Department and Toronto.

The Department faces two difficulties related to replacing ambulances. First, provincial downloading of ambulance services to municipalities has placed the Department in a position where it must request a budget increase in 1998 in order to purchase ambulances which were supplied at no cost by the province in previous years. This is a cost above and beyond the department's regular operating expenses, and is something over which it has had no control.

Second, to optimize the purchase price of replacing 24 ambulances this year, the Department must have approval to spend $1.9 million prior to March 31,1998. However, this date is in advance of the presently scheduled budget approval process time frames. Failure to secure approval by this date will result in an increase to the purchase price, which will also exceed the Department's originally requested budget increase amount for this item.

Contact Name:

Ron Kelusky, Director, EMS Operations, 397-9240, Fax: 392-2115.

High-Speed Network for the City of Toronto

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget Committee embodied in the transmittal letter (February 18, 1998) from the Budget Committee.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports, for the information of Council, having noted that the Corporate Services Committee requested the Chief Financial Officer to submit a report directly to Council for its meeting scheduled to be held on March 4, 1998, clarifying the benefits to be achieved by implementing this high-speed fibre network.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following transmittal letter (February 18, 1998) from the Budget Committee:

Recommendations:

The Budget Committee on February 17, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, and Council:

(1) the adoption of the recommendations of the Corporate Services Committee wherein it is recommended that the report (February 2, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services be adopted; and

(2) that the Chief Administrative Officer and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer report to the next Budget Committee meeting with respect to the financial information system, any plans for future computerization and the matter of software changes to correct the year 2000.

Background:

The Budget Committee on February 17, 1998 had before it a letter of transmittal (February 16, 1998) from the Corporate Services Committee advising that the Committee on February 16, 1998 recommended to the Budget Committee, and Council, the adoption of the report (February 2, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services regarding a high-speed network for the City of Toronto.

Councillor Ron Moeser, Scarborough Highland Creek, appeared before the Budget Committee in connection with this matter.

Councillor Bas Balkissoon, Scarborough Malvern, declared his interest in this matter in that he is an employee of Bell Canada.

________

(Transmittal letter dated February 16, 1998, addressed to the

Budget Committee from

the Corporate Services Committee)

Recommendation:

The Corporate Services Committee on February 16, 1998, recommended to the Budget Committee and Council, the adoption of the report (February 2, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services.

The Corporate Services Committee reports, for the information of the Budget Committee and Council, having:

(1) requested the Chief Financial Officer to submit a report directly to Council for its meeting scheduled to be held on March 4, 1998, clarifying the benefits to be achieved by implementing this high-speed fibre network; and

(2) requested the Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team to consider a more streamlined process for dealing with budget items that require Budget Committee approval prior to final approval of the Operating and Capital budget, and report thereon to Council.

Background:

The Corporate Services Committee on February 16, 1998, had before it a report (February 2, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services seeking approval to implement a high-speed fibre network to support the business and operating practices of the City of Toronto; advising that this will allow for the consolidation of computing resources required to run Corporate systems, such as Tax and Vital Statistics; that it will provide the connections necessary to access these and other resources from Civic Administration Centres; that the Chief Financial Officer has proposed that the operating costs of $569.1 thousand be funded from the transition fund; that the account number provided is CP950-J00950; that Capital funding for this project, in the amount of $498.2 thousand, is included in the 1998 to 2002 capital works program; and recommending that:

(1) capital funding, in the amount of $498.2 thousand, for data cabling, hardware and configuration services be allocated to connect to the global network for the City of Toronto;

(2) funding, in the amount of $569.1 thousand over the next three years be allocated for hardware maintenance and the lease of termination equipment and high-speed network services;

(3) the necessary officials be authorized to enter into contracts for the acquisition, implementation and maintenance of the global telecommunications network for the City of Toronto over the next three years;

(4) Bell Canada be awarded a contract for the provision of high-speed network connectivity and data cabling for one year with two optional years; and

(5) the appropriate officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action in order to give effect thereto.

_______

(Report dated February 2, 1998, addressed to the

Corporate Services Committee from the

Commissioner of Corporate Services.)

Purpose:

This report seeks approval to implement a high-speed fibre network to support the business and operating practices of the City of Toronto. This will allow for the consolidation of computing resources required to run Corporate systems, such as Tax and Vital Statistics. It will also provide the connections necessary to access these and other resources from the Civic Administration Centres, including audio/video broadcasts and the ability for members of Council to share data between their City and Community Council offices.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The Chief Financial Officer has proposed that the operating costs of $569.1 thousand be funded from the Transition fund. The account number provided is CP950-J00950.

Capital funding for this project, in the amount of $498.2 thousand, is included in the 1998 to 2002 capital works program.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) capital funding, in the amount of $498.2 thousand, for data cabling, hardware and configuration services be allocated to connect to the global network for the City of Toronto;

(2) funding, in the amount of $569.1 thousand over the next three years be allocated for hardware maintenance and the lease of termination equipment and high-speed network services;

(4) Bell Canada be awarded a contract for the provision of high-speed network connectivity and data cabling for one year with two optional years; and

(5) the appropriate officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action in order to give effect thereto.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Effective January 1, 1998, the Borough of East York, the Cities of Etobicoke, North York, Scarborough, Toronto, and York and the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto were amalgamated to form the new City of Toronto.

One of the first information technology challenges the new City of Toronto faces is to create a single network leveraging the existing networks of the seven amalgamated organizations. The network will enable communications between Council Members and staff at single or multiple locations, provide internet or intranet access to Corporate Information and enable interactive access by the public to elected members, information and services. In addition, it will enable the consolidation of financial reporting, support a single-site implementation of application systems such as the Tax system and support other integrated office automation initiatives.

The recommendation from the IT Service Review Team, in its Budget and Organizational Options Addendum Report, as endorsed by the Toronto Transition Team, identified this first phase of the network implementation as a priority project. The report confirms that major nodes on the network, such as the civic administration centres, should be connected using high-end network solutions.

Corporate applications such as the Tax, Vital Statistics and Healthy Babies Healthy Children applications will be implemented across the new City in the first quarter of 1998. In order to meet these implementation deadlines, alternate solutions such as multiple ISDN lines will have to be used to connect the outstanding sites.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

When connecting network sites, technology solutions range significantly in capacity and price. Network capacity is measured by the amount of data (bits) that can be transmitted per second. Low-end connectivity solutions can be provided using ISDN lines or Centrex Data lines, where ISDN is not supported. Mid-range solutions can be provided using radio frequency, T1 or LAN Emulation over ATM. High-end solutions use fibre optics.

Currently the network connectivity between the Toronto City Hall and Metro Hall administrative centres and the Computer Data Centre at 703 Don Mills Road is a fibre-optic network. The other administrative centres are connected using ISDN lines. Large distributed nodes, such as the Records and Archive Centre, and the Printing and Graphics Site, are connected using T1 lines. Smaller distributed nodes are connected using a combination of dial-up service, Centrex Data, ISDN and Radio Frequency.

For planning purposes it has been assumed that the seven civic administration centres will continue to be major nodes in the global network with multiple service requirements for a large number of staff.. The large staff population will require access to productivity tools. This will drive the need for a high-capacity global network to connect these sites to the centralized Computer Data Centre. This report proposes that these seven nodes be connected using a high-speed network. In addition, this report recommends that the Archives and Records centre and the Ambulance Headquarters also be connected as part of the initial implementation.

With application architectures moving towards multi-media, browser-based access, and high-volume graphics, high-speed networking will be essential to the organization.

Currently the amalgamated organizations deliver office automation/productivity software such as word processors, spreadsheets and presentation software using Novell's file and print services. Novell requires high-capacity networks to deliver its services at an acceptable performance level.

A centralized data centre would provide consolidated server platforms for application and data services. By consolidating smaller distributed servers, resources are maximized, as they are required to manage, maintain and operate fewer platforms. Without consolidation, there would be a requirement for server platforms at each major node. These distributed platforms would require on-site staff to manage, maintain and operate these resources. Staffing requirements for a distributed environment would be larger as the ability to share and spare employees would be restricted. In addition, the synchronization of data and the ability to obtain corporate information would be made significantly more complex.

In order to provide centralized administration of distributed services, it is recommended that fibre-optic technology be utilized to provide the high-speed wide area connectivity required. This technology has a significant lifetime - in excess of 20 years. It should also be noted that network protocols such as FDDI, ATM and gigabit-Ethernet service all utilize fibre optics.

A Request for Quotation (RFQ) was issued on November 4, 1997. The City of Toronto Purchasing Department notified 94 vendors that the RFQ was being issued, 24 vendors picked up a copy of the RFQ and 6 bids were evaluated to determine the most cost-effective method for implementing the high-speed network.

The options considered for Phase 1 were either buying the fibre or leasing the fibre. The lease option was for a one-year term with the second and third year optional with a penalty for not taking up the optional years.

The opportunity to bid was provided to both public and private vendors and carriers. These included public utilities, telecommunication providers and private companies. The RFQ closed on November 20, 1997. The recommended solution was selected based on the cost-effectiveness and the ability to meet the implementation schedule.

Bell Canada was the successful bidder. The Bell lease price for the fibre was significantly lower than the next solution, which was a purchase alternative.

The Quotations have been reviewed by Purchasing and Material Supply and they concur with the recommendation. The Manager, Fair Wage and Labour Trades Office, has reported favourably on the firm recommended.

Bell has proposed a leased-fibre solution with the necessary termination equipment offering high-speed connectivity to an ATM Core Network. Their proposal is based on a monthly lease payment for three years. The Transition Team directed staff to enter into one-year agreements. As a result, penalty clauses for cancellation during the two optional years are being negotiated. As a result of Bell's current fibre install base, they have agreed to a target implementation date of 10 weeks from contract approval.

Upgrades to the cabling of the administrative centres will occur in parallel with the implementation of the high-speed global network. Again Bell Canada was the successful bidder. They provided a flat rate proposal for the 900 data cable drops, which equates to $86.10 per drop, which was significantly lower than all other quotations

The following table outlines the expenditures over the next 3 years:

1997 1998 1999 Total

$ $ $ $

Capital:

Hardware 365,190

Configuration 55,500

Cabling 77,489

Subtotal 498,179 498,179

Operating:

Maintenance 54,779 54,779

Leased Lines** 153,180 153,180 153,180

Subtotal 153,180 207,959 207,959 569,097

Total 651,359 207,959 207,959 1,067,276

The next phase of the network implementation, addressing remote sites, is subject to clarification of the business and operational components of the new City and the finalization of the employee population density at each location. This implementation is planned over a 24-month period.

Conclusions:

A leased solution for the implementation of the high-speed fibre network will provide the City of Toronto with a cost-effective solution that requires minimal up-front capital investment. Additional benefits of this proposal include lower implementation risk and greater flexibility for expansion and upgrades in future.

Contact Name:

Lana Viinamae, 392-4548

Jim Andrew, Interim Lead, Information & Technology

(City Council on March 4. 5 and 6, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (March 2, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:

Purpose:

This report outlines the benefits to be achieved by implementing a high-speed fibre computer communications network in the City of Toronto.

Source of Funds/Financial Implications:

The source of funds outlined in the initial report to the Corporate Services Committee includes $498,200.00 from capital for data cabling, hardware and configuration services and $569,100 in operating costs over the next three years from transitional funding for hardware maintenance, lease of equipment and high-speed network services.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Council Reference/Background/History:

This report responds to the motion passed at the Corporate Services Committee meeting held on February 16, 1998. At its meeting, it was requested that the Chief Financial Officer submit a report directly to Council for its meeting scheduled to be held on March 4, 1998, clarifying the benefits to be achieved by implementing the high-speed fibre network.

One of the first and strategically important information technology requirements is the creation of a communications network for the seven amalgamated municipalities. This was identified by the IT Service Review Team and endorsed by the Transition Team as a priority project which would allow the major customer service centres to communicate with each other through centrally located computer processing systems. Corporate application systems such as Healthy Babies Healthy Children, Vital Statistics, Lotteries, Property Tax and Financial and Human Resources Information Systems would be centrally located but accessed from multiple delivery points including the former civic centres. This would facilitate consolidation of services by providing remote access by the various customer service centres from a centralized computer data centre. It would also provide Council and staff with the office productivity tools, such as e-mail and calendaring, necessary to operate in today's business environment.

Previously, all of the municipalities had their own computer hardware and software systems designed to meet their individual needs and any communications between customer service locations was generally limited to a centralized system within the municipality. The existing individual computer systems cannot support the proposed corporate applications because there is inadequate capacity and they would still not provide a viable link between the various city-wide sites.

Comments:

There are numerous benefits in implementing a high-speed network. It would allow the centralization of computer hardware and software and the decentralization of customer service delivery through remote access of similar applications. The associated savings include hardware acquisition, implementation, maintenance and administration. There would also be simplified and timely consolidated reporting. Data security and integrity would be more highly maintained from one central location. Customers would receive a consistent and high level of service because service delivery areas would be using the same application software and database.

The following are just some examples of applications which would benefit from being located centrally, but with service delivery from remote locations through a high-speed fibre communications network:

(1) Healthy Babies Healthy Children.

This is a legislated service required by the Ministry of Health. It involves the screening of new mothers in order to establish the type of care new born children may expect to receive once they leave the hospital. The confidential information is used by public health divisions to do a follow up on the type of care children are receiving and includes possible home visits. There was some start-up funds but most of the ongoing funding will be towards the hiring of public health nurses for follow-up and to contract/hire staff to provide home visits. This database could potentially be massive as there are approximately 44,000 births every year in the City.

(2) Vital Statistics and Lotteries.

Vital Statistics and Lotteries involves the registration of births, deaths, marriages and the processing of lottery licences. Previously, each individual municipality would provide this service and assign an identifier number. This number may have been the same for several municipalities but now it must be a distinct number regardless of where the service is provided within the City. Municipalities also processed the documentation in various ways (i.e., from some manual processing to highly automated). The Province is also requiring that more and more information be transmitted to them electronically.

(3) Property Tax.

All former municipalities have distinct, and in most cases, very old property tax systems. In order to produce and process tax payments and accommodate the new assessment system, a uniform tax system needs to be implemented. If the application system is centrally located and the service delivery areas are connected by a high-speed network, then tax inquiry, cashiering and other customer service initiatives can be provided from remote locations. Taxpayers who own property all across the new City can see their information from any remote location.

(4) Financial and Human Resources Information Systems.

The former municipalities have distinct information systems and in order to accurately and efficiently maintain our resources we will need a common system centrally located. Again, the various service delivery areas will be able to record, maintain, analyse and process information on a timely and consistent basis. The accurate and timely financial and human resources information can then be an essential tool in any decision making process by Council and staff.

A high-speed fibre communications network will improve the efficiency by which information can be transmitted. This will be an important customer service feature when someone is at a service counter or on the phone waiting to receive information from staff. The traditional telephone communication lines tend to be very slow in comparison and radio wave communication is susceptible to interference and data security can also an issue.

An illustration of the possible cost savings of implementing one centrally located system versus multiple systems across the new City would be the property tax system. If we install six computer systems to accommodate the new software, an additional cost of approximately $700,000.00 for the hardware and licences would be needed. In addition, it would cost another $400,000.00 annually to maintain the system, including staff resources, at the various locations.

Conclusions:

The implementation of a high-speed network between the former municipalities will provide the City of Toronto with a proactive, customer driven and cost-effective solution. It is one of the key first steps forward in the direction of providing one-stop customer service which will meet the consistently changing needs of the public, council and staff.

Contact Name:

Ed DeSousa,

Phone: 397-4226; Fax: 392-3649.)

Tax Manager 2000 - Purchase/Upgrade of Desktops

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

Recommendation:

The Budget Committee on February 17, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, and Council, the adoption of the following recommendations of the Corporate Services Committee:

"that the report (February 2, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services be approved in principle; and further, that the Commissioner of Corporate Services be requested to submit a report directly to Council for its meeting scheduled to be held on March 4, 1998, on the relative merits of purchasing versus leasing the workstations".

Background:

The Budget Committee on February 17, 1998, had before it a letter of transmittal (February 16, 1998) from the Corporate Services Committee advising that the Committee on February 16, 1998, had before it a report dated February 2, 1998, from the Interim Executive Commissioner of Corporate Services regarding the Tax Manager 2000 - Purchase/Upgrade of Desktops.

________

(Transmittal letter dated February 16, 1998, addressed to the

Budget Committee from

the Corporate Services Committee)

Recommendation:

The Corporate Services Committee on February 16, 1998, recommended to the Budget Committee, and Council, that the report (February 2, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services be approved in principle; and further, that the Commissioner of Corporate Services be requested to submit a report directly to Council for its meeting scheduled to be held on March 4, 1998, on the relative merits of purchasing versus leasing the workstations.

Background:

The Corporate Services Committee on February 16, 1998, had before it a report (February 2, 1998) from the Interim Executive Commissioner of Corporate Services seeking authority to acquire workstations for the implementation of the new tax system for the City of Toronto; advising that this being part of the new tax system, it should be funded through the Transition fund; and recommending that desktop workstations and upgrades to support the implementation of the new Tax Administration System, Tax Manager 2000, be purchased; at a cost not to exceed $150,000.00.

________

(Report dated February 2, 1998, addressed to the

Corporate Services Committee from the

Interim Executive Commissioner of Corporate Services)

Purpose:

To acquire workstations for the implementation of the new tax system for the City of Toronto.

Source of Funds:

This being part of the new tax system, it should be funded through the Transition fund.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that desktop workstations and upgrades to support the implementation of the new Tax Administration System, Tax Manager 2000, be purchased, at a cost not to exceed $150,000.00.

Background:

The tax administration system, Tax Manager 2000 (TXM2000) is to be implemented and put into production on March 27, 1998. The application will collect an estimated $2.2 billion in revenues and will service over 650,000 property tax accounts. This requires a number of networked desktop workstations to be purchased along with upgrades to other existing workstations to allow users of the new tax system the desktop hardware to process transactions and inquiry.

The purchase and installation of the new hardware and upgrades to existing workstations is critical to meeting the targets for the implementation of the TXM2000. The project plan calls for the delivery and configuration of the workstations by January 31, 1998, in preparation for the testing of the application software and the network. Delays in the purchase of this equipment will mean potential delays in the production date of March 27, 1997 for TXM2000.

Comments:

An inventory of the hardware in each of the former municipalities was taken to determine what would be required to bring all workstations to at least a minimum requirement to run the tax application. It was determined that the former Cities of Toronto, North York and Etobicoke would not require new workstations or any upgrades; their current inventory would be adequate for the new system. The other municipalities will require new equipment or upgrades as indicated below:

Municipality	Existing Hardware	New/Replacement Required	Upgrades
East York	0	9	0.00
Scarborough	31	26 (replacement)	0
York	8	3 (new)	8
Training and Testing	0	4	0.00
Total		42	8

The minimum workstation requirement for the tax system is:

Pentium based;

32 Mega Bytes of RAM; and

minimum of 50 Mb of free space after application is loaded.

East York has no PC workstations and will require new workstations for all their tax users.

Scarborough has identified 26 units that need to be upgraded or replaced to meet the needs of the new tax system. Twenty-two of these units are four year old 486's scheduled for replacement, any upgrade costs will need to be justified over a one year time frame, as the cost to upgrade these systems will be approximately $800.00 ($350.00 for disk drive, $125.00 for Win 95 upgrade, $155.00 for RAM, minimum $125.00 installation cost) as compared to $800.00 per year for a new system ($2,600.00 Compaq Pentium 166MMX, including a 15 inch monitor and warranty upgrade). Therefore, it is recommended that these 22 units be replaced with new purchased equipment. It should be noted that the annual cost for the new equipment is based on a three-year replacement.

Aside from the cost factor, upgrading the existing equipment will just meet the current minimum qualifications for this project. Other new City software standards, such as office suites and operating systems, will place additional requirements on this equipment and will probably push them beyond their limits.

York will require three new workstations to replace existing workstations, which are not suitable for upgrades.

Included in the request are four workstations to be used as training and test machines which will be used on an on-going basis for both training and testing.

Based on current prices for a Compaq Pentium 166mmx with 32 Mb of memory, 1.5 Gb disk and a 15 inch monitor the cost of each workstation will be approximately $2,600.00 before taxes, the upgrades are estimated to be $800.00 per workstation. Therefore, the total cost for 42 new workstations and 8 upgrades will be $114,800.00 before taxes. The cost of desktop office automation software required is not included. For the new PC's which are not replacement machines, the additional cost would be approximately $650.00 per workstation. For 16 workstations this would be $10,400.00 plus taxes.

The total for desktop hardware would be $125,200.00, plus applicable taxes for a total of (this would be) $143,980.00. The vendor to supply the above mentioned hardware would be selected for one or more of the current vendors of record which already have existing contracts with one of the former municipalities.

Conclusion:

Purchase of the above workstations and upgrades is required to establish and implement a new tax administration system to provide a first class service to the taxpayers of Toronto.

Contact Names:

Graham Kemp Jim Andrew

Director, Information Technology Interim Director, Information Technology

(Scarborough Office) City of Toronto

Telephone: (416) 396-7300 Telephone: (416) 392-8421

Fax: (416) 396-4205 Fax: (416) 392-3966

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (February 27, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services:

Purpose:

To provide information relating to the merits of leasing versus purchasing of workstation computers. The following is submitted for information.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

N/A

Recommendation:

That the report be received for information.

Council Reference/Background History:

At its meeting of February, 24, 1998, the Budget Committee requested the Commissioner of Corporate Services to report to the meeting of City Council on March 4, 1998 on the merits of leasing versus purchasing desktop hardware.

Comments and/or Discussion:

The tax administration system is a software application which will record information on each City of Toronto property and, for many taxpayers, will be the only contact with the City. The new system being implemented for the final billing in June of 1998 is designed to run on a client/server architecture over a distributed network. In such a scenario, it is important that the workstations be as current a technology as is possible to provide an optimum level of performance and customer service.

There are cost implications to keeping technology current, and the tax administrative staff will rely heavily on technology to provide a high level of customer service to make their operations as effective and efficient as possible. Leasing of desktops over a three-year period will provide the level of technology required at a cost that is not restrictive and over the long term will be more cost-effective for the Corporation. In addition, leasing will allow the tax related workstations to be replaced at a regular schedule without requiring the significant peaks in funding every three years.

Additional benefits of leasing as follows:

(1) Leasing offers 100 percent financing, negating the need for a large down payment or capital outlay. Leasing provides an opportunity to reduce the need for large capital expenditures related to Information Technology and allow the City to allocate capital to more strategic, core business investments.

(2) Rates are fixed for the term of the lease.

(3) Leasing provides for mid-lease and end of lease options to upgrade or refresh the technology, therefore, providing the City with the capability to replace outdated hardware without capital investment.

(4) At the end of a lease, the lessor will coordinate the renewal of the technology including the cleaning of the hardware, ensuing compliance to licensing agreements.

(5) Additional savings are achieved, as maintenance is included with the leasing term at no additional cost.

(6) An integrated asset tracking service is included with a leasing solution. This service provides physical product information complete with service number ID, customized asset reporting and the use of the asset management tool if required.

The following provides an analysis of the economics of a Lease versus Purchase, based on a purchase of $150,000.00 including tax and assuming annual payments in advance, the leasing rate is 7.5 percent and the financing rate is 5 percent. It also assumes that the residual value of owned equipment is calculated at 2.5 percent and depreciation is straight lined:

Staff from the Finance Department have verified this analysis.

Purchase Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Total

Interest $4,139 $3,405 $7,544

Depreciation $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $150,000

Disposal of Asset 0 0 (3,378) (3,378)

Purchase Total $54,139 $53,405 $46,622 $154,166

Lease (NPV) $47,216 $47,216 $47,216 $141,648

Net Savings $6,923 $6,923 (594) $12,517

Conclusions:

Leasing provides the most cost-effective method of acquiring and maintaining desktop hardware. In addition, it will result in an enhanced ability to provide service to internal and external customers through the maintenance of current technology.

Contact Name:

Jim Andrew, Interim Functional Lead - Information Technology, 392-8421.)

Renewal of Leases for Child Care Centres

- O'Connor, Emery and Shoreham Public Schools

in the Former City of North York

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

Recommendation:

The Budget Committee on February 17, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, and Council, the adoption of the recommendations of the Corporate Services Committee wherein it is recommended that the report (January 30, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services be adopted.

Background:

The Budget Committee on February 17, 1998 had before it a letter of transmittal (February 16, 1998) from the Corporate Services Committee advising that the Committee on February 16, 1998 recommended to the Budget Committee, and Council, the adoption of the report dated January 30, 1998, from the Commissioner of Corporate Services respecting the renewal of leases with the Toronto District School Board.

________

(Transmittal letter dated February 16, 1998, addressed to the

Budget Committee from the

Corporate Services Committee)

Recommendation:

The Corporate Services Committee on February 16, 1998, recommended to the Budget Committee and Council, the adoption of the report (January 30, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services.

Background:

The Corporate Services Committee on February 16, 1998, had before it a report (January 30, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services respecting the renewal of leases with the Toronto District School Board (formerly The Board of Education for the City of North York; advising that funds to cover the expenditures identified in this report are part of Children's Services 1998 Operating Budget Request; that the Commissioner of Finance, in accordance with Provincial regulations, has certified that financing for these expenditures in the amount of $21,992.08 is within the Updated Financial Debt and Obligation Limit; and recommending that:

(a) financing in the amount of $21,992.08 be approved;

(b) authority be granted to renew the leases with the Toronto District School Board for the captioned Child Care Centres, for a one-year term commencing August 1, 1997, and expiring on July 31, 1998, based on the terms and conditions in this report, in a form acceptable to the Toronto Solicitor; and

_______

(Report dated January 30, 1998, addressed to the

Corporate Services Committee from the

Commissioner of Corporate Services.)

Purpose:

To renew the captioned leases with the Toronto District School Board (formerly The Board of Education for the City of North York).

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Funds to cover the expenditures identified in this report are part of Children's Services 1998 Operating Budget Request.

The Commissioner of Finance, in accordance with Provincial regulations, has certified that financing for these expenditures in the amount of $21,992.08 is within the Updated Financial Debt and Obligation Limit.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) financing in the amount of $21,992.08 be approved;

(2) authority be granted to renew the leases with the Toronto District School Board for the captioned Child Care Centres, for a one-year term commencing August 1, 1997 and expiring on July 31, 1998, based on the terms and conditions herein below, in a form acceptable to the City Solicitor; and

(3) the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Metropolitan Council, by its adoption of Clause No.11 of Report No. 20 of The Corporate Administration Committee on April 23, 1997, authorized the renewal of leases with the North York Board of Education for the captioned Child Care Centres, for a one-year term commencing August 1, 1996 and expiring July 31, 1997, at the following rental rates:

(a) O'Connor Public School, with an area of 99.50 square metres (1,071 square feet) at $7.64 per square foot, which rental rate equates to $8,182.44 per annum, gross ($681.87 per month);

(b) Emery Public School, with an area of 85.19 square metres (917 square feet) at $7.64 per square foot, which rental rate equates to $7,005.88 per annum, gross ($583.82 per month); and

(c) Shoreham Public School, with an area of 89.18 square metres (960 square feet) at $7.64 per square foot, which rental rate equates to $7,334.40 per annum, gross ($611.20 per month).

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

By a letter dated December 2, 1997 to our Legal Department, the North York Board of Education forwarded Lease Agreements for the three captioned Child Care Centres, for a term of one year commencing August 1, 1997 and expiring July 31, 1998, at a slightly reduced rental rate of $7.46 per square foot. This rental rate equates to the following rentals:

(a) O'Connor Public School, 1665 O'Connor Drive, North York

Area: 1,071 square feet at $7.46 per square foot

= $7,989.66 per annum, gross ($665.81 per month);

(b) Emery Public School, 3395 Weston Road, North York

Area: 917 square feet at $7.46 per square foot

= $6,840.82 per annum, gross ($570.07 per month); and

Area: 960 square feet at $7.46 per square foot

= $7,161.60 per annum, gross ($596.80 per month).

On January 28, 1998, the Community and Neighbourhood Services Department, informed me that the above terms and conditions of the former City of North York Board of Education are acceptable to them, and has requested our assistance to proceed with the lease renewals.

Conclusions:

In my opinion, the above terms and conditions are fair and reasonable.

Contact Name:

Mr. Tony Pittiglio, Manager of Property Services, Tel No. 392-8155

The Metropolitan Toronto Police Benefit Fund -

Amendment to Metropolitan By-law No. 181-81

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the report (February 16, 1998) from the Chair of the Toronto Police Services Board:

Purpose:

To seek authority to further amend Metropolitan By-law No. 181-81 (as amended) governing the Police Benefit Fund for the purpose of granting authority to the Chair of the Toronto Police Services Board to appoint a Member of that Board as that Chair's voting representative at any meeting of the Fund's Board of Trustees.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) By-law No. 181-81, of the former Metropolitan Corporation (as amended), be further amended in the manner indicated in the draft amending by-law; and

(2) Council grant authority for the introduction of the necessary Bill in Council on March 4, 1998, to give effect to Recommendation No. (1).

Discussion:

By-law No. 181-81 (as amended) of the former Metropolitan Corporation, which by-law governs the Metropolitan Toronto Police Benefit Fund, provides for a 10-member Board of Trustees, including both the Mayor and the Chair of the Toronto Police Services Board ex officio.

The aforementioned by-law permits the Mayor to designate a Member of Council to act as his or her representative at any meeting of the Board of Trustees and exercise his or her voting rights. It is desirable that the Chair of the Police Services Board has a corresponding power to appoint a Member of the Toronto Police Services Board as that Chair's voting representative at any meeting of the Board of Trustees.

D R A F T

City of Toronto

By-law No.

To amend further By-law No. 181-81 of the former Municipality of Metropolitan

Toronto respecting pensions and other benefits

The Council of the City of Toronto hereby enacts as follows:

1. Clause 3(1)(c) of By-law No. 181-81 of the former Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, a by-law "To provide pensions and death benefits to members of the Metropolitan Police Force", as re-enacted by By-law No. 149-97 of that Municipality, is amended by adding to the end thereof, "who may designate a member of that Board to act as his or her representative at any meeting of the Board of Trustees and exercise his or her voting rights".

2. This by-law shall come into force on the date of its enactment and passing.

Enacted and passed by an affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the Members of Council present and voting this day of , A.D. 1998.

______________________ ______________________

Mayor City Clerk.

Workers' Compensation - Transfer of the Former City of York

from Schedule 1 to Schedule 2

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

Recommendation:

The Budget Committee on February 17, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, and Council, the adoption of the recommendation of the Corporate Services Committee, wherein it is recommended that the joint report February 16, 1998, from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, and the Commissioner of Human Resources be adopted, such report containing the following recommendation:

"that Council authorize the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer to remit immediately to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board the amount of $1,019,411.00 in satisfaction of the transfer of the former City of York from Schedule 1 to Schedule 2 pursuant to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act".

Background:

The Budget Committee on February 17, 1998, had before it a letter of transmittal (February 16, 1998) from the Corporate Services Committee advising that the Committee on February 16, 1998, recommended to the Budget Committee, and Council, the adoption of the joint report dated February 16, 1998, from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, and the Commissioner of Human Resources regarding the Workers' Compensation transfer of funds of the former City of York from Schedule 1 to Schedule 2 pursuant to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act.

________

(Transmittal letter dated February 16, 1998, addressed to the

Budget Committee from the

Corporate Services Committee)

Recommendation:

The Corporate Services Committee on February 16, 1998, recommended to the Budget Committee and Council, the adoption of the joint report (February 16, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, and the Commissioner of Human Resources.

Background:

The Corporate Services Committee on February 16, 1998, had before it a joint report (February 16, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and the Commissioner of Human Resources proposing a recommendation to create one uniform Workers' Compensation funding mechanism for the City of Toronto, as required by the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board; advising that the transfer to Schedule 2 is $1,074,964.23, if paid by February 28, 1998; that the projected savings resulting from the transfer are estimated to be $281,200.00 per month, rising with inflation; that payment from the Workers' Compensation reserve fund would be repaid over the next four years from the expected savings; that there is no impact on the 1998 Operating Budget; and recommending that Council authorize the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer to remit immediately to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board the amount of $1,019,411.00 in satisfaction of the transfer of the former City of York from Schedule 1 to Schedule 2 pursuant to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act.

_______

(Joint report dated February 16, 1998, addressed

to the Corporate Services Committee from the

Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and the

Commissioner of Human Resources)

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to propose a recommendation to create one uniform Workers' Compensation funding mechanism for the City of Toronto, as required by Workplace Safety and Insurance Board.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The cost of the transfer to Schedule 2 is $1,074,964.23 if paid by February 28, 1998. The projected savings resulting from the transfer are estimated to be $281,200.00 per annum, rising with inflation. Payment from the Workers' Compensation reserve fund would be repaid over the next four years from the expected savings. There is no impact on the 1998 operating budget.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that Council authorize the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer to remit immediately to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board the amount of $1,019,411.00 in satisfaction of the transfer of the former City of York from Schedule 1 to Schedule 2 pursuant to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act.

Council Reference/Background/History:

None

Discussion:

The Workplace Safety and Insurance Board's policy is that all employers must be designated as a Schedule 1 or Schedule 2 employer.

(a) Distinctions Between Schedule 1 and 2:

Under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act there are two funding mechanisms - referred to as Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 - applicable to employers.

Schedule 1 employers are collectively liable for paying the costs of workers' compensation claims. These employers are assessed within their rate groups, and pay an annual "premium" for coverage for all claims incurred. They are subject to an experience rating program which results in refunds or surcharges depending on claims performance.

Schedule 2 employers, on the other hand, are individually liable for paying the costs of workers' compensation claims. Schedule 2 employers self-insure the risk of their claims, paying the benefits as they arise plus a 15 percent administrative charge to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board. Some employers in this category purchase private supplementary excess-loss insurance, and establish segregated reserve funds to cover "catastrophic" claims.

Transfers to Schedule 2 are premised upon the employer paying its share of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board's Schedule 1 unfunded liability, effective upon the transfer date.

(b) The Benefits of Schedule 1 Versus Schedule 2 Designation:

A Schedule 1 designation provides security from the risk of catastrophic claims, much the same as any other insurance plan. It makes sense for either smaller employers who cannot sustain the impact of such claims, or high risk industries where accident frequency, and resultant lost-time, are key factors. The City of Toronto does not fall into either category.

Schedule 2 is more suited to employers with the resources to pay claims as they arise, and whose lost-time experience compares significantly better than others within the same industry over a sustained period of time. With the exception of the former City of York, all of the other former municipalities have been in Schedule 2 because of the cost-savings that, in conjunction with strong health and safety and claims management programs, can be achieved over the long term.

As a Schedule 1 employer, the City of York was paying in excess of $600,000.00 per year as its Workplace Safety and Insurance Board assessment, minus rebates for favourable experience. However, its actual lost-time injury rate declined over the last ten years, and in 1996 the City's total benefit awards, excluding worker pensions, were half of the average experience for a Schedule 1 Local Government with the same frequency of lost-time claims. Consequently, significant savings would be realized over time under the self-insured model.

These savings were confirmed to the former City of York in a study of the City's workers' compensation experience conducted by Nexus Actuarial Consultants Ltd. The consultant concluded that it would be in the City's long-term interests to transfer to Schedule 2. It was estimated that sustainable savings of $281,200.00 would have accrued to the City commencing in 1998, rising thereafter with inflation.

Through consultation with City representatives, the Board has provided an opportunity to transfer the former City of York to Schedule 2 and utilize York's 1996 and 1997 premium contributions against the normally applied transfer fee. The fee for transfer is approximately $1.9 million. The offset of the 1996 and 1997 assessments would reduce this number to $1,074,964.00. The Board has been very flexible in terms of delaying requirement for payment of this amount to the end of February of this year.

Conclusions:

The transfer to Schedule 2 of former City of York employees is required by the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board, and is in the long-term financial interests of the City of Toronto. The Board has requested that the fee for the York transfer be remitted as soon as possible after February 28, 1998. It is recommended that Council approve the expenditure, thus guaranteeing that the 1996 and 1997 assessment offsets will be applied against the amount owing.

Contact Name:

Patrick Kelly, Senior Director of Human Resources, York Civic Service Centre, 394-2598.

Canada Day And Celebrate Toronto Street Festival

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, amended this Clause by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that:

(1) 'WHEREAS the Canada Day celebrations traditionally held in the former municipalities that now constitute the new City of Toronto are important events that strengthen their respective local communities; and

WHEREAS Canada Day celebrations held in the downtown core are not easily accessible to many constituents in other areas of the City;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, prior to staff implementing any changes to the Canada Day budget allocations for the former municipalities that now make up the City of Toronto, particularly if they involve reductions in financial support, such changes be brought forward to Council for review and comment.'; and

(2) the Interim Functional Lead for Special Events be requested to:

(a) establish a consultation process with the adjacent residential neighbourhoods on Yonge Street and, in particular, the residential neighbourhoods on Yonge Street between St. Clair Avenue and Yonge Boulevard/Glen Echo Road; and

(b) investigate the possibility of having all of the church bells in the new City of Toronto ringing at a convenient hour on Canada Day, and report thereon to Council, through the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee.")

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends that:

(1) the report (February 23, 1998) from the Interim Lead, Special Events, be adopted, and that funds in the amount of $395,000.00 be included in the 1998 Operating Budget for Special Events; and

(2) Council adopt, in principle, a Councillors' celebration of Caravan if it can be incorporated as a promotional event for the Canada Day celebrations.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following report (February 23, 1998) from Ms. Jaye Robinson, Interim Lead, Special Events:

Purpose:

The attached report recommends the development of a dynamic celebration for the new City of Toronto. With the theme CELEBRATE TORONTO, the Toronto Special Events Office would package a weekend of colourful programming consisting of existing Canada Day events with a boost for retailers, Toronto Attractions Day and a Celebrate Toronto Street Festival.

This large-scale special event would bring the city together in a spirit of celebration, building a sense of community pride and the feeling that Toronto, Canada, is the best place in the world to live, work and play. Economic spin-offs from such a festival would be positive in various sectors including hospitality, transportation and retail.

Post-event evaluation would determine if the event could be sustained as an annual celebration.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Due to critical timelines, a mix of public and private sector funding is necessary to produce this event. The total operating budget of the event would be $550,000.00 with a contribution of $395,000.00 from the City of Toronto City and $155,000.00 secured from corporate sponsorships. A corporate fundraiser would be contracted to work closely with Special Events staff.

It would be necessary to seek an additional Economic Development grant of $80,000.00 to close Yonge Street on Canada Day. If a grant could not be secured for that day, retailers would be invited to participate in the weekend activities.

This series of events would positively impact the economy and entice tourists to explore Toronto.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) Approval be given for an expenditure of $395,000.00 to market and produce the Celebrate Toronto Festival;

(2) Council give direction to all city departments and staff to provide full cooperation and in-kind support for the production of this celebration including secondment of staff;

(3) Approval be given to approach the Economic Development grant program to support a Yonge Street road closure on Canada Day; and

(4) Based on the results of the first year, including a comprehensive event audit, Council consider making this an annual celebration.

Discussion:

The celebrations would begin on Canada Day, a Wednesday, and run through Sunday as follows:

(1) July 1 - Canada Day Celebrations:

For the first time, existing Canada Day community celebrations would be aggressively marketed together, providing Torontonians with a brand new perspective on their city and the diversity of its event offerings.

As a boost for local businesses, BIAs along Yonge Street would be invited to program a street festival bringing business to the streets and providing specialty and musical entertainment.

(2) July 2 - Toronto Attractions Day:

Toronto's world-class attractions would be invited to participate in the festivities by offering reduced admission rates and themed programming. Participating attractions would be marketed along with the festivities.

(3) July 3, 4, 5 - Celebrate Toronto Street Festival:

The festival would be focused at seven prime event sites along Yonge Street with easy subway access. Top-calibre programming will be secured through partnerships with existing events/activities, such as Toronto Raptors Street Tournaments, cultural festivals, CITY TV dance parties, etc.

Special programming would be developed for the main festival site at the Yonge Street- Eglinton Avenue intersection. This site was selected for its symbolic value - Yonge Street and Eglinton Avenue pass through all the former municipalities.

Opening ceremonies at this site would include official proceedings and dedications. This would be followed by a dynamic entertainment line-up featuring a headline concert and spectacular fireworks choreographed to the music of a massed symphony and choir.

Conclusion:

Marking the coming together of the new City of Toronto in a high-profile celebration would have many positive benefits. The Celebrate Toronto Festival would begin to build larger community bonds and a sense that the city and its constituent communities are moving forward together. It would also generate strong economic spin-offs and attract tourists to our vibrant streets.

Contact Name:

Jaye Robinson, Interim Lead, Toronto Special Events Office, 395-7310.

________

Event Proposal

Celebrate Toronto

Festival

City Of Toronto

Special Events Office

Objectives:

(1) Mark the formation of the new City of Toronto as an important historical event;

(2) Bring Torontonians together in a high profile, exciting celebration of their city;

(3) Generate positive feelings toward the new city instilling pride and a feeling that Toronto, Canada is the best place in the world to live, work and play; and

(4) Create economic spin-offs and entice tourists.

Strategies:

(1) Develop a package of events that will draw people together to celebrate the new City of Toronto;

(2) Build on the momentum of Canada Day celebrations carrying over into a weekend of festivities;

(3) Bring the event to the streets, making it accessible with a mass appeal to a general audience;

(4) Create marketing opportunities for Toronto attractions and local businesses;

(5) Create multi-layered programming that reflects our diverse and dynamic city;

(6) Celebrate the talent of our city and country by featuring top Canadian artists performing live;

(7) Hold official ceremonies in a location of significance, symbolically bringing the former cities together; and

(8) Develop an event model that can become a Toronto signature event.

Event Vision:

Canada Day festivities taking place mid-week will extend into exciting Celebrate Toronto events on the weekend.

(1) Canada Day Celebrations - July 1:

Canada Day is an important celebration in many Toronto communities. For the first time ever, all Toronto Canada Day activities would be aggressively marketed together, creating a festive cityscape worthy of a world-class city.

In partnership with local Business Improvement Associations (BIAs), Yonge Street would be closed and retailers would develop special programming.

(2) Toronto Attractions Day - July 2:

Toronto attractions would be invited to participate in the festivities by offering special rates and developing themed programming. Participating attractions would be included in marketing efforts.

(3) Celebrate Toronto Street Festival - July 3, 4 and 5:

In partnership with existing events, this festival would bring people to the streets to enjoy top-calibre programming at seven key locations.

The main festival site would be located at the Yonge Street and Eglinton Avenue intersection, selected for its symbolic value: these streets run through all former municipalities.

Event Design:

(1) Canada Day Celebrations - July 1:

Community Canada Day celebrations across the city would be marketed together as a salute to the new Toronto. For the first time, Torontonians will be able to choose from a host of unique offerings showing the diversity and colour of the city.

Existing events include:

Centennial Park (Etobicoke) Community Event, Midway, Fireworks

Coronation Park (York) Community Event, Fireworks

Mel Lastman Square (North York) Concert, Fireworks

Nathan Phillips Square Daytime Community Event

Thomson Memorial Park

(Scarborough) Parade, Concert, Fireworks

Stan Wadlow Park (East York) Community Event, Fireworks

Queen's Park Daytime Event

CISS FM Country Music Festival Concerts

CHIN Picnic International Festival

Ontario Place Regular Attraction, Fireworks Festival

Harbourfront Centre Regular Attraction, Parade of Lights

Dream in High Park Theatre Production

These locations, in turn, would generate excitement about weekend activities.

Retail Involvement:

Retailers would be incorporated into Canada Day festivities by closing Yonge Street and inviting the local BIAs to bring daytime business to the streets.

Economic Development would be approached for a grant to pay for the road closure where BIAs agree to support programming. If a grant cannot be secured, we recommend that retailers be included in the weekend festival programming.

BIAs would agree to supply special programming, such as:

(a) stage areas with musical acts;

(b) buskers;

(d) balloons;

(e) specialty & food sampling;

(f) sidewalk sales;

(g) contests/promotions; and

(h) family activities

(2) Toronto Attractions Day - July 2:

As a salute to Toronto, major attractions would offer reduced admission rates to their sites and develop special programming. Participating attractions would be marketed together in event collateral materials.

Toronto attractions include:

CN Tower

Fort York and other historic sites

Casa Loma

Metro Zoo

Hockey Hall of Fame

Ontario Place

Royal Ontario Museum

Art Gallery of Ontario

Ontario Science Centre

Harbourfront

(3) Celebrate Toronto Street Festival - July 3, 4 and 5:

Seven key festival sites would be located along Yonge Street from Mel Lastman Square to Dundas, and including Nathan Phillips Square. Partnerships would be formed with existing festivals and events to assist with programming, e.g. Toronto Raptors Street Tournaments, TV Ontario, Sunfest '98, City TV's Electric Circus, etc.

The main festival site would be located at Yonge and Eglinton, a symbolic location because Yonge Street and Eglinton Avenue run through all the former municipalities.

Official ceremonies would take place Friday evening, including greetings from dignitaries and the unveiling and dedication of the new city flag and logo. Liberty Silver would be invited to perform her song "Rhythm of the City", written about the new Toronto. A headline concert and spectacular fireworks choreographed to a massed symphony and choir would follow.

The fireworks erupting from the rooftops of the buildings would be the most breathtaking the city has seen, choreographed to music and painting the sky with brilliant colour.

Marketing:

The Celebrate Toronto Festival would be supported through a targeted, high-impact marketing plan. Strong media partnerships, enticing advertising and promotional materials, and significant publicity would ensure the message of this event is heard over the whole region.

(1) Media Partnerships:

Broad, diverse coverage would be ensured through partnerships with top Toronto radio, television and print media.

Partners would receive excellent profile through a cutting-edge event marketing benefits package, a Special Events Office trademark.

(2) Advertising:

A targeted display ad campaign would be supplemented by transit and subway ads.

(3) Marketing Materials:

A simple, striking design and message would invite all Torontonians to join in this celebration. Messages would be consistent in all materials.

(4) Media Relations/Free Publicity:

Media releases, public service announcements and media alert/photo ops would aggressively target news/listings/entertainment editors in all mediums. Intensive personal follow-up would ensure coverage and interviews.

A comprehensive public service campaign would target web sites, info lines, community billboards and LED signage.

Sponsorship:

For the first few years, a combination of private and public sector funding must be secured to produce this event. The long term goal would be to make the event self-sufficient.

Due to the very short timelines, we recommend that a corporate fundraiser be retained to work with the Special Events Office to coordinate the corporate sponsorship campaign. Once interested corporations were identified, Special Events staff would present event marketing benefits and ensure fulfilment of these benefits.

Immediately following Council approval of the event, a breakfast meeting would be organized to entice the corporate community to become involved.

Sponsorship Campaign Strategy:

(1) To position Celebrate Toronto festivities as a dynamic corporate sector opportunity.

(2) Develop a comprehensive Partnership Proposal to attract high-profile corporations with national properties.

Benefits would include identification in promotional materials, on-site presence and product-based event marketing opportunities.

The number of sponsors would be limited for maximum exposure and impact.

(3) Ensure exceptional servicing of sponsors including benefit fulfilment.

Revenue Generation:

The total operating budget of this event as outlined is $550,000.00. Public and private funding would be required as follows:

City Funding $395,000.00

Sponsorship $155,000.00

Total $550,000.00

Budget Breakdown:

Programming:

Opening Ceremonies $ 65, 500.00

Seven Festival Sites $185,000.00

Fireworks $ 35,500.00

$286,000.00

Production:

Staging $29,750.00

Sound $21,250.00

Lighting $ 8,000.00

Road Closure $120,000.00

$179,000.00

Marketing:

Advertising

Marketing Materials and Production

Distribution $85,000.00

Total $550,000.00

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) approval be given for an expenditure of $395,000.00 to produce the Celebrate Toronto Festival;

(2) Council give direction to all city departments and staff to provide full cooperation and in-kind support in the production of this celebration including secondment of staff;

(3) approval be given to approach The Economic Development grant program to support a road closure on Canada Day; and

(4) based on the results of the first year and a comprehensive event audit, Council consider making this an annual celebration.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports, for the information of Council, having viewed an overhead presentation "Celebrate Toronto! Special Events in the New City" by Ms. Jaye Robinson, Interim Lead, Special Events.

Municipal Grants Review Committee

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, amended this Clause by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that deputations respecting the Municipal Grants Review take place at the Municipal Grants Review Committee level for report thereon to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council.")

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (February 19, 1998) from the Chair of the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee:

Purpose:

This report recommends the establishment of a Municipal Grants Review Committee composed of eight Councillors reporting to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee. The purpose of the Municipal Grants Review Committee will be to oversee the development of a Municipal Grants Policy for implementation in 1999 and to provide political direction with respect to grants administration decisions arising from the 1998 budget process.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Not applicable.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) a Municipal Grants Review Committee composed of eight Councillors be established;

(2) Councillors Bussin, Chong, Duguid, Flint, Johnston, Jones, Lindsay Luby, and Saundercook be appointed members of the Municipal Grants Review Committee, to be chaired by Councillor Lindsay Luby;

(3) the Review Committee steer the development of an integrated Municipal Grants Policy for implementation in 1999 and, after consultation with the relevant Standing Committees, recommend approval of the policy to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee;

(4) staff consult the Review Committee with respect to grants administration decisions arising from the 1998 budget process;

(5) for the 1998 interim grants process only, allocations reports normally received by Standing Committees be submitted to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee for recommendation to Council with the future grants reporting process to be determined through the development of the Municipal Grants Policy for 1999;

(6) for the 1998 interim grants process only, the Municipal Grants Review Committee be used as the appeal mechanism, to hear and respond to deputations by applicants; and

(7) the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

Council Reference/Background/History:

City Council approved the report titled "Administration of Municipal Grants Programs" (Report No. 1, Clause No. 2, Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee) on February 4 and 5, 1998. The report outlined a plan for the administration of municipal grants programs in 1998, requested authority to issue advances to a defined group of agencies, and suggested an approach to the development of a Municipal Grants Policy for implementation in 1999.

The Administration of Municipal Grants Programs Report also identified that a number of grants programs were located in departments which did not report out through the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee, although they shared similar issues and challenges. Under the current structure the Urban Planning and Development Services, Corporate Services, and Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Department also have responsibility for municipal grants programs. There is a need for a coordinated process to develop the Municipal Grants Policy which is linked to the relevant Standing Committees. Appendix A contains a list of the grants programs, the Standing Committees and staff contact names.

The Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee requested that staff develop options with respect to an effective and accessible appeal process. In addition, the Committee recommended that a vehicle enabling Councillors to provide political input and direction to municipal grants programs be developed.

In response to these issues, this report recommends the creation of a Municipal Grants Review Committee.

Municipal Grants Review Committee:

The purpose of the Municipal Grants Review Committee will be to steer the development of a Municipal Grants Policy for implementation in 1999 and to provide political direction with respect to grants administration decisions arising from the 1998 budget process. The Municipal Grants Review Committee will also act as an appeals committee for grants programs.

Composition:

Councillors Bussin, Chong, Duguid, Flint, Johnston, Jones, Lindsay-Luby, and Saundercook have agreed to sit as members of the Municipal Grants Review Committee.

In developing the slate of Councillors identified above, attention was paid to ensuring that all of the standing committees receiving grants allocations reports and the Board of Health were represented on the Committee. Each member will be responsible for ensuring that their respective standing committees (or the Board of Health) are kept informed of the work of the Municipal Grants Review Committee and that the concerns of standing committees are brought forward to the Municipal Grants Review Committee. As members of our respective Community Councils, we collectively bring that perspective to the work of the Municipal Grants Review Committee.

The Review Committee will be supported by a grants staff workgroup (see Appendix A). The staff support will be co-ordinated by the Commissioners of Urban Planning and Development Services, Corporate Services, Economic Development, and Culture and Tourism, and chaired by the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services.

Mandate:

As noted above, the mandate of the Municipal Grants Review Committee will be threefold: to oversee the development of a Municipal Grants Policy for implementation in 1999; to provide political direction with respect to grants administration decisions arising from the 1998 budget process; and to act as an appeals committee for grants programs.

The Municipal Grants Policy will identify:

(1) broad, over-arching principles applicable to all grants within the scope of the review;

(2) commonalities, duplication of effort and opportunities for coordination among grants in different service areas;

(3) alternative administrative and delivery options for grants; and

(4) recommended policy and administrative practices specific to grants programs within each service area.

Upon approval of recommendations on these policy issues later this year, grants administration will revert to the appropriate Standing Committees. Appendix B provides an outline of the draft Municipal Grants Policy development process.

Staff will consult with the Municipal Grants Review Committee with respect to grants administration decisions arising from the 1998 budget process. The existing Transitional Grants Policy is based on the Transition Team recommendation that grants funding be maintained at 1997 levels. Should Council decide to adjust grants budgets through the 1998 budget process, staff will consult with the Committee with respect to how budget adjustments are managed through allocations processes.

The Municipal Grants Review Committee will act as the formal appeal body for applicants wishing to appeal their specific allocation recommendation. The grounds for appeal are clearly stated in the terms of reference for the various grants programs. The appeal process should be somewhat simplified by the Council direction that grants programs be administered under existing eligibility criteria. For 1998 only, and until the development of the integrated Municipal Grants Policy by the Review Committee, applicants have the ability to depute to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee on broader issues associated with the grants allocation process or the grants programs.

As identified in the "Administration of Municipal Grants Programs" report, the unique appeal and approval routes for grants administered by Public Health and the Toronto Arts Council would remain unchanged.

To simplify the grants reporting process during the 1998 transitional year, I am recommending that all allocations reports, except those identified above, be submitted to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee for recommendation to Council. This recommendation is specific to the 1998 transitional grants process with the longer term reporting process to be recommended through the Municipal Grants Policy.

Reporting:

The Municipal Grants Review Committee will report to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee regarding the Municipal Grants Policy.

As an appeals sub-committee, the Municipal Grants Review Committee will hear appeals and provide input to the staff recommendations going forward to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee. In order to keep the Standing Committee aware of the service issues arising from the deputations, a report on the appeals heard for each grant program will be submitted to the appropriate Standing Committee.

Conclusions:

The tasks of developing a 1999 Municipal Grants Policy within a tight time frame while also providing direction on 1998 grants administration during a complex and challenging budget process require that a reference group of Councillors be in place to provide a political perspective. Given the reporting timelines for the existing standing committees and the broad nature of the work required, the establishment of a Municipal Grants Review Committee reporting to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee is recommended.

Contact Name:

Shirley Hoy: 392-8302

Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services

Appendix A

Standing Committee	Department	Grant Program	Staff Contact
Board of Health	Community and Neighbourhood Services	AIDS Prevention Drug Abuse Prevention	Connie Clement Michael Fay
Community and Neighbourhood Services	Community and Neighbourhood Services Economic Development, Culture and Tourism	Community Resources Fund/ Emergency Support Fund/General Grants Homeless Initiatives Fund Arts and Culture (excluding Toronto Arts Council) Recreation Grants	Chris Brillinger/Sue Kaiser/Sarah Rix Simon Liston John Elvidge Cathi Forbes
Corporate Services	Corporate Services	Access and Equity	Charles Smith
Environment and Urban Development	Urban Planning and Development Services	Breaking the Cycle of Violence	Sue Kaiser

Appendix B

Municipal Grants Policy Development Process

The report Administration of Municipal Grants was considered by Council on February 4-6, 1998. This report recommended that a Municipal Grants Policy be developed in 1998 for implementation in 1999. This document sets out the framework for the development of the policy.

(1) Scope of the Policy Development Process:

The development process described here will address a range of municipal grants programs, located within a number of departmental groupings including Community and Neighbourhood Services, Urban Planning and Development Services, Corporate Services, and Economic Development, Culture and Tourism.

These diverse grant programs have been brought into a coordinated development process because of a common need to design mechanisms appropriate to support community-based organizations and services in their respective areas. Therefore, because the focus of this development is the support of community organizations and services (irrespective of service areas).

The proposed Municipal Grants Policy will result in a set of broad principles which will apply to all grants programs, as well as, a range of grants policies and practices specific to each service area.

There is a clear need both to coordinate policy development processes within the new City, and to examine the linkages among all municipal grants programs. As a result, the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services will co-ordinate the policy development process.

(2) Outcomes:

The proposed policy development process will explore and identify:

(a) broad, over-arching principles applicable to all grants within the scope of the review;

(b) commonalities, duplication of effort and opportunities for coordination among grants in different service areas;

(d) recommended policy and administrative practices specific to grants programs within each service area.

(3) Significant Areas for Consideration:

Particular attention will be paid to the following areas in the development process:

Funding Purposes and Priorities:

A comparative analysis of existing grants funding purposes and priorities within and across service areas will be conducted to identify commonalities, duplication of effort and opportunities for coordination (Outcome B). Through this analysis, a statement of over-arching, cross-service area funding purposes which provide a framework for the specific and varied funding purposes of the different service areas will be developed.

The Role of Standing Committees and Community Councils:

One of the most significant questions to be addressed is the role of standing committees, Community Councils, and Boards in grants processes. This analysis will be key to the development of clear protocols and relationships between community organizations and Council (and Committees of Council) with respect to grants. As indicated in the report Administration of Municipal Grants, particular attention will be paid to the role of Community Councils in these processes.

Consultations:

The report Administration of Municipal Grants identified consultations with a wide variety of stakeholders as a key part of the 1999 grants design process. The following parameters were established for consultations, and will be adhered to as a part of the development process:

The review will include consultations with all stakeholders, including: staff and board members of funded agencies, unsuccessful applicant agencies, Councillors, service users, citizens, other funders, and municipal staff. Consultations with common stakeholders will be coordinated to minimize the number of consultations required.

(4) Reporting:

Grants to not-for-profit organizations are administered by a number of departments and will report out through a number of standing committees, including Community and Neighbourhood Services, Urban Environment and Development, and possibly, Corporate Services. Council may consider further changes to the current committee structure given the recent change in the administrative structure resulting in six departments. Although the Report recommending the development of a Municipal Grants Policy reached Council through the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee, it is appropriate that further reporting on this initiative be made to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee.

(5) Structure for the Policy Development Process:

The development of a Municipal Grants Policy within the given time frame will demand a tight process and a structure that facilitates communication among all stakeholders. To accomplish this, a three-tiered review structure which builds upon existing workgroups is recommended.

Municipal Grants Review Committee:

A Review Committee comprised of councillors and supported by staff will be established to develop a set of broad, over-arching grants principles (Outcome A). This group will also comment on policy and administrative practices specific to each service area, and review and comment on the draft Municipal Grants Policy prior to its finalization.

Councillors would be selected to ensure adequate representation from each of the different service areas. There will need to be representation from each of the standing committees with responsibility for grants programs; currently, that includes Community and Neighbourhood Services, Urban Environment and Development, and Corporate Services. There should also be political representation from the Board of Health and the Toronto Arts Council.

The staff Grants Workgroup described below, will provide staff support to the Review Committee under the direction of the appropriate Commissioners.

Grants Workgroup:

This existing staff workgroup includes a representative from each service area workgroup, and has been working and planning together for 1998 since the late fall of 1997. In the development process, the workgroup will be responsible for analyzing commonalities, duplication of effort and opportunities for coordination among grants in different service areas (Outcome B) and preparing alternative administrative and delivery options for grants in the new City of Toronto (Outcome C).

The workgroup will also provide coordination and management functions to the development process by:

(a) ensuing the coordination of service area reviews;

(b) coordinating stakeholder consultations;

(d) addressing issues which cross service areas;

(e) managing other issues that arise through the review process; and

(f) preparing the draft grants policy.

Service Area Reviews:

In many service areas workgroups comprised of staff (and other individuals as appropriate to the service area) have been established to plan and implement the administration of grants programs in 1998. In the development process, these workgroups will plan and undertake the review of grants programs in their respective service area. The workgroups will each be coordinated by a grants manager who will also sit on the grants workgroup (above).

Service area workgroups will be responsible for providing the grants workgroup with a service area review plan. Plans will include:

(a) workgroup membership;

(b) timelines/workplan; and

Workgroups will be responsible for carrying out their review plan and preparing a service area report detailing recommended policy and administrative options for specific grants programs in 1999 (Outcome D). Each of these reports will form an appendix to the developed grants policy.

(6) Timeline:

Using the process described here, a comprehensive Municipal Grants Policy will be developed between March and August 1998. Once complete, the policy will be sent to Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council for approval in September.

Business Education Tax Rate - Communications Plan

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, amended this Clause:

(1) to provide that the communications strategy not be restricted to the Business Education Tax but also include all tax categories; and

(2) by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that the report dated March 2, 1998, from the Chief Administrative Officer, entitled 'Business Education Tax Rate - Communications Strategy', be adopted, subject to inserting in Recommendation No. (2), after the word 'report', the words 'to the Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force', so that the recommendations embodied in such report shall now read as follows:

'It is recommended that:

(1) Council approve the communications strategy in partnership with the business community, under a 50/50 funding formula up to a maximum of $200,000.00; and

(2) Council direct the Economic Development and Communications Departments to provide staff support to the final development and implementation of the campaign components with the business community and to have staff report to the Assessment and Tax Policy Task Force on those actions and outcomes.' ")

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having concurred with the recommendations embodied in the report (February 23, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer and having directed that such report be submitted to Council for information.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports, for the information of Council, having directed that the communications plan resulting from discussions between the Economic Development and Communications staff with representatives of the business community be submitted directly to Council at its meeting scheduled to be held on March 4 and 5, 1998.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following report (February 23, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer:

Purpose:

At its meeting of February 11, 1998, City Council requested me to report on a communications strategy to enlist the support of the public and business against the unfair business education tax scheme which will leave Toronto in a disadvantaged position.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statements:

To be reported upon.

Recommendations:

(1) that the Committee direct the Economic Development and Communications staff to work with representatives of the business community to finalize a communications strategy to address City Council's concerns regarding the business education tax rate issue; and

(2) that the communications plan resulting from this discussion be brought directly to City Council next week.

Background:

A communications plan to address the business education tax issue is being developed. In the past week staff have been part of discussions with representatives of the business community about their participation in a partnership with the City to address this issue. The partnership would result in a much stronger campaign which demonstrates the concern and involvement of the business community, rather than a solely City-driven effort. This should also result in financial participation by the business community.

I recommend that Economic Development and Communications staff be directed to continue to consult with the business community representatives and, as a result, bring forward to City Council a full communications plan.

Contact Name:

Sydney K. Baxter, 392-3769.

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (March 2, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer:

Purpose:

At its special meeting of February 11, 1998, City Council requested me to report on a communications strategy to enlist the support of the public and business against the Province's unfair business education tax policy which will leave Toronto in a disadvantaged position further perpetuating the 'tax gap' for businesses within the Greater Toronto Area (GTA).

This report will outline a cooperative communications strategy developed in partnership with the business community to address the Education Tax Levy.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The maximum amount required for this program would be $200,000.00 matched by private sector contributions. The Treasurer recommends the source of the funding be from the Corporate Contingency Fund.

Recommendations:

(1) That Council approve the communications strategy in partnership with the business community, under a 50/50 funding formula up to a maximum of $200,000.00;

(2) that Council direct the Economic Development and Communications Departments to provide staff support to the final development and implementation of the campaign components with business community and to have staff report on those actions and outcomes.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At the emergency meeting of Council on February 11, 1998, City Council received a report from the Chief Administrative Officer, and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer on the impacts of the Province's decision not to implement an uniform education tax rate for business across the Province.

The impacts as articulated in the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer's report will definitely impact the City's abilities to retain existing business and will cause further declines in the Industrial Commercial Assessment base. Overall, it is a Provincial 'location tax' on business in Toronto.

Communications Strategy:

Rationale:

When the Provincial Government announced that it would not establish an uniform education business tax rate across the Province or even throughout the GTA, it perpetuated the discriminatory treatment against Toronto in the education tax field. The Province has virtually imposed a "location tax" on businesses in Toronto, and did not even attempt to move incrementally in the direction of improved fairness.

Combined with other radical changes in tax policy, Toronto businesses are faced with a confusing new property tax system which discriminates against them. The Toronto area, which has just begun to recover from the economic downturn of the late '80's and early '90's, can now expect to experience further erosion of its business assessment base as companies choose relocation as a means of tax relief. The loss of employment and investment in Toronto can only lead to further weakening of the City itself.

Under the leadership of Mayor Lastman, Toronto Council has asked the Province to reconsider its decision and choose one of the following options:

(1) single, uniform education tax rate for business across Ontario;

(2) a GTA-wide education business tax rate; and

(3) offer financial assistance to those cities or areas with higher than average business tax.

Since the February 5, 1998, announcement, the Mayor with Council has taken decisive action to address this crucial issue. They have drawn businesses together from all quarters to make them aware of the seriousness of the situation and to urge them to take action. Clearly, the Mayor and Council cannot fight this battle alone and business must now be seen by the Province to be willing to enter the fray.

Mayor Lastman has proposed that the City participate in partnership with business to impress upon the Provincial Government the dire implications of its recent decision. To this end, a four-week joint business/city marketing campaign is proposed to highlight the issue and educate business people and the public while at the same time pressure the Province to implement a fair tax system for Toronto.

The leadership of business in the endeavour is crucial. City Council's contribution is important but it must be led by business for business. This will require a real commitment from the business community in terms of time, effort and financial participation.

Goals:

The campaign we propose focuses on three key areas:

(1) a call to action - getting businesses committed and involved;

(2) creating awareness of the issue and the basic unfairness of the provincial decision; and

(3) pressuring the Province to take action and treat Toronto businesses fairly.

(1) Call to Action:

The first step is to get as many businesses as possible involved. This can be accomplished through a week-long fax/advertising/direct mail focus. The key is numbers. The more businesses on board, the stronger the movement will be.

A hotline should be established to register businesses interested in participating. This line could be maintained by either the Chambers, the Board of Trade or Toronto Economic Development. Wherever located, it should be one, central number and one central list should be maintained.

Businesses calling to register should be provided with an information pamphlet and the level of support from business should be identified: whether the business will provide written support, attend meetings or rallies, solicit other businesses, display signage, provide financial support, etc.

The hotline should be maintained throughout the duration of the campaign.

(2) Awareness:

Simultaneously with the call to action, an advertising/poster/transit ad component should be implemented to build on the recent media focus on this issue. In addition, a media relations component should be used to augment paid advertising. Meetings with editorial boards of the major dailies as well as local papers should be arranged immediately to obtain support and editorial coverage on an ongoing basis. Speakers from the business community should be identified to participate in radio/television interview opportunities.

While the taxation issue is a complex one, effort should be made to simplify explanations of the issue to the greatest extent possible in order to make it understandable to the general public. A simple-to-understand hand-out about taxation should be developed as well as Q & A's for speakers on the issue.

(3) Pressuring the Province:

Weeks 3 and 4 of the campaign should focus on increasing the pressure on the Province. This is accomplished through advertising, editorial, billboards, organized rallies, meetings with Ministers and MPP's and, if funds permit, radio advertising. At this point in the campaign, the voice of business should be heard loudly and clearly. The objective is to force a response from the Province on this issue as the campaign heightens during the 3rd and 4th weeks.

Campaign Costs:

Preliminary estimates indicate that a campaign of this magnitude can be accomplished for between $200,000.00 - $400,000.00 The majority of costs relate to print advertising, billboards, printing and radio advertising. The campaign itself can be stepped up or scaled back based on available funds.

It is extremely important, in our view, that the business community contribute financially in this campaign. It would be our recommendation that in addition to staff resources from Economic Development and communications, the City contribute up to 50 percent of the overall cost of the campaign.

It is therefore incumbent upon the business community to set up a focussed fundraising component to its initiative. Contributions to the campaign for in-kind services for items such as printing, delivery, etc. are just as valuable as cash and these types of contributions should be identified as quickly as possible. Staff of the Toronto Economic Development office would work with the fundraising committee in a support role.

Partnership Roles:

A campaign of this nature, carried out in partnership, requires a clear statement of the roles and responsibilities of each of the participants to avoid confusion, duplication and to maximize effectiveness. A suggested division of responsibilities includes:

(a) Business:

- overall leadership and management of the campaign;

- key spokes people throughout;

- 50 percent fundraising partners;

- central hotline registration management;

- distribute information through associations;

- use existing events/meetings to feature discussion around issue;

- hosts rallies/events; and

- secure meetings with editorial boards, MPP's and Ministers.

(b) Toronto Economic Development/Toronto Communications:

- supports and co-ordinates business efforts;

- develop creative and prepares marketing materials;

- implements campaign strategies in co-ordination with business;

- supports and co-ordinates Mayor/Council efforts;

- provides media relations support; and

- advises and consults as required.

(c) Mayor Lastman/Council:

- Mayor acts as key spokesman for City;

- 50 percent funding partner;

- attends and supports events/activities as required; and

- Mayor/Council media relations.

Campaign Components:

In partnership with the business community, staff from the Economic Development and Communications Departments will finalize a full marketing campaign. The campaign would potentially include: Graphic look and slogan, public information materials -- transit poster, poster, direct mail piece, Internet, print advertising, councillor's tool kit, special events/rallies, editorial, and media spokespersons. Business community contacts will comprise the Fair Tax Partnership which is a coalition of business associations and individual businesses from across the City. The Board of Trade will work with the Fair Tax Partnership in sharing information and research. No doubt their activities will dovetail with one another resulting in a combined impact that will drive movement towards the common objective.

Conclusions:

In order to achieve Council's position of an unified education tax rate which will benefit local businesses and level the playing field within the GTA a comprehensive communications strategy will be needed. This strategy must incorporate both the City and the business community in a partnership, both sending a strong message to the Province on the unfairness of their actions. The implications of not addressing the issue will have far reaching impacts on the whole Province.

Contact Name:

Brenda Librecz, Economic Development, 396 7744;

Sydney K. Baxter, Communications, 392 3769.)

(A list of the participants in the Fair Tax Partnership, which was appended to the foregoing report, is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

(City Council also had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (February 24, 1998) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

To provide information and advice on:

(a) the taxation provisions of the Education Act, and the City of Toronto's duties thereunder; and

(b) the potential for the City launching a legal challenge to the higher tax rates for school board purposes set by the Province for business properties located in the City of Toronto as compared to the tax rate set for business properties located in other municipalities.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

N/A

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Council Reference/Background/History:

City Council, at its Special Meeting held on February 12, 1998, requested the City Solicitor to:

(a) review constitutional issues arising from the setting of differing tax rates for school board purposes for business properties located in different municipalities and to advise Council on the potential for launching a legal challenge to the establishment of such rates by the Province; and

(b) advise Council on what it can do to ensure that the City of Toronto is "not responsible for the collection of an inequitable tax".

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

(1) The Prescription of Tax Rates for School Purposes under The Education Act:

The Education Act (the "Act") was recently amended by the enactment of the Education Quality Improvement Act, 1997 (formerly Bill 160). Section 113(1) of the Education Quality Improvement Act, 1997 repeals and replaces the Finance provisions of the Act.

Municipalities are required by paragraph 1 of subsection 257.7(1) of the Act to levy and collect the tax rate prescribed for school purposes under section 257.12 on residential and business properties located in the municipality. The Act provides definitions of both business and residential property and provides authority for the Minister of Finance to make regulations prescribing further classes of property to come within those definitions.

The Minister of Finance is authorized to make regulations, "prescribing the tax rates for school purposes for the purposes of section 257.7" pursuant to clause (b) of subsection 257.12(1). These regulations may prescribe different tax rates for, "different municipalities" pursuant to clause (3)(a), but must prescribe a single tax rate for the residential/farm property class and the multi-residential property class pursuant to subsection (4). The tax rate for the farmlands and the managed forests property classes must be 25 percent of the tax rate prescribed for the residential/farm property class (subsection (5)).

Thus, the Act provides the Minister of Finance with the authority to prescribe different tax rates in different municipalities on all but the residential/farm, multi-residential, farmland and managed forests property classes. As the commercial, industrial or other business property classes are not so excluded, the Minister is free to prescribe varying rates on properties within those classes.

(2) Constitutional Issues:

Section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the "Charter") protects an "individual" from discrimination which is based either upon one of the grounds listed in the section or upon a ground which is analogous to the listed grounds. While not yet considered by the Supreme Court of Canada, section 15 has been held by lower courts not to apply to corporations. It is also unclear whether discrimination by geographic location would be a ground for discrimination analogous to those listed in subsection 15(1) of the Charter. Factors held to be analogous grounds generally involve immutable personal characteristics and it is thus questionable whether geographic location is similarly immutable as a person is always free to change the geographic location of his or her business.

In any event the City of Toronto has no standing to launch a challenge to the Act under section 15 or under any section of the Charter since municipal corporations have no inherent rights independent of those conferred upon them by provincial statute. Pursuant to paragraph 8 of section 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867, the Provinces have the exclusive power to make laws in relation to "Municipal Institutions in the Province". Municipal institutions such as municipal corporations created pursuant to this power have no constitutional status and no autonomous rights or powers. As the Province may confer rights or powers upon municipal institutions by enacting legislation, the Province may similarly amend or repeal such conferring legislation thereby rescinding the previously conferred rights and powers.

While the City itself has no standing to launch a constitutional challenge to the provisions of the Act, an unincorporated business adversely affected by the differing tax rates might attempt to challenge the Act under section 15. Similarly, a separate school board could attempt to challenge the Act under section 93 of the Constitution Act, 1867. This section provides the Provinces with jurisdiction to legislate with respect to education subject to the separate school rights protected by section 93 which, in essence, protect all rights and privileges conferred by law regarding denominational schools enjoyed prior to confederation. It may be arguable that taxing rights are inherent in the management rights of the denominational school system, and that the removal of the taxation power from separate school boards by the Act therefore infringes this constitutionally protected right.

Subject to the separate school restrictions, section 93 confers full jurisdiction upon the Province to legislate with respect to education. Thus, the Act is squarely within Provincial jurisdiction, subject only to a challenge by a separate school board for infringement of its constitutionally protected pre-confederation rights.

(3) The City's Duties under the Education Act:

Since the Province can confer powers and rights upon a municipal institution of its creation, it can similarly impose duties and obligations upon such institutions. The Act imposes certain levy, collection and payment duties on municipalities in respect of the tax rates set for school board purposes.

As discussed above, the Act requires municipalities to levy and collect the tax rate prescribed for school purposes on residential and business properties located in the municipality (subsection 257.7(1), paragraph 1). Consequently, the City of Toronto is obliged to levy and collect the tax rate on business properties whether or not it agrees with the rate so prescribed.

Furthermore, the Minister of Education and Training is authorized, pursuant to clause 257.14(1)(d), to make regulations, in connection with taxes for school purposes only, regarding the contents of the tax notices required to deliver by municipalities pursuant to the Municipal Act. Similar powers of regulation have been conferred on the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing by subsection 392(5) of the Municipal Act (as enacted by the Tax Credits to Create Jobs Act, 1997).

Similarly, the amount levied by a municipality for school purposes on business property must be distributed by the municipality directly to the school board (subsection 257.8(2)). Where the property is located in the area of jurisdiction of only one board, the amount levied on the property by the municipality in accordance with the tax rates set by the Minister, shall be distributed by the municipality to the board in whose jurisdiction the property is located. Alternatively, if the property is located in the area of jurisdiction of more than one board, the amount shall be distributed among the boards in proportion to enrolment in the area within the jurisdiction of both boards. Such calculations are to be made by the Minister pursuant to subsection 257.8(3).

The Act also establishes due dates for the payment to school boards of instalments of taxes levied by a municipality for school purpose. These payments are to be made as follows:

(i) 25 percent of the amount levied for the previous calendar year, on or before March 31;

(ii) 50 percent of the amount levied for the current calendar year less the amount of the instalment under paragraph 1, on or before June 30;

(iii) 25 percent of the amount levied for the current calendar year, on or before September 30; and

(iv) the balance of the amount levied for the current calendar year, on or before December 15. (Subsection 257.11(1))

As a transitional measure, the total payments to be made on or before March 31, 1998 are to be the sum of:

"(a) 12.5 percent of the amount levied for school purposes for 1997 on residential and farm assessment, within the meaning of section 248 of this Act as it read on December 31, 1997, in the area in respect of which the municipality or board levies taxes under section 257.7; and

(b) 25 percent of the amount levied for school purposes for 1997 on commercial assessment, within the meaning of section 248 of this Act as it read on December 31, 1997, in the area in respect of which the municipality or board levies taxes under section 257.7." (subsection 257.11(9))

Where such payments are not made on the due dates, interest must be paid from the date of default to the date that payment is made at a rate specified by subsection (4) (subsection 257.11(2)).

The number of instalments, their due dates and amounts may be varied by agreement between a school board and a majority of the municipalities in its area of jurisdiction representing at least two-third of the assessment taxable for the purposes of the board (subsection 257.11(5)). However, a minimum of one instalment must be made in each quarter of the year (subsection 257.11(7)).

The City of Toronto is thus required to levy and collect taxes for school purposes in accordance with the tax rates prescribed by the Minister. The taxes for school purposes so levied and collected must be paid over to the relevant school boards in accordance with the provisions of the Act. While instalment due dates are set out in the Act, the City may vary such due dates by agreement with the relevant school boards.

Conclusions:

The Education Act provides authority for the Minister to prescribe different tax rates for school purposes on business properties in different municipalities. The City of Toronto, as a statutory municipal corporation, has no standing to challenge constitutionally the Province's ability to prescribe such varying rates.

The City of Toronto is also required by the Act to levy and collect such tax rates for school purposes as the Minister prescribes. The taxes so levied and collected must be paid by the City to the school boards in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The City has no power to vary the prescribed rates, or to refuse to levy and collect taxes in accordance with such rates. However, the City may vary the schedule for payment of the taxes to the school boards in accordance with an agreement between the City and the school boards.

Contact Name:

Christina Hueniken, Legal Services, 392-8429.)

Other Items Considered by the Committee

(City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, received this Clause, for information.)

(a) Remuneration and Expenses of Members of Council and of Council Appointees to Local Boards and other Special Purpose Bodies for the period January 1 to December 31, 1997.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received the following report:

(i) (February 6, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer advising, for information, that it is anticipated that the statement of the remuneration and expenses paid in 1997 to each member of Council in respect of his/her services as a member of Council or as an officer of the municipal corporation and also to each member of Council or other person appointed by Council to a local board or other special purpose body, will be forwarded to the Corporate Services Committee meeting on March 30, 1998, and subsequently to Council on April 15, 1998.

(b) Resolution - Loss of Revenue as a Result of Downloading from the Province - Town of Pickering.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received the following transmittal letter:

(i) (February 18, 1998) from the Budget Committee advising that it had received the communications from the Clerk of the Town of Pickering, forwarding resolutions passed by the Council of the Town of Pickering on December 22, 1997 and January 22, 1998, expressing its strenuous objection to the proposal received from the Minister of Finance which provides a substantial loss of revenue for the Town of Pickering resulting from the downloading from the Province and setting out various actions to be taken in this connection.

(c) St. Lawrence Centre for the Arts - Capital Improvement Fund.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received the following transmittal letter:

(i) (February 18, 1998) from the Budget Committee advising that it had received the communication (October 10, 1998) from the Assistant City Clerk of the former City of Toronto advising that on October 6 and 7, 1997, that Council had adopted Clause 53 of Executive Committee Report No. 23 entitled "St. Lawrence Centre for the Arts: Capital Improvement Fund".

Respectfully submitted,

MEL LASTMAN,

Chair

Toronto, February 24, 1998

(Report No. 3 of The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, including additions thereto, was adopted, as amended, by City Council on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998.)

Please note that council and committee documents are provided electronically for information only and do not retain the exact structure of the original versions. For example, charts, images and tables may be difficult to read. As such, readers should verify information before acting on it. All council documents are available from the City Clerk's office. Please e-mail clerk@city.toronto.on.ca.

City maps | Get involved | Toronto links

� City of Toronto 1998-2001