TABLE OF CONTENTS

REPORTS OF THE STANDING COMMITTEES

AND OTHER COMMITTEES

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

REPORT No. 4

1Attracting Semi-Conductor Plant Investment to Toronto

2Proposed Contract Award - Arena and Major Facility Advertising Program - Parks and Recreation Division

3Appointments to the Board of Management for Business Improvement Areas and Amendments to the (former Toronto) Municipal Code Chapter 20, Business Improvement Areas - Various Wards

4Proposed Fees for Heritage Preservation Services

5Standing Authority to Exempt Certain Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Lands from Municipal Taxes

6Milliken Park Community Recreation Centre, Project No. 705,Scarborough District Contract No. PBS 98-004, Malvern Ward

7Celebrate Toronto Street Festival

8Other Items Considered by the Committee

City of Toronto

REPORT No. 4

OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

(from its meeting on October 19, 1998,

submitted by Councillor Brian Ashton, Chair)

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998

1

Attracting Semi-Conductor Plant Investment to Toronto

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Economic Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (September 29, 1998) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism subject to Recommendation (2) being amended to include the words "on phasing and funding" after the word "reports", so as to read:

"(2)staff from the Economic Development Division provide further status reports on phasing and funding in a timely manner on the progress of this project;":

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to initiate a strategy to attract semiconductor plant investment to the City of Toronto through the structuring of a local partnership to combine the resources and efforts of a number of interested organizations on this initiative.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Costs associated with this project will be compensated through partnerships with other levels of government, private sector and business associations. The City's contribution will include Economic Development Division staff time, marketing materials and a portion of the costs of any research/data deemed to be beneficial to the city. This is a long-term project and funds will be derived from both current and future operating budgets of the Economic Development Division.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)staff from the Economic Development Division initiate and participate in the creation of a Toronto Semiconductor Partnership which will explore the opportunity to attract semiconductor plant facility investment to Toronto;

(2)staff from the Economic Development Division provide further status reports in a timely manner on the progress of this project; and

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

Background:

The Mayor's Office and staff from the Economic Development Division received a presentation from the Federal Semiconductor Working Group led by Investment Partnerships Canada (Industry Canada/Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade - DFAIT) outlining the opportunity to locate a semiconductor manufacturing facility in Toronto. North Etobicoke MP Roy Cullen coordinated the presentation, which included representatives from the Ontario Government, Humber College and the development community. In addition, MPP John Hastings, and Toronto Councillors Elizabeth Brown and Bruce Sinclair have been actively involved in this initiative and were represented at the meeting.

A semi-conductor plant, commonly referred to as a "Fab" facility, manufactures computer chips. At the last roundtable discussion of the Federal Semiconductor Working Group, the federal government estimated that the world-wide semiconductor market will represent US$376 billion by the year 2002 and that this demand will fuel the requirement for more than 100 new and refurbished fabrication plants over this period. Of these, it is anticipated that some 27 new facilities will be located in North America and that each of these plants will require an investment of US$500 million to US$2.4 billion. Fabs create significant benefits, including attracting skilled labour, contributing to the municipal, provincial and federal tax base, creating an average of 800 to 2000 jobs per facility with the supplier chains and supporting industry creating an additional two to three indirect jobs for each permanent fab job. These facilities consume a significant amount of electrical power and water and demand a well established, modern and complete infrastructure and an educated work force.

Recently the computer chip industry has experienced a downturn in its growth and production with the closure of some older fab facilities, however forecasts predict that the current situation will turn around in the latter part of 1998 and beginning of 1999. This slowdown affords Toronto with an opportunity to compete in this market by taking such necessary actions as producing comprehensive investment profiles in anticipation of the next growth cycle.

The Ontario Jockey Club (OJC) site is located at the northwest corner of the Woodbine Racetrack property, bounded by Highway 427 and Rexdale Boulevard. The OJC retained the services of Industrial Design Corporation (IDC) of Portland, Oregon, to evaluate this location as to its suitability for semiconductor manufacturing. IDC's investigation was very positive with no potential flaws identified.

Within Toronto, only the OJC site has been investigated to date. There is an outstanding need to identify and evaluate further sites within Toronto as to their suitability for this type of development. Many of the regions and cities participating with Investment Partnerships Canada have identified a number of sites with potential for this type of facility; Ottawa, for example, has four sites identified.

The process of attracting a fab facility can take several years, therefore land owners typically investigate other opportunities for their property concurrently. The OJC has indicated that they are enthusiastic about the potential of locating a fab facility on their lands and will actively participate in securing this investment, however they will also continue to consider other opportunities should they materialize.

Comments:

Investment Partnerships Canada is a joint initiative of Industry Canada and DFAIT with staff dedicated to coordinating the attraction of semiconductor investments into Canada. Currently there are seven municipalities actively pursuing this type of investment; these include: Calgary, Edmonton, Burlington, Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver and Winnipeg. The five provinces in which these cities are located also provide staff and political support to these efforts. Research is provided to the group through the National Research Council and the Communications Research Centre. In addition, there are seventeen Canadian Embassy posts actively involved in communicating with investors in their respective countries and who report regularly to the group. In June and August of 1997 potential investors visited Canada; this visit involved 325 people with 19 meetings, site visits and significant logistic support (eg. helicopter fly-overs, etc.).

It is anticipated that, in order for a municipality to be prepared and have a comprehensive profile ready to respond to a future investment prospect, an investment in the order of $400,000.00 will be required. This investment can be broken down into labour/staff time (2 FTEs), commissioning of specialized studies (e.g. soil, vibration and hydro), preparation of investment profiles, study tours, site visits, partnership meetings and costs associated with the participation of Mayor and Members of Council with investment leads.

These costs will not all be born by the City; rather there is a need to develop a team or partnership to cost share in this initiative. This project's success hinges on a committed partnership being established in the community. A regional semiconductor investment profile is one of the most extensive and comprehensive data sets a community will ever require and, therefore, represents a good investment in research which has broader application for future investment inquiries.

A working group will be structured to undertake this initiative and will include political representatives, university and college representatives, provincial and federal government officials, economic development professionals, utility companies (ie., hydro, water, gas) the Greater Toronto Marketing Alliance, the GTA Economic Development Partnership, relevant business associations such as SMART Toronto, Connect IT and the Toronto Technology Network and private sector representatives including development industry interests.

Toronto has many major advantages which have been reviewed by the federal government in their Toronto Census Metropolitan Area (CMA) Report. This prospectus highlights the breadth and depth of the capability in semiconductors that currently exists within the Toronto CMA and its strong links to the electronics market. This capability is founded on Toronto's technological strengths, its specialized services and support for the electronics industry, its R&D resources, the availability of skilled labour, the strength of existing business networks and the regional infrastructure in place to support the sector. A copy has not been included in this report, however after review one would conclude that the Toronto CMA represents a huge opportunity for potential semiconductor investment.

This project will yield number of spin-off benefits which have been experienced in other regions to date. The City will create a comprehensive community profile which can be used to attract investment in other industries. The partnership developed in this process can, and will, form the nucleus for future investment attraction efforts and most importantly it sends a clear signal that Toronto is "open for business".

Conclusions:

This report recommends a process for the City of Toronto to take a proactive role in securing a future investment in semiconductor fabrication facilities. In order for this initiative to be successful, it is necessary that the Economic Development Division take a lead role in forming a coalition of local public sector and business interests through the formation of a Toronto Semiconductor Partnership. Along with the significant benefits which will be afforded to the City's economy through the securing of this type of investment, the process itself will yield a comprehensive investment profile which will have application to other future investment inquiries in other industry sectors.

Contact Names:

Rick Field, Economic DevelopmentTel.:394-8237Fax: 394-5537

Christine Raissis, Director, Economic Research & Bus. Info.Tel.:392-3385Fax: 395-5332

Brenda Librecz, Managing Director, Economic DevelopmentTel.:397-4700Fax: 395-0906

--------

The Economic Development Committee reports, for the information of Council, having received an overhead presentation from Mr. Bruce Graham, Director, Business Developments and Retention, Economic Development, in connection with the foregoing matter.

The following persons also appeared before the Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

-Mr. James Holloway, Senior Account Executive, Investments Partnerships Canada, Industry Canada;

-Mr. Saad Rafi, Director, Investment Branch, Investment Division, Ministry of Economic Development, Trade and Tourism, Government of Ontario; and

-Councillor Elizabeth Brown, Rexdale Thistletown.

(A copy of the aforementioned presentation is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

2

Proposed Contract Award - Arena and Major Facility Advertising

Program - Parks and Recreation Division

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Economic Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following recommendations of the report (September 1, 1998) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism appended to his further report dated October 2, 1998:

It is recommended that:

(1)a five year contract for the exclusive indoor advertising rights for arenas and major facilities within the Parks and Recreation Division be awarded to DM Media;

(2)this contract reflect the terms and conditions contained within the Request For Proposals and this report;

(3)the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, the City Solicitor, and the Director of Purchasing, be directed to negotiate, prepare and execute the appropriate contract(s);

(4)the portion of annual revenues in excess of the $1,000,000.00 revenue budget requirement, be placed in a balance sheet account for basic improvement use by the participating facilities; and

(5)the appropriate City officials take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

The Committee reports, for the information of Council, having received for information the letter (September 17, 1998) from MediaCo.

The Economic Development Committee submits the following report (October 2, 1998) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to respond to Media Co.'s letter of September 17, 1998 (Appendix II), addressed to the Chair and Committee. In this letter, Media Co. cited reasons why the company felt it should have been granted an interview in its bid for the above award. This report explains why an interview was not granted and recommends that the recommendations contained in the award report of September 1, 1998 be now approved.

Source of Funds:

Not applicable.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)this report, addressing Media Co.'s letter of September 17, 1998, be received as information; and

(2)the recommendations contained in the Department's award report of September 1, 1998 (Appendix I) be approved.

Background:

At Committee's Meeting of Friday, September 18, 1998, the Department submitted an award report dated September 1, 1998 with regard to an Arena and Major Facility Advertising Program. At that same time Media Co., an unsuccessful proponent submitted a letter dated September 17, 1998 (Appendix II) in which the company cited reasons why it felt it should have been granted an interview in its bid for this award.

As the Department received this letter during the course of Committee's meeting, a decision was made to defer the Department's report until Committee's next meeting of October 19, 1998.

Comments/Discussion/Justification:

The following is the Department's response to Media Co.'s letter of September 17, 1998, referencing the pages and paragraphs of the company's letter.

Bid Submission Values - Page One - All Paragraphs:

Media Co. suggests that it was the third highest bidder and as such, should have been invited for an interview. This is not correct. All the proponents that were invited for an interview were made up of companies with higher bids than Media Co. and the two present incumbents; namely Future Sign Multimedia Displays and Board View Advertising. As an act of courtesy, the Evaluation Team had decided before the process began to grant the two incumbents this interview.

Appendix I lists the three final candidates of which DM Media submitted the highest bid. If Media Co.'s bid submission had been listed, the company would have ranked fifth and dollar wise, well below the top proponents.

Only Company to Conduct Site Visits - Page Two - Paragraph Three:

Media Co. suggests that it was the only proponent to conduct site visits and gather information. This is not correct. We can advise that a number of proponents went out to visit our facilities and that one proponent actually went out and did a video tape survey of some of our facilities, the latter being presented with their bid submission.

Guarantees - Page Two - Paragraphs Four and Five:

Media Co. suggests that the R.F.P. was changed to include a 20 percent revenue variance guarantee. This is not correct. In the R.F.P. under Obligations/Conditions, 4.1 reads as follows:

"Rights

The City reserves the right to reject any proposal including those proposals offering the highest remuneration.

The City reserves the right to enter into negotiation with preferred Proponents in the event that proposals do not entirely address the requirements and desires of the City. As such, mutually agreeable terms and conditions may be negotiated and included as a modification to proposals."

This guarantee was negotiated with the recommended proponent with a view to ensuring the proponents' commitment to deliver their stated remuneration to the City.

In its letter, Media Co. states, "If we had been made aware that there was a 20 percent cushion, we could have put in a higher bid".

Background on Recommended Proponent - Page Three - Paragraph Two:

Media Co. suggests that neither of the top two proponents have any history in the business. This is not correct. The recommended proponent, DM Media and its two principals, have over twenty-five years experience selling and designing advertising. As individuals, they have personally sold and managed advertising contracts associated with bill boards, bus shelters, mall posters, airports, GO Stations, Go Trains, buses and subways, all in excess of $60,000,000.00.

The second "runner-up", Future Sign Multimedia Displays, currently manages arena bill board, poster and banner advertising in the former municipality of North York and has had a number of years experience in designing, selling, producing and installing arena board advertising in multiplex arenas such as Westwood, Chesswood and Doublerink Arenas.

Arena Advertising Experience - Page Four, Paragraphs Two, Three, Four and Five:

Media Co. suggests that it is the only company in the industry to handle this contract (arena ads) with the exception of Board View Advertising (another unsuccessful proponent). This is not correct, as previously referenced. However, and more importantly, this was not an arena/rink board based R.F.P. The Request For Proposals, under 1.1 Introduction and 1.3 New Advertising Venues, clearly states that the Department wishes to establish a comprehensive indoor advertising program encompassing all venues within all its facilities. Of the one hundred and fifty-eight facility opportunities listed in the R.F.P., Media Co.'s bid submission addressed 25 percent.

Interview Not Granted - Page Five - Paragraphs Two and Three:

Media Co. did not receive an interview for the following reasons:

Their financial bid was not in the top three as suggested and, dollar-wise well below the main contenders.

Their bid for each of the five years in the proposed contract was a constant $590,000.00. Unlike most proponents, who projected increased sales and revenues to the City over the five years, their financial projections indicated a standstill, no growth position.

Their average guarantees City-wide, although not a requirement, were less than what the City currently receives from a modest rink/bill board program in North York, Etobicoke and East York.

Their submission was very arena facility oriented. It is the Department's desire to move away from a traditional, localized arena rink board advertising program and enter into a new comprehensive, future focused facility advertising program. Such a program would seamlessly address the revenue requirements of the City, while addressing all advertising venue opportunities in all types of facilities.

Conclusions:

With the receipt of Media Co's letter on the day that Committee last met, the Department felt it best to defer the submission of its report in order to prepare this response. This delay, however, resulted in a missed opportunity to earn projected revenues in excess of $100,000.00 as October and November are key advertising sales months.

The Department wishes to assure the Chair and the Committee that the selection process was conducted by a team of qualified representatives from all the former municipalities, and that the team was unanimous in their decision and in turn, the award report which we respectfully re-submit today.

Contact Name:

David C. Brown

Partnerships and Sponsorships Officer

Parks and Recreation

Telephone: 395-6196Fax: 395-0105

(Appendix I, report dated September 1, 1998, addressed to

the Economic Development Committee, from the

Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism)

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to request Council's approval of a five year contract award to DM Media for the exclusive indoor advertising rights for arenas and major facilities within the Parks and Recreation Division. In return the City will receive projected new advertising revenues averaging $1,115,000.00 per annum over the five year period of the contract (Appendix I). This award request is the result of a public Request for Proposals.

Source of Funds:

There are no City funds required with respect to this matter. The award of this contract would result in new advertising revenues as indicated above.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)a five year contract for the exclusive indoor advertising rights for arenas and major facilities within the Parks and Recreation Division be awarded to DM Media;

(2)this contract reflect the terms and conditions contained within the Request For Proposals and this report;

(3)the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, the City Solicitor; and the Director of Purchasing, be directed to negotiate, prepare and execute the appropriate contract(s);

(4)the portion of annual revenues in excess of the $1,000,000.00 revenue budget requirement, be placed in a balance sheet account for basic improvement use by the participating facilities; and

(5)the appropriate City officials take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

Background/History:

The Parks and Recreation Division's revenue enhancement budget calls for a 1998 increase of $250,000.00 in facility advertising with an annual impact of $1,000,000.00. In order to meet this budget challenge, new facility advertising programs must be explored and ideally implemented in 1998.

At present, the former Regions of Etobicoke, East York and North York, have arena board advertising contracts that expire on November 30, 1998, September 30, 1998 and April 30, 1998 respectively. The other former Regions, by and large, have yet to enter this and other indoor facility advertising programs.

With a view to addressing contract expirations, capitalizing on economies of scale and meeting the above budget objective, the Division believes that a City-wide Request For Proposals and subsequent contract award for all indoor advertising rights for arenas and major facilities, would be both appropriate and timely.

On May 19, 20, and 21, 1998, a Request For Proposals advertisement appeared in the Globe and Mail and the Toronto Star, and on Friday, May 22, in the Marketing Magazine. In addition, registered letters were sent out to nine major groups who in the past had shown interest in similar initiatives. The Request For Proposals closed on Monday, June 8^th at 4:30 p.m. and at that time, seventy-three Request For Proposals had been picked up over the previous three weeks. The latter does not include Request For Proposals that were sent out to a number of cities across Canada upon their request for information. In turn, fourteen bid submissions were received, three late bid submissions that could not be entertained, and two letters of interest.

A Project Committee, made up of representatives from each of the former Regions and who had formulated the Request For Proposals, reviewed all bid submissions and determined that seven merited interviews. These seven companies and their principals were in turn interviewed. The interviews focused on remuneration to the City and the bidders' ability to deliver a quality product backed by quality service that would meet the expectations and requirements of the City, bidder, and ultimately the consumer. Three of the seven companies were invited back for a second interview which explored even further the companies' ability to deliver remuneration, product and service.

Comments/Discussion/Justification:

Like most Request For Proposals, this R.F.P. was designed to provide a business opportunity whereby proponents could demonstrate background, expertise, product knowledge, along with their ability to provide satisfactory remuneration to the City. As the Request for Proposals reflected both a business arrangement with the City and a service provision that would reflect on the City's image, a great deal of emphasis was placed during the assessment/interview process on the bidders' ability to meet the terms and conditions of the Request For Proposals, both short and long term.

Taking all of the above into consideration, the Project Committee unanimously believes that DM Media best demonstrates this ability to perform and to provide the City with projected new indoor advertising revenues averaging $1,115,000.00 per annum over the five year period of the contract. These projected revenues (Appendix I) would be backed with a contractual understanding that should these revenues fall short of projections by twenty percent or more after the first year, the City would have the right to either cancel or re-negotiate the contract.

The execution of the contract(s) in addition to the terms and conditions contained within this report and the Request For Proposals would be contingent on a) the approval of the City Solicitor and the Director of Purchasing and b) an obligation on the part of the successful proponent to accommodate any partnership/sponsorship initiatives which might come from such a program in the future.

DM Media is an amalgamation of two sole proprietors that would be brought together and dedicated solely to this undertaking. The principals, Stephen Dohoo and James McCaffrey, with John Tomlinson as a consultant, have had many years experience in advertising sales and media consulting, most recently as consultants to GO Transit, developing GO Station advertising and managing all on train advertising. A number of references were checked and all proved satisfactory.

Finally, as both a participation incentive and reward for the individual facilities concerned, it is recommended that on an annual basis, the portion of City wide revenues in excess of the $1,000,000.00 budget requirement be placed in a balance sheet account for basic improvement use by the facilities. Although this amount is projected to be $575,000.00 over the five year period of the contract (Appendix I), this projection is considered to be conservative.

Conclusions:

The Division believes that appropriate indoor facility advertising is a key element in revenue generation which assists in the financing of programs and services, while providing a community service. The Division further believes that the award of this contract firmly addresses the latter. It is acknowledged, however, that this is only the first step and that in the future, a more comprehensive advertising strategy will be established to address and coordinate all advertising venues, including parks, playgrounds, public vehicles, newsletters, and various publications.

Contact Name:

Gary W. Stoner, Deputy Commissioner

Parks and RecreationTelephone: 395-6190Fax: 395-0105

E-mail: gwstoner@north-york.on.ca

--------

Appendix I

City of Toronto

Parks and Recreation Division

Arena and Major Facility Advertising Program

Requests for Proposals

Projected Annual Revenues to the City

(Three Final Candidates)

City of Toronto

Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Department

Parks and Recreation Division

Proposed Contract Award

Arena and Major Facility Advertising Program

Executive Summary

This proposed contract award:

-Flows from a comprehensive, public Request For Proposals.

-Was initiated as a result of a) arena board advertising contracts expiring in the former Regions of Etobicoke, East York and North York, b) a desire to capitalize on city wide economies of scale, and c) the need to meet the Division's revenue enhancement budget call for a 1998 increase of $250,000.00 in facility advertising with an annual impact of $1,000,000.00.

-Covers all arenas and major facilities within the Division with the exception of some facilities run by Boards of Management.

-Reflects a five year contract which would provide the successful proponent with the exclusive rights to develop, sell, install and maintain several forms of advertisements (arena boards, centre ice, picture posters, etc.) in arenas and major facilities subject to a) advertising guidelines laid out in the Request For Proposals and b) approval of all advertising by the Division before installation.

-Requires the execution of the contract(s) in addition to the terms and conditions contained within this report and the Request For Proposals, to be contingent on a) the approval of the City Solicitor and the Director of Purchasing and b) an obligation on the part of the successful proponent to accommodate any partnership/sponsorship initiatives which might come from such a program in the future.

-Projects, conservatively, the following revenues to the City; Year 1 - $900,000.00; Year 2 - $1,025,000.00; Year 3 - $1,100,000.00; Year 4 - $1,200,000.00; Year 5 - $1,350,000.00).

-Recommends that the portion of annual revenues in excess of the $1,000,000.00 revenue budget requirement be placed in a balance sheet account for basic improvement use by the participating facilities.

--------

The Economic Development Committee reports, for the information of Council, also having had before it during consideration of the foregoing matter a communication (September 17, 1998) from Mr. Andrew Hethrington, Vice President, MediaCo, requesting that the recommendation of the Economic Development Committee at its meeting on September 18, 1998, be referred back to staff for further consideration for a variety of reasons including what seems to be, a significant change in the terms of the RFP, which is on file in the office of the City Clerk.

3

Appointments to the Board of Management for Business Improvement

Areas and Amendments to the (former Toronto) Municipal Code

Chapter 20, Business Improvement Areas - Various Wards

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Economic Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (September 28, 1998) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism:

Purpose:

Changes to membership of Boards of Management for Business Improvement Areas require Council approval and a by-law amendment. Attached is Schedule A detailing the amendments to (former Toronto) Municipal Code, Chapter 20 and Appendix 1 listing the names of the nominees to be appointed.

Source of Funds:

No funds required. Business Improvement Area operating budgets are raised by a special levy on members.

Recommendations:

"It is recommended that:

(1)amendments be made to Schedule A Individual Boards of Management, of the (former Toronto) Municipal Code Chapter 20, Business Improvement Areas as set out in the attached Schedule A. These changes are specific to Number of Members and Members Needed for Quorum and are highlighted by "Changes From and To";

(2)Council appoint the nominees listed in Appendix 1 of this report to the Boards of Management for Bloor/Bathurst-Madison, Bloor West Village, and Eglinton Way Business Improvement Areas. The term of office is to expire on November 30, 2000, or as soon thereafter as successors are appointed. Each of the named nominees meets the requirements of Section 220 of the Municipal Act, as amended;

(3)Leave be granted for the introduction of the necessary bill in Council to give effect thereto; and

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

Comments:

The Board of Management of the Bloor/Bathurst-Madison Business Improvement Area has requested that the size of their Board be increased from eleven to twelve. The nominee to be appointed is Mr. David McCullough. The quorum should remain at six.

The Board of Management of the Bloor West Village Business Improvement Area has requested that the size of their Board be increased from twelve to thirteen. The nominee to be appointed is

Mr. Bill Walker. Also the Board recommends that Ms Nancy-June Jackson be appointed to the Board following the resignation of Mary Field. The quorum should remain at six.

The Board of Management of the Eglinton Way Business Improvement Area recommends that Pamela Switzer be appointed to the Board following the resignation of Liza Chalaidopoulos.

Neither the size of the Board of Management of the Eglinton Way Business Improvement Area or the quorum are affected by this appointment.

Clause No. 1 contained in Report No. 8 of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, which was adopted by City Council at its meeting of May 13 and 14, 1998 increased the Board of Management of the Gerrard India Bazaar Business Improvement Area from twelve to sixteen. The quorum was not adjusted at the time. The quorum requires to be changed from seven to eight to reflect the increase in the size of the Board.

Authority to change the number of Council Members appointed to the Junction Gardens Business Improvement Area from two to three was provided by amendment (6) of the Striking Committee Report(1), adopted by City Council January 8, 1998.

Authority to change the number of Council Members appointed to the Little Italy Business Improvement Area from one to two was provided by amendment (7) of the Striking Committee Report (1), adopted by City Council January 8, 1998. This will also require a change to the total number of members from six to seven. The quorum should remain at 3.

Conclusions:

These amendments should be reflected in Schedule A, Individual Boards of Management of the (former Toronto) Municipal Code Chapter 20, Business Improvement Areas.

The nominees listed in Appendix 1 of this report should be appointed to the Business Improvement Area, Boards of Management. The terms of office are to expire on November 30, 2000, or as soon thereafter as successors are appointed. Each of the named nominees meets the requirements of Section 220 of the Municipal Act, as amended.

Contact Names:

Ingrid Girdauskas, Economic Development

(tel.) 392-1134

(fax) 392-0675

Brenda Librecz, Managing Director, Economic Development

(tel.) 397-4700; (fax) 397-0906

--------

Schedule A

Business Improvement Areas

Individual Boards of Management

Name ofBy-lawMembers

Business WhichNumberCouncil MembersNeeded

ImprovementDesignatesofFor

AreaAreaMembersNumberWardQuorum

ChangedChanged

FromToFrom To

Bloor/Bathurst1995-06881112 2Downtown, 6 6

MadisonMidtown

Bloor West 30-861213 2High Park 6 6

Village

Gerrard India590-811616 1East Toronto 7 8

Bazaar

Junction8-731212 3High Park 5 5

GardensDavenport

Little Italy497-85 6 7 2Trinity-Niagara 3 3

--------

Appendix 1

Bloor/Bathurst-Madison BIA

David McCulloughHorizon Bar

298 Brunswick Ave.

Toronto, Ont. M5S 2M7

Bloor West Village BIA

Nancy-June JacksonRoyal Bank

2329 Bloor St. W.

Toronto, Ont. M6S 1P1

Bill WalkerCanada Trust

2322 Bloor St. W.

Toronto, Ont. M6S 1P2

Eglinton Way BIA

Pamela SwitzerPamela Switzer Enterprises

263 Eglinton Ave. W.

Suite 201

Toronto, Ont. M4R 1B1

4

Proposed Fees for Heritage Preservation Services

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, amended this Clause by striking out Recommendation No. (1) embodied in the report dated September 29, 1998, from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, and inserting in lieu thereof the following:

"(1)the following fees for heritage preservation services be approved for implementation beginning November 1, 1998:

(a)written responses to inquiries regarding the Inventory of Heritage Properties: $60.00 per property or $60.00 flat fee (applicable taxes included) for multiple adjacent properties covered by a single transaction;

(b)written responses to inquiries regarding Heritage Easement Agreements and/or Section 37 Agreements: $60.00 per agreement (applicable taxes included); and

(c)fees will not be charged for inquiries requiring only a verbal response from preservation staff;".)

The Economic Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (September 29, 1998) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism:

Purpose:

To recommend appropriate fees and processing procedures for heritage preservation services provided by Heritage Toronto and the Department of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism.

Financial Implications:

This report is consistent with the approved 1998 operating budget for Arts, Culture and Heritage.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the fees for heritage preservation services outlined in this report be approved for implementation beginning November 1, 1998;

(2)a by-law be introduced to permit fees for heritage preservation services; and

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

Background:

The Municipal Act allows a municipality or local board to pass by-laws, imposing fees for its services.

Prior to amalgamation, the City of Scarborough was the only area municipality to charge for inquiries respecting heritage properties. Precedents do exist, however, in other City Departments. The Building Division of Urban Planning & Development Services, as an example, charges a $60.00 per hour base rate for permit processing and inspections and a flat rate of $100.00 for a routine compliance search of records.

There are two types of preservation-related inquiries regarding the status of a property. The first and most common type is a request seeking formal confirmation whether a property is listed, designated, or is being considered for designation under the Ontario Heritage Act.

The second type of inquiry concerns compliance with legally contracted requirements. For a property subject to a Heritage Easement Agreement (HEA) under the Ontario Heritage Act and/or a Section37 agreement under the Planning Act, a prospective purchaser will wish to know whether all conditions of the HEA or the Section 37 agreement have been met. The response may or may not require input from other City departments.

Discussion:

Charging fees for heritage preservation services is intended to recover a portion of the administrative costs associated with processing inquiries. Fees, however, should not be set at a level which compromises preservation objectives. It should be noted that the fees proposed below do not include staff costs attributable to other City departments.

Proposed Fees:

Written responses to inquiries regarding the Inventory of Heritage Properties: $60.00 per property or $60.00 flat fee (applicable taxes included) for multiple adjacent properties covered by a single transaction.

Written responses to inquiries regarding Heritage Easement Agreements and/or Section 37 Agreements: $60.00 per agreement (applicable taxes included).

Fees will not be charged for inquiries requiring only a verbal response from preservation staff.

Processing:

The Ontario Heritage Act states that the municipal clerk shall keep a register of designated properties and issue extracts from it upon payment of a fee. In practice, some inquiries are directed to the clerk; others come directly to preservation staff. To ensure that outgoing information is accurate, the City Clerk should direct all inquiries regarding heritage properties to preservation staff. Only City staff authorized by the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism and staff of Heritage Toronto may sign letters responding to inquiries. Fees should be collected only by the preservation unit and used to achieve the "revenue enhancement" line item in the Arts, Culture and Heritage budget.

Requests for information on properties in the former City of Toronto should be directed to the Toronto Historical Board (Heritage Toronto). The Toronto Historical Board has agreed to implement the same fee policy that is approved for the Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Department.

Conclusions:

The fees proposed in this report will recover a portion of costs incurred for processing inquiries related to heritage properties. While the Ontario Heritage Act identifies the City Clerk as the intake point for inquiries, responses are typically prepared by preservation staff to ensure accuracy. Consequently, all responses should originate from the preservation unit and all fees collected should be applied to the Arts, Culture and Heritage budget.

This report has been prepared in consultation with the Clerk's and Legal Departments and the Toronto Historical Board.

Contact Name:

Beth Hanna, Manager

Culture Division, North York

North York Civic Centre

Office (416) 395-7415

Fax (416) 395-7886

5

Standing Authority to Exempt Certain Toronto and Region

Conservation Authority Lands from Municipal Taxes

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Economic Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (September 30, 1998) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism subject to the addition of the following Recommendation (4):

"(4)that authority be granted for the introduction of the necessary bill in Council to give effect thereto."

Purpose:

To grant standing authority to exempt from municipal taxes lands owned by the TRCA and managed by the City pursuant to an Agreement with the TRCA for park purposes, and to seek standing approval to authorize the submission of Bills in relation thereto.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Not Applicable.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that :

(1)approval be granted for standing authority to exempt from municipal taxes those lands owned by the TRCA and managed by the City for park purposes, and for the submission to Council of the relevant Bills in relation thereto;

(2)Clause No.1 of Report No.12 of the Parks, Recreation and Property Committee adopted by Metropolitan Council on October 3, 1961 with respect to the exemption from municipal taxation certain lands owned by the (then) Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and used for Metropolitan parks purposes, be rescinded; and

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

Council Reference/Background/History:

Historically, an Agreement was entered into between the former The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto ("Metro") and the (then) Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority ("MTRCA"), whereby Metro managed, as regional parkland, lands owned by MTRCA turned over to it by the MTRCA for operation as regional parkland.

On March 7, 1961, by the adoption of Clause No. 2 of Report No.3 of the Parks and Recreation Committee, the former Metropolitan Council authorized an application for authorizing legislation to exempt from taxation those lands owned by MTRCA within the Metropolitan area which were used for Metropolitan park purposes. This application was granted by an amendment to Section 223 of the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto Act, which provided that Metro could, by by-law, exempt such MTRCA lands from municipal taxation while same were managed by Metro as parkland.

On October 3, 1961, by the adoption of Clause No. 1 of Report No. 12 of the Parks, Recreation and Property Committee , the former Metropolitan Council granted standing authority for submission of Bills to Council to exempt from municipal taxes such lands owned by MTRCA and used for Metropolitan park purposes pursuant to an Agreement with MTRCA. As individual pieces of property were acquired by the MTRCA and "turned over" by it to Metro to be managed for parks purpose pursuant to such Agreement, the (then) Metropolitan Solicitor would submit the relevant Bills to Council providing for exemption from municipal taxes those lands owned by MTRCA and used for Metropolitan park purposes.

The City of Toronto Act, 1997 (No.2), similarly provides, at Clause 59(2)(f), that lands vested in the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority ("TRCA") and managed and controlled by the City under an Agreement with that body, may be exempt by the City from municipal taxation. The City is the legal successor to Metro under the pre-existing Agreements with (new) TRCA. Accordingly, it is within the City's power to exempt such lands from municipal taxation, so long as same are used for parks purposes.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Accordingly, it is recommended that a new standing authority be approved to allow for the expeditious processing of Bills/By-laws exempting from municipal taxation those lands owned by Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and managed by the City for park purposes.

Contact Name:

Margaret Fischer, Director, Real Estate Law, Legal Division Tel: 392-8054

Frank Kershaw, Director, Policy & Development Tel: 392-8199

--------

The Economic Development Committee reports, for the information of Council, also having had before it during consideration of the foregoing matter Appendix "A" of Clause No. 1 of Report No.12 of The Parks and Recreation Committee, titled "Authority to Introduce Bill in Council to Exempt from Municipal Taxes Certain Conservation Lands Used for Metropolitan Park Purposes", which was adopted by The Council of The Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto at its meeting on October 3, 1961.

6

Milliken Park Community Recreation Centre, Project No. 705,

Scarborough District Contract No. PBS 98-004, Malvern Ward

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Economic Development Committee recommends the adoption of the following joint report (October 5, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services, the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to advise the results of the tender issued for the construction of a new Community Recreation Centre in Milliken Park in the District of Scarborough (Parks and Recreation Project No. 705) in accordance with the specifications as required by the Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Department and to request authority to issue a contract to the recommended bidder.

Source of Funds:

Financial authorization was approved in the 1998 Capital Budget for this project.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that Contract No. PBS 98-004, for the construction of a new Community Recreation Centre in Milliken Park, be awarded to Derbtile Construction Inc. in the total amount of $2,984,230.00 including all taxes and charges being the lowest tender received.

Council Reference/Background/History:

The Bid Committee at its meeting held on September 16, 1998, opened tenders for Contract No.PBS98-004 for construction of a new Community Recreation Centre in Milliken Park in the District of Scarborough, as summarized below:

Tender No.TendererTender Price

(1)Derbtile Construction Inc.$ 2,984,230.00

(2)Torbear Contracting$ 3,156,500.00

(3)Carosi Construction$ 3,188,600.00

(4)Pre-Eng Contracting$ 3,198,230.00

(5)Frank Pellegrino General Contracting Ltd.$ 3,348,030.00

(6)Maystar General Contracting$ 3,368,360.00

(7)Maracon Construction$ 3,389,760.00

(8)Tasis Contracting$ 3,438,659.00

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The tender documentation submitted by the recommended bidder has been reviewed by Parks and Recreation and Facilities staff and was found to be in conformance with the tender requirements.

Conclusion:

This report requests authority to issue a contract for the construction of a new Community Recreation Centre in Milliken Park in accordance with the specifications to Derbtile Construction Inc. at the tender price quoted being the lowest tender received.

Contact Names:

R.H. Barry, P.Eng.L.A. Pagano

DirectorDirector

Public Building ServicesPurchasing and

Telephone: 396-4762Materials Management

Telephone: 392-7312

7

Celebrate Toronto Street Festival

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, amended this Clause by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism be requested to submit a further report to the Economic Development Committee on the feasibility of expanding the Celebrate Toronto Street Festival to include some activities along the waterfront, specifically in the former City of Etobicoke area of the City of Toronto.")

The Economic Development Committee recommends the adoption of the report (October 19, 1998) from the Chair, Celebrate Toronto Street Festival.

The Economic Development Committee reports, for the information of Council, having:

(1)requested the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism to report, in the context of the City's Economic Development Strategy, to the Economic Development Committee with a comparative analysis of other events of similar size and outline the potential comparators which could be used;

(2)forwarded the bound report prepared by the City of Toronto Special Events Office, titled "1998 Celebrate Toronto Street Festival - Post Event Report" to the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism; and

(3)forwarded a copy of the report (October 19, 1998) from the Chair, Celebrate Toronto Street Festival to Tourism Toronto for information.

The Economic Development Committee submits the following report (October 19, 1998) from the Chair, Celebrate Toronto Street Festival:

Purpose:

To report the results of the Celebrate Toronto Street Festival held July 3-5, 1998, provide a comprehensive post event summary (see Appendix "A" attached), and to obtain approval to establish the Street Festival as an annual event. This Street Festival will become Toronto's summer signature event, promoting the city of Toronto as a vibrant place to live, work and play.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the Street Festival be developed into an annual signature event that will draw residents and tourists;

(2)the Street Festival be repositioned to July 9-11, 1999, to strategically support key stakeholders in the tourism industry and better complement Toronto's event calendar; and

(3)cross-departmental support be provided for this festival and other signature events.

Funding Sources:

The cost of producing this event will be included in the annual Special Events Division budget for the Budget Committee's consideration. Corporate sponsors and partners will be sought to reduce expenditures and to enhance festival programming.

Background:

The Celebrate Toronto Street Festival, July 3-5, 1998, was created to bring people of the new Toronto together in a spirit of celebration and civic pride.

The celebration transformed portions of Yonge Street into vibrant festival sites energized by pedestrian traffic, decorated with tents and stages, and filled with diverse music and activity over three days. In its first year, the festival welcomed more than 400,000 residents and visitors.

The five festival sites were strategically placed along Yonge Street at Lawrence, Eglinton, St. Clair, Bloor and Dundas. Each of these dynamic neighbourhoods offered retail and restaurant experiences to complement the top caliber free entertainment on the street.

The Toronto Transit Commission reported record use of their special Family Pass over the weekend, which was specifically marketed for the Festival. This indicates that attendees travelled from site to site to experience many of the entertainment offerings.

The event received exceptional coverage in the media and also enjoyed strong promotional support through partnerships. Major media outlets including Citytv, the Toronto Sun and a total of 14 radio stations and print partners helped spread the word through pre-produced spots and supplements, as well as added to the programming mix through on-site activities.

The corporate sponsorship campaign was tremendously successful. The scope and design of the festival, as well as our strategic approach to partnerships attracted major corporations which provided cash and in-kind services and strong programming on-site.

The Celebrate Toronto Street Festival is a superbly formatted, sustainable product which could become an annual "signature" Toronto event and important tourism property. The resident audience would continue to grow from the momentum built in 1998. Over the next five years, it would also evolve into a strong destination attraction for tourism markets.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

By all counts, the Street Festival was a success drawing together Toronto residents and providing top entertainment for visitors. The testimonials received from the public, media, corporate and other partners were overwhelmingly positive. See Appendix "A", Section 2.

Strategic development of this festival will continue to bolster civic pride, creating immense goodwill among citizens for their city. It will also provide pivotal support to tourism industry stakeholders and have a significant impact on the economy.

Canadian Tourism Commission statistics show that after visiting friends and relatives, festivals and events are the top "trip motivators" for tourists. Key stakeholders in the Toronto tourism industry, including Tourism Toronto, feel that this festival could become a major trip motivator and viable tourism product in the visitor market, having tremendous economic impact on the City of Toronto.

The Toronto Tourism economic impact study yielded outstanding first year results which bode well for steady increases in the future. The Street Festival generated a total of $6,782,725.00 of industry output in the city. A total of $16,198,350.00 of economic activity in Ontario was generated as a result of the initial attendance and operating expenditures of the festival, $12,152,713.00 of which is in the City of Toronto. See Appendix "A", Section 2 for details on Economic Impact Study.

After thorough consultation with the hotel industry, attractions, festivals and events, we recommend that the Street Festival be repositioned to July 9-11, 1999. The change of date better complements Toronto's summer event calendar as it is a "slower" weekend for tourism industry partners. Hotel occupancy rates are lower, the attendance at attractions is reduced and there are fewer competing special events and festivals.

There are a number of areas for specific development in 1999:

(1)A formal event plan will reposition the Street Festival from a one-time celebration to an annual signature event. Key to this plan will be the centralized format, focusing the Street Festival on Yonge Street and allowing people to come together in one part of the city to celebrate. The comprehensive communications strategy will address in and out of market audiences.

(2)Resources will be allocated to develop an improved event experience in 1999. Much was learned in year one and recommendations from our detailed evaluations on programming, customer service, infrastructure, marketing and sponsorship will be implemented. The Street Festival's second year will offer a refined format with brand new, cutting edge entertainment and spectacle.

(3)The Street Festival will undertake complete community consultations with business, resident and community associations, churches and other community stakeholders.

(4)The Street Festival will be positioned within Toronto Special Events' long-term business plan currently being developed for the Economic Development Committee.

The plan will detail the division's strategy to develop a year-round "city of festivals". A series of city-produced signature events will anchor Toronto's event calendar in each season, capitalizing on tourist trends and providing optimum event experiences for residents. Events include Toronto Winterfest (winter), Celebrate Toronto Street Festival (summer), Toronto Swing Music Festival (fall) and Cavalcade of Lights (holiday season). The plan will also articulate the commitment to bring innovative signature events to the regions, specifically through the Toronto Swing Music Festival. This "city of festivals" vision will powerfully promote the city to residents and visitors while supporting the vital tourism industry in the city.

Conclusion:

Developing the Celebrate Toronto Street Festival as an annual signature event will capitalize on the tremendous momentum and excitement created in 1998. Retailers, hotels and associated businesses will be positively affected by the increase in their trades as this event flourishes. Likewise, residents will enjoy the sense of community that develops when they come together to celebrate their city.

Contact Name:

Jaye Robinson

Director of Special Events

Tel: 395-7310

Fax: 395-7337

--------

Councillor Korwin-Kuczynski, High Park, appeared before the Economic Development Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

8

Other Items Considered by the Committee

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, received this Clause, for information.)

(a)National Communities in Bloom Award.

The Economic Development Committee reports having:

(1)presented the National Communities in Bloom Award to Ms. Fiona Campbell, Co-Chair of the Parks and Forestry Advisory Board (West District) who accepted the Award on behalf of those involved with this project;

(2)thanked and congratulated the members of the Advisory Board, staff and volunteers associated with this initiative for their hard work and community involvement;

(3)requested the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism to:

(a)take the necessary action to submit an entry from the City of Toronto for the international award "Nation in Bloom"; and

(b)report to the Economic Development Committee on how similar projects can be undertaken on the City's streets and highways; and

(4)received the following submission:

(October, 1998) headed "Planning Document for Environmental Action", prepared by the City of Toronto West District - Parks and Forestry Advisory Committee, which provides a framework to promote the protection, restoration and conservation of parkland, open spaces and natural environments by way of goals, objectives and action plans that reflect and encourage the commitment, initiative and innovation of the community, together with the Advisory Committee's terms of reference.

--------

The following individuals appeared before the Economic Development Committee with respect to the foregoing matter:

-Ms. Claire Tucker-Reid, General Manager, Parks and Recreation;

-Mr. Paul Ronan, Co-Chair of the Parks and Forestry Advisory Board (West District);

-Mr. Murray Cameron, Supervisor of Horticulture, West District, and also gave a slide presentation; and

-Ms. Fiona Campbell, Co-Chair of the Parks and Forestry Advisory Board (West District).

(b)The Greater Toronto Marketing Alliance (GTMA)

Presentation to the Economic Development Committee.

The Economic Development Committee reports having requested the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism to report to the Economic Development Committee, in the context of the Economic Development Strategy, on similar initiatives being undertaken in other North American jurisdictions, such report to provide a comparative analysis, information on the funding allocated by each municipality or region, linkages with other levels of government, and success rates.

--------

Mr. Kenneth Copeland, President and CEO, The Greater Toronto Marketing Alliance (GTMA) gave a presentation to the Economic Development Committee on the programs and activities of the GTMA, and also filed various documentation with respect thereto.

(c)Film Permit Issuance - Review of Practices, Procedures, Policies and By-Laws.

The Economic Development Committee reports having:

(1)deferred consideration of the following report to its next meeting scheduled to be held on November 16, 1998, in order to allow Members of Council the opportunity to conduct community consultation, if they so wish; and

(2)requested the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism to report at that time on the impact of introducing a fee for the issuance of film permits, as well as information on any policy which the City of Vancouver may have in this regard:

(i)(September 8, 1998) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, advising that in order to provide consistency and exemplary service in film permit issuance, there was a need to review the current practices and regulatory framework utilized in the various municipalities; and recommending that:

(1)the Economic Development Committee endorse the attached Guidelines for Filming in the City of Toronto and the City of Toronto Code of Conduct for Cast and Crew (Appendices 1 and 2);

(2)film location permitting for Toronto be coordinated by the Toronto Film and Television Office in Economic Development with decision making remaining decentralized;

(3)the Economic Development Committee endorse the attached by-law (Appendix3) and recommend that the City Solicitor be authorized to introduce the necessary Bill in Council to give effect thereto; and

(4)the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism report back as necessary on future developments in the film and television sector including any operational requirements.

(ii)(undated) from Ms. Yolanda Adamovsky opposing the policy of issuing permits for the film industry to use school property and immediate vicinity roads that the children use for various reasons.

(iii)(October 16, 1998) from S.R. Battista expressing opposition for various reasons.

--------

The following persons gave a presentation to the Economic Development Committee with respect to the foregoing matter:

-Ms. Rhonda Silverstone, Toronto Film and Television Office; and

-Mr. Manny Danelon, Chair, Film Liaison Industry Committee.

(d)Urban Aboriginal Economic Development.

The Economic Development Committee reports having adopted the following report:

(October 2, 1998) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, responding to the Committee's earlier referral of a series of recommendations from the Task Force on Community Access and Equity and the Aboriginal Planning Group, to the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, and recommending that staff from the Economic Development Office be directed to invite the appropriate staff from other Departments, Agencies and Non-Profit Organizations to meet with the Aboriginal Planning Group to ensure linkages are made to the resources currently available to support aboriginal business development, and to develop and set in motion an action plan for furthering the implementation of the recommendations of the Task Force on Community Access and Equity.

(e)Toronto Small Business Forum '98.

The Economic Development Committee reports having received the following report and brochure:

(i)(October 6, 1998) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, advising that the City of Toronto Economic Development Division is hosting Small Business Toronto '98 on October 27 and 28, 1998 at the North York Civic Centre and Memorial Hall; providing background information with respect to this event; and recommending that the report be received for information.

(ii)(undated) headed "Toronto Small Business Forum '98 - October 27 and 28", which provides conference details, a schedule of events and a registration form.

(f)School Facilities Reviews - City-Wide.

The Economic Development Committee reports having:

(1)recommended to City Council, for consideration with Clause No. 2 of Report No.12 of the Urban Environment and Development Committee, that Recommendations (A)(3) and (A)(4)(a) of the Urban Environment and Development Committee as contained in the report (October 8, 1998) from the City Clerk, be adopted subjectto:

(a)Recommendation (A)(3) being amended to include the Toronto French School Boards in the emergency joint meeting, so as to read:

"(A)(3)direct that an emergency joint meeting be convened between City Council, the Toronto District School Board, the Toronto Catholic District School Board and the French School Boards with respect to this matter;"

(b)adding to the end of Recommendation (A)(4)(a) the words:

"or those that could be converted to much needed community uses."; and

(2)requested the appropriate City officials to report to the School Tax Sub-Committee:

(a)with a view of the portfolio of the school sites declared surplus to determine the impact of purchasing such sites for community use; and

(b)on the potential costs of enhanced transportation services as the result of these school closures:

(i)(October 8, 1998) from the City Clerk, advising that the Urban Environment and Development Committee on October 5, 1998, during its consideration of a report dated September 17, 1998 from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, entitled "School Facility Reviews, City-Wide", took the following action:

(1)directed that a copy of the aforementioned report be forwarded to the Economic Development Committee for information; and

(2)requested the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services to direct the Manager of Policy and Programs, City Planning Division, to make a presentation thereon to the Economic Development Committee.

(ii)(October 16, 1998) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, providing a preliminary report on the potential impact on parks and recreation services brought about by possible school closures in the City of Toronto; and recommending that this report be received for information.

--------

Ms. Ann-Marie Nasr, Manager of Policy and Programs, Urban Planning and Development Services, gave an overhead presentation to the Economic Development Committee with respect to the foregoing matter.

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

(g)Bill Board Advertising - Revenue Potential for The City of Toronto.

The Economic Development Committee reports having requested the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism to report to the Committee on the feasibility, planning criteria and revenue potential for the City if it undertook lease agreements for Billboard Advertising on appropriate City owned or maintained properties:

(October 15, 1998) from Councillor Mario Silva, Trinity Niagara, requesting a report on the feasibility of the City undertaking lease agreements for bill board advertising on appropriate city-owned property, and that such report provide details with respect to potential planning criteria and revenue generation.

(h)Update on the Economic Development Strategy Process.

The Economic Development Committee reports having received the following report:

(October 16, 1998) from Councillor Brian Ashton, Chair, Economic Development Committee, advising that the launch of the Economic Development Strategy Process will take place on November 6, 1998, from 8:00 - 10:30 a.m. in the Metro Hall Council Chambers; and providing details of the launch and various other initiatives underway with respect to the strategy process.

Respectfully submitted,

BRIAN ASHTON,

Chair

Toronto, October 19, 1998

(Report No. 4 of The Economic Development Committee was adopted, as amended, by City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998.)