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

STRATEGIC POLICIES AND PRIORITIES COMMITTEE

REPORT No. 21

1Submission to the Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation on the "Ontarians With Disabilities Act"

2Recreation Grants Program - 1998 Allocations in the Former City of Etobicoke

3Lester B. Pearson International Airport - Noise Monitoring

4Coat of Arms for the City of Toronto

5Response to Information Requested About Parking Enforcement Issues and Feasibility of Placing Parking Tag Revenues Into a Reserve

6Funding Sources to Offset the Financial Impact of the1998 Toronto Police Association Contract Settlement

7People Movers

8Corporate Leasing Requirements and Strategy

9Toronto Transit Commission - Sheppard Subway- Bessarion Station

10Funding Requirements - City Hall Council Chamber and Main Committee Room

11Security Upgrades to Toronto City Hall

12Social Development Strategy - Elements, Timelines, Process and Preliminary Budget

13Yonge/Dundas Redevelopment Project - Settlement of Claims- 291 Yonge Street, Toronto (Ward 24 - Downtown)

14Appeal to Ontario Municipal Board - Equalization Factors by Former City of Toronto

15Status of Negotiations - A Proposal for Eliminating theCity's Obligation to Provide an Annual Subsidy to the Toronto Harbour Commissioners

16Financial Impact to the City of Toronto- Recent Provincial Actions

17Other Items Considered by the Committee

City of Toronto

REPORT No. 21

OF THE STRATEGIC POLICIES AND PRIORITIES COMMITTEE

(from its meeting on October 20, 1998,

submitted by Councillor Case Ootes , Chair Pro Tem)

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998

1

Submission to the Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation

on the "Ontarians With Disabilities Act"

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

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Task Force on Community Access and Equity contained in the following transmittal letter (September 29, 1998) from the City Clerk:

Recommendation:

The Task Force on Community Access and Equity on September 24, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council that the position of the Task Force on Community Access and Equity respecting the Ontarians With Disabilities Act, embodied in the submission dated September 3, 1998 to the Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation, be endorsed.

The Task Force on Community Access and Equity reports for the information of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council, having referred the aforementioned submission to the Writing Team of the Task Force on Community Access and Equity for its consideration when preparing the final report for City Council.

Background:

The Task Force on Community Access and Equity had before it the following communications:

(a)(July 17, 1998) from David Lepofsky, Co-Chair, Ontarians With Disabilities Act Committee, headed "ODA Public Consultation Kit", requesting that written submissions regarding the enactment of the Ontarians With Disabilities Act be sent to the Ontario Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation by the September 4, 1998 deadline; advising that the Ontarians With Disabilities Act Committee is contacting other disability organizations in the community to work together to find ways of participating in the consultation process that the Ministry is organizing; and forwarding the ODA Committee's Analysis of the Discussion Paper, draft letters to The Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation; and a list of regional contacts for the Ontarians With Disabilities Act Committee; and

(b)(September 3, 1998) from Councillor Joe Mihevc, Chair, Task Force on Community Access and Equity, forwarding a submission dated September 3, 1998 to The Honourable Isabel Bassett, Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation, headed "Submission to the Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation - The Discussion Paper on the Ontario With Disabilities Act", in response to the Ministry's discussion paper titled "Preventing and Removing Barriers for Ontarians with Disabilities", respecting the Ontarians With Disabilities Act.

--------

(Submission dated September 3, 1998 addressed to the Minister of Citizenship, Culture

and Recreation from the Task Force on Community Access and Equity, headed

"The Discussion Paper on the Ontarians With Disabilities Act")

Introduction:

Thank you for providing the Task Force on Community Access and Equity the opportunity on August17, 1998 to provide input on ways to prevent and remove barriers for people with disabilities. Members of the Task Force, as well as staff from the City of Toronto were pleased to meet with you, your staff and representatives from the League for Human Rights of B'nai B'rith, and members of the Indo-Canadian Chamber of Commerce, Toronto Chinese Business Association and the Hispano Chamber of Commerce.

We echo the Minister's personal acknowledgment in the discussion paper, "Preventing and Removing Barriers for Ontarians with Disabilities" that barriers preventing people with disabilities from fully participating in society can not only be removed but prevented. As you have already expressed, barriers can be physical, procedural or attitudinal and must be removed in a planned, coordinated approach involving communities, business, labour, service providers, governments, and disabled citizens.

As you may already be aware, the Task Force on Community Access and Equity has been mandated by Toronto City Council to develop a comprehensive and coordinated plan of action in the newly amalgamated city. This plan of action will address the barriers to full participation of the City's diverse communities, which include: people with disabilities, racial minorities, women, Aboriginal peoples, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender communities, ethno-cultural groups, immigrants and refugees. The process undertaken by the Task Force includes extensive consultations with the community, City staff and members of Council. The results of the consultation, in addition to submissions and available research materials, will yield a range of solutions, policies and practices for the new City to embrace. Ensuring access and equity to facilities, services and processes is not only a legal obligation, it is also good business and good government.

The City of Toronto recognizes the valid and valuable contribution of people with disabilities in all facets of city life. In meeting citizens with disabilities, the Task Force has heard a litany of examples of barriers they face on a daily basis. While the consultation process identified key barriers inherent in the City, citizens of Toronto also recognized and are frustrated that many strategies and actions are beyond the jurisdiction of the local level of government. These barriers could be addressed, removed and new barriers prevented with an effective Ontarians With Disabilities Act.

It is estimated that approximately 17 percent of the people living in the Province of Ontario have some form of a disability. By the year 2011, it is estimated that one in every six Ontarians will be over the age of 65 and the over 75 population will more than double to 874,000 (Ministry of Treasury and Economics, Population Projections for Regional Municipalities, Counties and Districts of Ontario to 2011). It is an established fact that increasing age results in the greater possibility of the development of some form of disability. If we as a province are to in anyway develop strategies for addressing the coming demographics, then a strong, effective, and mandatory Ontarians With Disabilities Act must be enacted now.

Anywhere from 50-80 percent of people with disabilities either are unemployed or have never been tied to the labour market directly as a result of their disability. This is a terrible waste of talent. Ontarians with disabilities have as much right to employment as any other Ontarians. The economic implications of people with disabilities not being economically self-sufficient through employment income are horrendous. In 1994, the Ministry of Citizenship received a report from the Working Group on the Employment of Persons with Severe Disabilities entitled "Towards Equity: The Employment of Severely Disadvantaged Persons with Disabilities". The report identified that the cost of exclusion from the labour market of people with disabilities was conservatively estimated to be 5 billion dollars and this estimate does not cover the human cost.

This report estimated that 38.1 percent of people with disabilities have incomes of less than $20,000.00 which is true of only 16.1 percent of the population who do not have disabilities. Over one-quarter (25.6 percent) of persons with disabilities in Ontario have incomes below Statistics Canada's "low income cut-off", which is a measure of poverty.

Principles and Parameters:

Your government's discussion paper has identified three principles and a set of parameters. We contend, as currently drafted, that these pose significant limitations to the enactment of an effective ODA and in themselves result in additional barriers for our community.

It is the view of the Task Force on Community Access and Equity that the ODA be based on the following:

(1)Any legislation applying to the prevention and removal of barriers for Ontarians with Disabilities should promote full inclusion; be mandatory and apply to all sectors: public, private or non-profit. It must be a pro-active framework, not an after the fact, reactive set of processes and options. While the Ontario Building Code requires that new buildings have a minimum level of physical accessibility, it does nothing for barrier free upgrades required in the large number of buildings erected prior to the creation of these standards.

(2)The ODA must not be disability specific but should endeavour to remove barriers and prevent the creation of new ones across disabilities. It must be inclusive in addressing physical, procedural, and attitudinal barriers. Any attempt to forge a subjective hierarchy of disability would be unacceptable, as the needs and rights of people with one disability cannot take precedence over the needs and rights of those with another regardless of the type of mental, emotional, cognitive or physical disability. Moreover, people with disabilities are as diverse as the population of Ontario and we need choices and options in dealing with people who face multiple barriers.

(3)There must be an enforcement body to monitor the implementation of the ODA. While the Ontario Human Rights Code provides Ontarians with Disabilities the right to equal treatment, the Commission is not equipped to monitor the proposed ODA given its already copious responsibilities. This "body" must have the mandate to obtain systemic remedies rather than depend upon individualized complaint-driven fixes.

(4)The legislation should extend the mandate of the "enforcement body" to determine standards for planning and implementation. There should be representation from all sectors, including business, education, not for profit organizations, provincial and municipal governments, in order to facilitate sector ownership, and it should include the expertise of people with diverse disabilities. This "body" could encourage the implementation of the ODA by becoming a clearing-house for information on barrier removal, by encouraging research into new barrier-free technologies, by promoting innovation in barrier-free design and by clarifying the economic value of making Ontario open and accessible to all. It is expected that once the regulatory body is established, it can immediately begin synthesizing standards and regulations from several existing tribunal and court decisions (e.g., Eldridge v. British Columbia; Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission v. Canadian Odeon Theatres).

(5)The Ontarians With Disabilities Act should supersede all other codes and regulations which either conflict with or provide lesser protections and entitlements to people with disabilities. The ODA must not weaken any rights or entitlements already in place, it should complement and reinforce the protections that now exist.

(6)The ODA must require that all enterprises doing business with institutions funded by taxes: the provincial and municipal levels of government, their agencies, and subsidized programs/projects, be ODA compliant. One of the more positive outcomes of the implementation of the Americans With Disabilities Act is that it has fostered new technologies and innovations which are now available to the general public. For instance the development of speech input to replace the keyboard, for personal computers has not only allowed people with limited mobility in their hands to operate a computer, but has allowed time pressured business people to operate their computers, while leaving their hands free for other tasks. It also has enabled business people with limited typing skills to effectively operate their computers without undergoing time-consuming skills training.

The Task Force on Community Access and Equity believes that Respecting the Dignity of Persons with Disabilities "The phrase `respects their dignity' means to act in a manner which recognizes the privacy, confidentiality, comfort, autonomy and self-esteem of persons with disabilities, which maximizes their integration and which promotes their full participation in society" (Ontario Human Rights Commission).

Key Questions:

(1)What are the Priorities for Preventing and Removing Barriers?

All processes and strategies falling out of the legislation while possibly implemented in a staggered fashion, must be developed in parallel and published concurrently. This simultaneous approach should include:

(a)a review of all existing legislation dealing with barrier free access to ensure that their regulations are being enforced fully. For example - are the barrier free measures of the Ontario Building Code being applied properly? Are developers applying for exemptions from certain provisions of the Code and are they being granted such leave? If so, by whom: municipalities, the Code Compliance Branch of the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and housing, or the Ontario Municipal Board. The ODA would apply to all and result in uniformity of application resulting in a levelling up rather than down.

(b)all decisions handed down by the Ontario Human Rights Tribunals and all other Provincial Commissions dealing with barrier free access and people with disabilities must be reviewed; if there exists jurisprudence which requires a certain level of access, then all aspects of other legislation must be amended to ensure that they are compliant;

(c)once the standards are set by the regulatory body (see #4), agencies and organizations must conduct barrier audits, set timetables for barrier elimination and establish policies to ensure that new barriers are not created (examples of proven success include the Occupational Health and Safety Act and the Day Nurseries Act.

(d)organizations should be required to submit Annual Reports on their progress toward barrier removal to the enforcement "body".

(e)the enforcement "body" should be mandated to undertake spot checks of organizations to ensure compliance and delinquency would be fined.

(f)organizations failing to comply and subsequently penalized should be identified in an annual report which should be broadly publicized.

(2)What could a new ODA include to help prevent and remove barriers?

(a)It must be recognized that voluntary measures while yielding some benefits in the short term, are at times unreliable and one could argue unable to take the lead on and ensure important public objectives. Lasting measures are required to ensure a barrier-free Ontario.

(b)National Access Awareness Week which was an annual initiative, depended upon voluntary measures - in 1997, its 10^th anniversary year, the program essentially waned, faded and fizzled out - now seen as a public relations initiative which has little scope - "community" initiatives struggle with this every year- some projects which applied for the Opportunities Fund were denied. Community education and initiatives to deal with the stigma of mental and physical disabilities must be supported.

(3)What additional approaches could complement an ODA?

While the existence of fines and other penalties must be an integral part of the enforcement mechanism, there must be other measures taken which will encourage voluntary compliance. Some of these measures could include an awards program which would reward organizations for swift barrier removal, innovation in results and the provision of good service to people with disabilities. This program would be an important positive publicity tool for the encouragement of further implementation of the ODA. Additionally, the component of the "body" which would develop the barrier removal regulations and standards for the ODA should also have a resource center where organizations can come for information and advice on the effective removal of barriers and the avoidance of new barriers. Finally, there must be financial assistance to organizations which are making a genuine effort to remove barriers, but require some financial incentives to continue.

Conclusions:

For too long the rights of people with disabilities have been subsumed to the needs of other Ontarians. Tax cuts, government policies encouraging self-regulation, voluntary measures and well-meaning, but empty words will not help people with disabilities. If we are to assume that this government values all its citizens and residents, then this government must demonstrate this commitment by bringing into law an effective and strong Ontarians With Disabilities Act which will start to break down the barriers that are faced by the disability community.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the communication (August 18, 1998) from Mr. Denis Casey, Acting President, Local 79, addressed to the Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation:

CUPE Local 79 represents approximately 13,000 people employed by the City of Toronto, The Riverdale Hospital and the Toronto Public Library Board. Our members work in such areas as health care, child care, welfare, housing, planning, public health, clerical support and ambulance services.

Before the 1995 provincial election, Mr. Mike Harris promised that his government would pass an Ontarians with Disabilities Act during his first term in office. Three years later, your Ministry has just released a discussion paper, "Preventing and Removing Barriers for Ontarians with Disabilities". You have invited responses that identify priorities for preventing and removing barriers to the full participation in the life of the province of people with disabilities.

Local 79 is pleased by some of the discussion paper's strong statements that support rights for people with disabilities. However, we are most concerned that your Ministry is ruling out any discussion on two issues that are vital to the achievement of equal rights.

With historically high unemployment levels among people with disabilities, ensuring access to meaningful employment must be a key ingredient in any new legislation. For this reason, Local 79 is very disappointed that the Government has already concluded that "equal opportunity in the workplace should be promoted through voluntary strategies."

A voluntary approach will result in employers continuing to do as little as they want, or even nothing at all, to redress systemic discrimination against people with disabilities. This is not acceptable. Working towards equal opportunity in the workplace must not be left to the employer's discretion: it must be mandatory.

Local 79 would propose that employers develop and implement a process that would identify existing barriers to equal participation in their workplaces, barriers that have an impact on their current employees and on potential employees/applicants. They should then follow a reasonable timetable for eliminating those barriers. In our view, this process would necessarily include meaningful consultation with the unions in the workplaces.

We also disagree with the discussion paper's conclusion that "no new agency will be created to administer and enforce the new Act." Instead, the Ontario Human Rights Act would be relied upon.

Under the Human Rights Act, individuals file complaints when they feel that their rights have been violated. However, complaint-based enforcement does not address systemic problems. We believe that the new legislation must create an agency that will have the power to make employers comply with its terms.

People with disabilities deserve fair and equitable treatment in all areas of their lives. We urge your Ministry to consider these important issues before drafting an Ontarians with Disabilities Act.

--------

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also had before it the following which were circulated to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee for its meeting of October 20, 1998, and copies thereof are on file in the office of the City Clerk:

-(July 17, 1998) from David Lepofsky, Co-Chair, Ontarians With Disabilities Act Committee, headed "ODA Public Consultation Kit", requesting that written submissions regarding the enactment of the Ontarians With Disabilities Act be sent to the Ontario Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation by the September 4, 1998 deadline; advising that the Ontarians With Disabilities Act Committee is contacting other disability organizations in the community to work together to find ways of participating in the consultation process that the Ministry is organizing; and forwarding the ODA Committee's Analysis of the Discussion Paper, draft letters to The Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation; and a list of regional contacts for the Ontarians With Disabilities Act Committee; and

-(Undated) Discussion paper titled "Preventing and Removing Barriers for Ontarians with Disabilities", respecting the Ontarians With Disabilities Act, from the Honourable Isabel Bassett, Minister of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation.

2

Recreation Grants Program - 1998 Allocations in the Former

City of Etobicoke

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

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Municipal Grants Committee contained in the following transmittal letter (September 28, 1998) from the City Clerk:

Recommendation:

The Municipal Grants Review Committee on September 28, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, and Council, the adoption of the attached report (September3,1998) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism recommending 1998 allocations in the former City of Etobicoke under the Recreation Grants Program.

--------

(Report dated September 3, 1998, addressed to the

Municipal Grants Review Committee from the

Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism)

Purpose:

This report presents recommended allocations to two sports groups in the former City of Etobicoke in accordance with its Sports Grants Policy.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Sufficient funds for the two recommendations exist in the Recreation Grants Program component of the Corporate Grants appropriation. There are no other financial implications.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)an amount of $601.00 be allocated to the Etobicoke Girls Baseball League;

(2)an amount of $1,500.00 be allocated to the Toronto West Minor Football League;

(3)any future requests to the former City of Etobicoke that meet the criteria for Sports Grants be awarded, provided there are funds available in the Recreation Grants Budget, and reported to Council by year end; and

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

Council Reference/Background/History:

At its meeting on February 17, 1997, the former Etobicoke City Council established a Sports Grant Policy, attached as Appendix A, through Resolution No. 83. For 1998, Council directed that any group eligible for 1997 funding in any of the former municipalities, be deemed eligible and reviewed using that municipality's policy. Unlike other municipal grants programs, there is no deadline for requesting support, so requests can be accepted anytime during the calendar year.

Comment and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

1998 Budget:

The total amount in the 1998 Recreation Budget was $1,126,989.00 which was flatlined at the 1997 funding levels of the combined recreation grants programs. After all the recommendations, appeals and approvals, the budget was totally allocated. However, two organizations in the original report that traditionally received lawn bowling grants no longer exist, so there is $5,408.00 in the Recreation Grants Account available and unallocated.

Application/Assessment/Allocation Process:

The Etobicoke Girls Baseball League has submitted a letter of request for $601.00, and is attached as Appendix B. It meets the eligibility requirements for support through the Etobicoke Sports Grants Policy and falls within the budget limitations of that program. Likewise, the letter to Bill Channing, Parks and Recreation Supervisor of Facilities at the Etobicoke Civic Centre, which is attached as Appendix C, serves as a request for start up funds of behalf of the Toronto West Minor Football League. Approval of this grant in principle is requested. The funds will be released upon receipt of the required documentation for structure, board etc.

Conclusions:

A grant of $601.00 to the Etobicoke Girls Baseball League is recommended. A one-time start up grant of $1,500.00 to the Toronto West Minor Football League is also recommended. Any future applications to the former City of Etobicoke for Sports Grants that meet eligibility requirements will be awarded grants as long as funds are available through the Recreation Grants Program ($3,307.00 remains unallocated). A report will be submitted to the Municipal Grants Review Committee at the end of this calendar year if any additional Sport Grants are awarded.

Contact Name:

Cathi Forbes ; Tel: 395-6192/Fax:395-7886; cforbes@city.north-york.on.ca

(A copy of each of the Appendices 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 October20, 1998, and copies thereof are on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

3

Lester B. Pearson International Airport - Noise Monitoring

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

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Municipal Grants Committee contained in the following transmittal letter (September 28, 1998) from the City Clerk:

Recommendation:

The Municipal Grants Review Committee on September 28, 1998, recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, and Council, the adoption of the following recommendations contained in the attached report (September 15, 1998) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services subject to amending Recommendation No. (1) to read as follows:

(1)the City's Noise Section of the Works and Emergency Services Department develop terms of reference and a cost estimate, with input from the Etobicoke Federation of Ratepayers' and Residents' Associations, to conduct an assessment of noise impacts from Lester B. Pearson International Airport; and that the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services submit such terms of reference and cost estimate to the Works and Utilities Committee before the end of 1998; and

(2)funds for this study be considered in the 1999 Operating Budget submission of the Works and Emergency Services Department.

Ms. Sylvia Giovanella, President, Etobicoke Federation of Ratepayers' and Residents' Associations, appeared before the Municipal Grants Review Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

--------

(Report dated September 15, 1998, addressed to the

Municipal Grants Review Committee from the

Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services)

Purpose:

To determine the most appropriate methodology to monitor and address the noise concerns in Etobicoke resulting from the Airport operation.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The ultimate amount of funding will depend on the scope and terms of reference of the project.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the City's Noise Section of the Works and Emergency Services Department develop terms of reference and a cost estimate, with input from the Etobicoke Federation of Ratepayers' and Residents' Associations, to conduct an assessment of noise impacts from Lester B. Pearson International Airport; and

(2)funds for this study be considered in the 1999 Operating Budget submission of the Works and Emergency Services Department.

Council Reference/Background/History:

The Municipal Grants Review Committee on June 11, 1998, had before it a report (June 8, 1998) from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services advising that a grants contingency amount of $200,000.00 was included in the 1998 Corporate Grants Budget to respond to one time ad hoc grant requests; outlining the criteria for the use of these funds; attaching a list of the allocations from the Contingency Fund to date, as well as the proposed and outstanding requests; and recommending that:

(1)the allocation criteria as defined in this report be applied to all ad hoc requests for grants; and

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

Ms. Sylvia Giovanella and Mr. Anthony Cole, Etobicoke Federation of Ratepayers' and Residents' Associations (EFRRA), appeared before the Committee and answered questions in connection with their grant request.

The Committee, inter alia, directed that the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, following consultation with EFRRA, be requested to report to the Municipal Grants Review Committee for its meeting on September 28, 1998, on the most appropriate way to monitor and address the noise problems in Etobicoke resulting from Lester B. Pearson International Airport, rather than providing a grant to EFRRA for noise monitoring equipment.

Comments:

The Co-ordinator of the City's Noise Section has consulted with Ms. Sylvia Giovanella, President of EFRRA. Ms. Giovanella is aware that noise from airport operations is not under the City's jurisdiction and, therefore, outside the City's mandate of enforcement. Although the City's Noise Section has the technical capability to provide assistance, there are insufficient resources available to assume this task as a full time responsibility. During 1998, the demand on resources has increased substantially, and due to the present severe backlog it would not be feasible for City staff to carry out this work in the immediate future.

Therefore, it would be necessary to hire an acoustical consultant to study the matter. The City's Noise Section could develop terms of reference and work with the consultant and the community to facilitate the process, should it be determined that this approach be adopted.

Conclusion:

If it is decided to conduct a study of the noise impact of the Lester B. Pearson International Airport, funds could be requested in the 1999 Budget.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Chris Andrew, Co-ordinator, Noise Section, Environmental Services Section, Works and Emergency Services, Toronto Community Council Area, Tel: (416) 392-0791/Fax: (416) 392-1456; e-mail "candrew@city.toronto.on.ca"

4

Coat of Arms for the City of Toronto

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

"It is recommended that the report dated October 23, 1998, from the Chief Administrative Officer, embodying the following recommendations, be adopted:

'It is recommended that:

(1)the revised design for the Coat of Arms for the City of Toronto be approved; and

(2)the appropriate City officials be authorized to take appropriate action to give effect thereto.' ")

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends that:

(1)the proposed Coat of Arms for the City of Toronto be approved subject to the following amendments:

(a)replacing the symbol of a Bald Eagle with that of a Golden Eagle and that its stance be as that depicted on the drawing distributed at Committee;

(b)the incorporation of a Maple Leaf symbol on either side of the lower part of the Coat of Arms in red and depicted as flowing; and

(c)replacing the texture of the grass to depict it as smooth rather than rough;

(2)Council select the motto "Diversity Our Strength" for the Coat of Arms;

(3)the Chief Administrator Officer forward the approved design for the Coat of Arms to the Fire Chief, the Police Chief and the General Manager of Toronto Ambulances to inform them of the opportunity to receive a badge from the Coat of Arms by Crown grant; and

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

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having requested:

(1)the Chief Herald of Canada to incorporate the Committee's recommended changes to the Coat of Arms into a revised design for submission to City Council at its meeting on October28, 1998;

(2)the Chief Herald of Canada to discuss with representatives from the First Nations people the symbolism of the Committee's recommendation that the Bald Eagle be replaced with that of a Golden Eagle and report directly to Council; and

(3)the Chief Administrative Officer to report directly to Council on:

(a)the possibility of incorporating the approved Coat of Arms as the Flag of the City; and

(b)the amount of funding involved in the development and use of the Coat of Arms.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following report (October13,1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer:

Purpose:

To propose a Coat of Arms for the City of Toronto.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The funding for the development of the Coat of Arms has been provided in the Clerk's Budget - Protocol Office.

Further expenditures will arise in the application of the City's new corporate symbol. Any expenditures to utilize this symbol beyond those in the current budget, will be identified as part of the 1999 budget process.

The guidelines that will describe how to use this new symbol will be included as part of the Visual Identity Manual, currently being developed by the Communications Division.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)Council approve the Coat of Arms for the City of Toronto as proposed by the Chief Herald of Canada;

(2)Council select a motto for the Coat of Arms from the following:

Diversity Our strength

The Meeting Place

Home to the World

Stronger in Unity

Strength in Diversity

A new Destiny

(3)the Chief Administrative Officer forward the approved design for the Coat of Arms to the Fire Chief and Police Chief to inform them of the opportunity to receive a badge from the Coat of Arms by Crown grant; and

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

Background:

Robert Watt Chief Herald of Canada responded in November 1998 to an enquiry from officials from across the seven former municipalities. In consultation with a civic working group the Chief Herald developed a design for the Coat of Arms. This design was presented to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee at its meeting on May 5, 1998. Reverend Dr. Robert M. Black, Chaplain of Trinity College, University of Toronto and technical consultant to the Chief Herald presented the design to the Committee.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee referred the report from the Chief Administrative Officer dated April 28, 1998, back to staff and requested the City Clerk to co-operate with the Chief Herald's Office to facilitate input from Members of Council and eventually the public via the Community Council Chairs.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also requested that the new Coat of Arms for the new City of Toronto contain a component of each of the former municipalities, if possible and that a large component include recognition of the City's aboriginal heritage.

Comments and/or Discussion:

The Chief Herald of Canada proposed to the Community Council Chairs at a meeting on June18,1998, that the City of Toronto undertake a public consultation process similar to the City of Penticton, British Columbia. The consultation process involved circulating a questionnaire inviting the public to indicate the elements that residents would like to have included in the Coat of Arms including flora, fauna, colours, mottos and themes. A summary of the results is attached as AppendixA. The questionnaires were distributed through the Civic Services Centres, Members of Council, some libraries and community centres and the City of Toronto web site during the month of July. Over 1100 responses were received and the results were forwarded to the Chief Herald. Mr.Watt interpreted the responses and created the proposed new design.

Further revisions to the design were made over the summer and early fall with input from the Community Council Chairs and various staff. In addition, Mr. Watt consulted with Chief Carole King and the elders of the Mississauga First Credit Nations on how a symbol representing the First Nations should be depicted in the Coat of Arms.

Dr. Black's detailed description of the proposed Coat of Arms follows.

"The shield: Or a chief and pale Azure. This is intended to allude to the two towers of the Toronto City Hall, a refurbished landmark property owned by the City and housing Council. As the architect of that space intended, the blue sky between and above the towers also forms the capital letter T. This elevates the symbol to a kind of a letter-mark that is straightaway understood by the viewer.

The crest: On a mound Vert issuant from a mural coronet Or charged in the centre with a heart Gules between two York roses Proper an eagle rising wings elevated and addorsed also Proper.

This eagle is the principal totemic symbol of the First Nations people whose territory anciently was that on which the City of Toronto now stands. (The successors of this population now reside at Hagersville, Ontario.) Consulted and asked for their contribution, they proposed the eagle to represent them. Symbolically the eagle is sovereign of the birds, known for its might and valour, its energy and renewal, its serenity and dominion. The figurative city wall is a reference to the City's function of sheltering and protecting its citizens. On it are symbols for the former City of York (a York rose with green "barbs"), the former City of North York ( for "the city with heart"), and the former Borough of East York ( a white rose with gold centre). They are in a position in the design approximately that of their geographical location within the new City of Toronto.

The dexter supporter: a beaver Proper collared of a cord Guiles pendant therefrom on a hexagon Or an alder leaf Vert. On the left-hand side of the design is a beaver in its natural colours, a notable symbol of the area throughout its history, as a symbol of industry and activity. Trade in its fur was a reason the various historic paths converged on what is now the downtown area, giving birth to its indigenous name, "Toronto" (the meeting place). The beaver is collared to show taming of its energies; the intertwined strands speak of the added strength each has when working together, suggesting the emergence of strength out of diversity as an idea for the new City. From the rope is pendant a gold hexagon (alluding to honeycomb, symbol of energy and productivity) on which is a green alder-leaf. This latter makes reference to the former City of Etobicoke, whose name means "place where alders grow."

The sinister supporter: A bear Proper collared of a cord Gules pendant therefrom on a hexagon Or a columbine flower Azure. On the right-hand side the shield is supported by a bear in its natural colours, a symbol of strength, of tenacity, of solidity, of care in the rearing and protection of offspring, coloured dark brown like the earth itself. It, too, is collared with a rope, showing its common purpose with the other, very different, supporter. From the collar is pendant a gold hexagon with the floral emblem symbol of the former City of Scarborough, the columbine flower. Together, the placement of these symbols alludes to the geographical flanking of Etobicoke on the west and Scarborough on the east of the new City of Toronto.

The supporters stand on a compartment of green grass - referring especially to the many parks and recreational facilities of which the City is proud and on which are depicted three rivers entering a lake, at one level insinuating separate bodies maintaining a larger one, but in fact a reference to the geographical position of the City vis-a-vis Lake Ontario.

The mottoes are drawn from a very large number proposed by the public. A motto can be simply descriptive (reporting a fact), but if it can be allusive (conveying an inspiring thought) it seems to invoke greater interest and have a longer staying-power. The motto shown here is allusive: Diversity Our Strength. Others with significant levels of support were: The Meeting Place, Home to the City, Stronger in Unity, Strength in Diversity and A New Destiny."

If Council accepts the proposal, other opportunities for related symbols exist, notably for uniformed Emergency Services personnel.

Conclusions:

The Chief Herald is proposing a formal corporate emblem in heraldic tradition that embodies all of the communities from across this City as well as many traditional symbols of the City. Elements of the Coat of Arms may be used separately to represent the City as a badge or an official flag. This design, we believe, blends the input received from the public consultation with the traditions of heraldry into a Coat of Arms for the new City.

Contact Name:

Daphne Gaby Donaldson, Chief of Protocol, 392-4273.

Insert Table/Map No. 1

toronto coat of arms - final survey results

Insert Table/Map No. 2

toronto coat of arms - final survey results

Insert Table/Map No. 3

toronto coat of arms - final survey results

Insert Table/Map No. 1

proposed coat of arms

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (October 23, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer:

Purpose:

To report back to Council on questions about the Coat of Arms arising from the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee meeting of October 20, 1998.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Expenditures for the development of the Coat of Arms to date are $7,200.00 and are estimated to be $15,000.00. The additional expenditure for a new Corporate Seal and Chain of Office will be approximately $8,000.00. Funding has been provided in the Clerk's - Protocol budget. Other costs associated with implementing the Coat of Arms will be absorbed by the Operating Budget of the Departments or subject to further review during the budget process.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the revised design for the Coat of Arms for the City of Toronto be approved; and

(2)the appropriate City officials be authorized to take appropriate action to give effect thereto.

Background:

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee requested that the Chief Herald of Canada submit a revised design incorporating the Committee's recommended changes to the October 28, 1998 meeting of City Council.

Discussion:

The Chief Herald has revised the design of the Coat of Arms based on the recommendations of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee. The bald eagle has been replaced by a golden eagle, the maple leaf has been included on the banner at the bottom of the Coat of Arms, and the texture of the grass has been smoothed. The design will be distributed at the Council meeting.

The Committee also requested that the Chief Herald consult with the Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation on the acceptability of substituting the golden eagle for the bald eagle in the Coat of Arms. The Chief Herald advises Council that Chief Carolyn King and the Elders of the Band Council see no difficulty in substituting the golden eagle for the bald eagle in the design. However, the position of the eagle with its wings outspread is more in keeping with the symbolism of the eagle for the First Nation. The design has been revised to incorporate their recommendation. Chief King also wished to thank Toronto City Council for their desire to include a symbol of the First Nations in the new Coat of Arms.

The revised design also details how elements of the Coat of Arms could be incorporated as the official flag of the City of Toronto should Council approve. A report on the official flag for the City of Toronto and the costs associated with its use will be forwarded to City Council for approval. The immediate costs associated with the implementation of the design of the Coat of Arms will be approximately $8,000.00 to create the Corporate Seal and Chain of Office. Funds to fabricate and install the Coat of Arms in the Council Chamber have not been budgeted in the City Hall renovation project. The Commissioner of Corporate Services will report back on the visual representation of the Coat of Arms in the Council Chamber. The Visual Identity Program, to be introduced shortly, will suggest additional uses for the Coat of Arms.

Conclusions:

The revised design for the Coat of Arms includes the recommendations of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and input from the Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation. The three flag designs submitted to Council, demonstrates how the Coat of Arms can be implemented as an official City of Toronto symbol.

Contact Name:

Daphne Gaby Donaldson, Chief of Protocol 392-4273.)

(A copy of the revised design, referred to in 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, a communication (October 23,1998) from Mr. Albert R. Smith, London, Ontario, submitting a proposal for the City of Toronto Coat of Arms.)

5

Response to Information Requested About Parking Enforcement

Issues and Feasibility of Placing Parking Tag Revenues

Into a Reserve

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

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget Committee contained in the following transmittal letter (October13,1998) from the City Clerk:

Recommendation:

The Budget Committee on October 13, 1998 recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council that:

(1)the Chief of Police provide a monthly report on absenteeism through the Police Services Board, to the Emergency and Protective Services Committee and the Budget Committee;

(2)the Police Services Board secure full civilianisation of the remaining four parking enforcement officers;

(3)the Chief Administrative Officer report back by the end of 1998 on the feasibility of incorporating parking enforcement and other related parking functions into an authority or department; and

(4)the parking tag revenues not be removed from the corporate revenue stream.

Deputy Chief Reesor and Superintendent Gary Bearish appeared before the Committee in connection with this matter.

Background:

The Budget Committee on October 13, 1998, had before it a report (August 28, 1998) from the Chairman, Toronto Police Services Board entitled, "Response to Information Requested about Parking Enforcement Issues".

--------

(Report dated August 28, 1998 addressed to the

Toronto Budget Committee from the

Chairman, Toronto Police Services Board

titled, "Information Requested by the City of Toronto

Budget Committee Relating to Parking Enforcement")

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the following report be received for information.

Council Reference/Background History:

At its meeting on August 27, 1998, the Toronto Police Services Board was in receipt of the following report July 20, 1998, from David J. Boothby, Chief of Police:

Recommendation:

That the Board receive this report for information, and that a copy be forwarded to the City of Toronto Budget Committee.

Background:

At the meeting of March 11, 1998, the Budget Committee of the City of Toronto requested the Toronto Police Service respond to a number of issues affecting the Parking Enforcement Unit's 1998 budget.

This report provides the requested responses. The delay in response occurred because the transmittal letter dated March 18, 1998 did not include all of the recommendations made by the Budget Committee. The corrected letter was forwarded July 7, 1998.

(2)the Parking Enforcement Unit to:

(b)establish a target to reduce absenteeism from 9 per cent to 5 per cent and that it provide a plan on how this can be done;

Parking Enforcement staff reported sick/injured on average of 3.4 times during 1997. In addition to the outdoor requirements, enforcement duties involve particular challenges. For example, over the past two years nearly 90 assault charges have been laid resulting from incidents involving Parking Enforcement Officers on duty.

Unit management is taking a number of initiatives to minimize absenteeism

The Supervisor of Administration has been assigned responsibility of ensuring sick staff comply with all Service requirements (e.g. doctor's letters), are reassessed when specified by the Service's Medical Advisory Service and take whatever steps are required to return the employee to work as soon as their situation permits.

With the assistance of Human Resources, strategies have been developed to assist long term light duty staff enhance their job skills qualifying them for reclassification and placement in other units. Replacement Parking Enforcement Officers are then hired, improving unit productivity. Since January, two officers have been reclassified and several others are currently within this program.

(c)take the necessary action to civilianize the last remaining parking enforcement positions; that the Toronto Police Service be thanked for its efforts with regard to parking enforcement; and that the Parking Enforcement Unit report back to the Budget Committee before the 1998 budget wrap-up meeting on the cost of these positions and how the budget will be adjusted;

The Unit updated the Police Services Board in November 1997 on its progress with civilianization. The following quote from the Board Letter (minute 453/97) summarizes both the progress and issues involved

"Since its inception the Parking Enforcement Unit has made consistent progress towards its target of fully civilianizing the Unit. The position reclassification report approved by the Board on February 26, 1997 deleted one third of the remaining uniform positions. The key challenge faced in securing full civilianization of the final six positions is the current lack of fully qualified operational staff. To address this issue in mid 1997 a civilian supervisory position was created on an acting basis to replace one of the sergeants. This will provide a career development opportunity eventually leading to permanent civilianization.

In the shorter term, plans are underway to civilianize the Staff Sergeant position, achieving full civilianization of that section in 1998"

The report civilianizing the Staff Sergeant position is contained in the current Board agenda, and will generate a net savings in the 1999 estimates.

(d)report back to the Budget Committee with information on the number of parking enforcement officers that may be required to meet the demands of the calls received; the costs related thereto; and the effect on the revenue and expenses of the Parking Enforcement Unit.

The average Parking Enforcement Officer provides a net revenue of approximately $113,000.00 for the City, equivalent to 2.25 times the cost of the position.

Over the last 12 months the Unit suffered higher than usual staffing shortfalls due to constable recruitment. This situation will be resolved by 1998 hiring.

Parking Enforcement staff have reviewed the current establishment and believe that it is adequate to meet the City's enforcement needs.

Superintendent Gary Bearish (8-6653) will be present at the Board meeting to answer any questions.

Conclusions:

The Board received the foregoing.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Superintendent Gary Bearish, Parking Enforcement Unit, telephone no. 808-6653.

6

Funding Sources to Offset the Financial Impact of the

1998 Toronto Police Association Contract Settlement

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, during its in-camera portion, amended this Clause to provide for confidential instructions to staff, such instructions to remain confidential in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act.)

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of:

(1)the recommendations of the Budget Committee contained in the transmittal letter (October 13, 1998) from the City Clerk; and

(2)the confidential report (October 13, 1998) from Councillor Jakobek which has been forwarded to members of Council under separate cover, subject to amending the first recommendation to indicate that the consultation process take place within the next two weeks.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports, for the information of Council, having received the report (October19,1998) from the City Solicitor for information.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following transmittal letter (October 13, 1998) from the Budget Committee:

Recommendation:

The Budget Committee on October 13, 1998 recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council the adoption of the recommendation contained in the report (August 28, 1998) from the Toronto Police Services Board regarding the subject matter.

The Budget Committee reports having:

(a)requested the City Solicitor to provide a report to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee meeting on October 20, 1998 on the authority of OMERS to retain surplus funds; and

(b)forwarded a confidential motion moved by Councillor Jakobek to all Members of Council under separate cover for consideration in conjunction with this item.

Councillor Norm Gardner, Chair, Toronto Police Services Board appeared before the Committee in connection with this matter.

Background:

The Budget Committee on October 13, 1998, had before it a report (August 28, 1998) from the Chairman, Toronto Police Services Board entitled, "Funding Sources to Offset the Financial Impact of the 1998 Toronto Police Association Contract Settlement".

--------

(Report dated August 28, 1998, addressed to the

Budget Committee from the

Chairman, Toronto Police Services Board)

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the Budget Committee approve the utilization of $3.5 million of the OMERS contribution holiday savings towards offsetting the remainder of the 1998 impact of the Toronto Police Association contract settlement.

Council Reference/Background History:

At its meeting on August 27, 1998, the Toronto Police Services Board was in receipt of the following report August 7, 1998 from David J. Boothby, Chief of Police:

Recommendation:

That the Board:

(1)approve the utilisation of $4.2 M of the OMERS Type 3 surplus (the portion of the surplus accessible in 1998) towards offsetting a portion of the 1998 impact of the Toronto Police Association contract settlement;

(2)approve the utilisation of $3.5 M of the OMERS 1998 contribution holiday savings towards offsetting the remainder of the 1998 impact of the Toronto Police Association contract settlement; and

(3)forward this report to the City of Toronto Budget Committee.

Background:

A negotiated settlement on the 1998 contract settlement between the Board and the Toronto Police Association has been reached. The salary and benefit implications of the settlement result in an impact on the Service's 1998 Operating Budget. Details of these are as follows:

(1)For all Uniform and Civilian Police Association members:

(i)a 1 percent increase as of January 1, 1998,

(ii)a 1 percent increase as of July 1, 1998,

(iii)a 0.9 percent increase as of October 1, 1998 and

(iv)benefit adjustments (i.e. cap on dispensing fees, dental check-ups every 9 months vs. 6 months)

(2)In addition, Coach Officers are to receive a rate of 2 percent over that of a First Class Constable as of September 1, 1998.

Impact on the 1998 Operating Budget:

The compounded salary increase amounts to 2.93 percent over the base rate at December 31, 1997. The estimated net impact on 1998 expenditures is $7.7 M, and this annualises to $12.7M in 1999.

The Service's 1998 Operating Budget does not include any allowances for salary increases (this is consistent with the practise utilised in the past). Normally, funding to offset the impact of a negotiated contract settlement is provided from the City's Contingency Account at the request of the Board. Any current year projected surplus would be used to reduce the amount of the request from the Contingency Account. Given that the Service is projecting a shortfall for 1998, there are no funds available from the Operating Budget to offset the impact of the salary settlement. As a result, funding to offset the total impact of $7.7 M is required for 1998. The sources of funding to offset the 1998 budget impact are as follows.

OMERS Type 3 Surplus:

Approximately five years ago, it was identified that there was a significant surplus in the OMERS Type 3 plan. At that time, discussions commenced between the Board and the Police Association on the potential utilisation of the surplus and the ownership of same. These discussions and legal arguments carried on until this year. In June, 1998, the Board and the Police Association reached an agreement to equally share the surplus. This agreement entitled the Board access to approximately $38.5M from OMERS.

Access to these funds from OMERS is only available through the non-remittance of normal employer pension contributions which currently total approximately $1.4M per month. As a result of the OMERS surplus and the subsequent agreement with the Police Association, the Service ( with the acknowledgement of OMERS ) has withheld OMERS monthly employer contributions for the months of May, June and July, 1998. The Service's employer contributions for these three months, totalling about $4.2M, was made utilising the $38.5 M surplus and drawing the Board's share of the surplus down from $38.5 M to $34.3 M. In the meantime, the remaining amount will continue to accumulate interest and will be under the stewardship of OMERS. There are no more contributions to be withheld beyond July, 1998, as OMERS has implemented a one-year contribution holiday (discussed later in this report). Consequently, $4.2M is the total amount of the surplus accessible in 1998.

Given the availability of the $4.2M drawn from the OMERS surplus to the Service, it is recommended that the funds be used to offset a portion of the 1998 impact of the Toronto Police Association Working Agreement. In order for the Service to utilise the remittances withheld, a deferred revenue account would be established. The $4.2M would be credited to this deferred revenue account and invested with the City (where these funds would earn interest), and the funds would be withdrawn at the time of the retroactive payment to staff, to be made in November, 1998.

Should the OMERS contribution holiday not extend beyond July 31, 1999, resultant monthly employer contributions to OMERS would be made from the Type 3 surplus. At that time, a request would be made to establish a Reserve account to capture the monthly contributions that would otherwise be made from the Police Service's operating budget. Use of the funds in the Reserve account would be presented to the Police Services Board for approval.

OMERS Contribution Holiday:

As a result of the pension surplus growth in OMERS exceeding their forecast and expectations, OMERS has implemented a contribution holiday for both employees and employers effective August1, 1998 to July 31, 1999. The Service's 1998 budget includes funds for the full year contributions and therefore savings of $7.5M will be realised for the period of August 1 to December31, 1998 and $10.7 M for the period of January 1, 1999 to July 31, 1999.

City of Toronto Finance has recommended to the City Budget Committee that funds not remitted to OMERS from the contribution holiday be transferred to the Employee Reserve Fund pending future reports on various City requirements for one time funding.

After discussion with City Finance staff, they have suggested that the Service utilise $3.5M of the $7.5 M 1998 savings from the contribution holiday to offset the remaining impact of the 1998 contract settlement.

The above funding recommendations will have no impact on the City's overall financial status in 1998; however, there will be an annualised impact in 1999 of $5 million for salaries and benefits over and above the $7.7 million 1998 budget adjustment.

Summary:

It is recommended that the Board approve the utilisation of $4.2M of the OMERS Type 3 surplus (that portion of the surplus accessible in 1998) towards offsetting a portion of the 1998 impact of the Toronto Police Association contract settlement. It is further recommended that the remaining portion of the 1998 impact of the contract settlement be off-set through the utilisation of a portion ($3.5M) of the savings from the OMERS contribution holiday and that the Board forward this report to the City of Toronto Budget Committee.

Frank Chen, Director of Finance & Administration (8-7877) and Angelo Cristofaro, Manager of Budgeting & Control (8-7113) will be present at the Board meeting to respond to any questions."

Conclusions:

The Board approved the foregoing and the following Motion:

That, given that Council directed that funds from the holiday savings be transferred into a city reserve fund, recommendation no. 2 be forwarded to the City of Toronto Budget Committee for approval.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Angelo Cristofaro, Manager, Budgeting & Control, 808-7113.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the following report (October19,1998) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to provide legal advice on the issue of the authority of OMERS to retain surplus funds.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At its meeting held on October 13, 1998, the Budget Committee received a report from the Chairman of the Toronto Police Services Board recommending that the Committee approve the utilization of $3.5 million of the OMERS contribution holiday savings towards offsetting the remainder of the 1998 impact of the Toronto Police Association contract settlement.

The Budget Committee recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee that it adopt the recommendation contained in the aforementioned report. It also requested the City Solicitor to report to the meeting of that Committee to be held on October 20, 1998, on the authority of OMERS to retain surplus funds.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

I am informed by outside counsel, that has advised the Police Services Board on pension matters, that section 17 of the legislation governing OMERS (the "Act") provides that any surplus may be paid from the fund, subject to any conditions set out in the regulations to the Act and in accordance with the Pension Benefits Act (the "PBA").

Neither item of legislation technically precludes withdrawal of a surplus. However, section 29 of the regulations to the Act require any withdrawal to be shared equally by members who are employees and members who are employers.

More significantly, the PBA requires that any withdrawal by an employer must, among other things, be approved by 100 percent of the members of the plan. This requirement effectively precludes a surplus withdrawal in view of the practical difficulties associated with obtaining 100 percent member consent to a withdrawal in favour of the Police Services Board, or any other employer for that matter.

Conclusions:

While OMERS does not appear to have the right to retain any surplus, the legislative requirements for withdrawal of a surplus effectively preclude the possibility of a surplus withdrawal.

Contact Name:

Albert H. Cohen, (392-8041)

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a confidential transmittal letter (October 13, 1998) from the City Clerk, such transmittal letter to remain confidential in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act.)

7

People Movers

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

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget Committee contained in the following transmittal letter (October13,1998) from the City Clerk:

Recommendation:

The Budget Committee on October 13, 1998 recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council that:

(1)the report (September 22, 1998) from the Interim General Manager, Exhibition Place, be received as information;

(2)the Board of Governors of Exhibition Place, the Board of Directors for the Toronto Zoo and the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism be requested to examine the feasibility of purchasing vehicles which could be utilized at the Canadian National Exhibition, the Toronto Zoo and the Toronto Islands;

(3)in the event that the five-year capital plan includes the purchase of replacement vehicles; it be ensured that the said vehicles have the capability of operating at any and all of the three identified sites;

(4)the Fleet Manager be instructed to coordinate the purchase of vehicles so that the said vehicles can be utilized at all City-owned facilities; and

(5)in the event that Toronto Zoo requests the use of additional vehicles on a temporary basis from the City's Parks Division; i.e. Centre Island, that every effort be made by staff to comply with any such request.

Mr. Cal White, the General Manager of the Toronto Zoo appeared before the Committee in connection with this matter.

Background:

The Budget Committee on October 13, 1998, had before it a memorandum (September 22, 1998) addressed to the Toronto Budget Committee from the Interim General Manager, Exhibition Place regarding "People Movers".

--------

(Memorandum dated September 22, 1998 addressed to the

Toronto Budget Committee from the

Interim General Manager, Exhibition Place)

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Background:

At the Budget Committee Meeting of March 9, 1998, the Committee directed Exhibition Place to meet with the City of Toronto Zoo and the City of Toronto Parks & Recreation Department to exchange information on the "People Movers" owned by Exhibition Place and report back on a possible standard type of train that could be purchased in the future in order that the equipment could be better utilized among all City departments and agencies. This request arose because of a need for the Toronto Zoo to have additional trains on its site during the summer season.

Discussion:

Exhibition Place staff met with representatives of the City of Toronto Zoo and the Parks & Recreation Division and have exchanged information on the train equipment utilized by each. Generally, there are four areas where trains are or were used: High Park, Toronto Islands, Toronto Zoo, and Exhibition Place.

Presently Exhibition Place owns five "People Movers". Each unit is driven by a diesel-powered tractor shrouded by a Plexiglas casing. The shrouded tractor pulls two Plexiglas covered coaches which can accommodate two physically challenged people and approximately thirty persons per coach. The units were purchased in 1989 and are primarily used during the eighteen days of the Canadian National Exhibition, mid August to Labour Day, and then placed in storage. Exhibition Place does not require additional "People Movers" at this time nor does it intend to replace the existing "People Movers" for several years. The design of Exhibition Place "People Movers" with a low level floor base and low ground clearance restricts their use for sharing with other departments as they do not travel well and cannot be used on inclines.

The former City of Toronto did not own the trains used in High Park, rather, through the City of Toronto Purchasing Department they tendered with a private contractor to provide this service and are presently under contract with Carla Construction until October 30, 1998. The requirements in High Park are for three power units with two coaches per unit which accommodate approximately fifty people. The units are used from April to October. There is no intention of purchasing any train units for this site but the City intends to continue to contract out this service.

The former Municipality of Metro Toronto purchased six power trains and fifteen coaches for use on the Toronto Islands in 1985. These trains are handicapped-equipped and carry approximately thirty people per coach. All units are in very good condition and there is no need for any additional units. These units were usually utilized on the Islands from May 15 to Labour Day by the concessionaire pursuant to an agreement with the former Metro Toronto. However, this concessionaire agreement was terminated in 1998 and the trains from the Toronto Islands were transferred to the Toronto Zoo.

The Toronto Zoo has two power units and two coaches purchased in 1981. They are handicapped-equipped and each coach carries approximately seventy persons. While the Toronto Zoo had intended to replace these trains over the next few years, the ability to use the Toronto Island trains has delayed this immediate need. The season for use of trains at the Toronto Zoo starts Easter weekend and ends at Thanksgiving.

Conclusion:

Since the period of operation for trains is basically the same, there would not appear to be any opportunity for shared usage among these groups. While the trains from Exhibition Place are available for some part of the summer outside the CNE period, they are not suitable for use in the park areas because of the low floor structure.

However, given this review, it would be the intent of Exhibition Place that prior to any future purchase of train equipment, there will be consultation with the departments and agencies of the City to ensure such train equipment would be adaptable to other City sites.

8

Corporate Leasing Requirements and Strategy

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

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget Committee contained in the following transmittal letter (October 13, 1998) from the City Clerk:

Recommendation:

The Budget Committee on October 13, 1998 recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council that:

(1)the transmittal letter (October 9, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding the recommendations of the Corporate Services Committee be received as information;

(2)the Commissioner of Corporate Services provide a three to five-year plan on the reduction and/or consolidation of space to cut costs and that such consolidation not affect direct services;

(3)a quarterly progress report on the corporate leasing requirements and strategy be provided to the Budget Committee; and

(4)the Chief Administrative Officer notify the Budget Committee on decisions to lease "General Purpose" office space for periods beyond one year.

Background:

The Budget Committee on October 13, 1998, had before it a transmittal letter (October 9, 1998) from the City Clerk forwarding recommendations of the Corporate Services Committee relating to the corporate leasing requirements and strategy.

--------

(Transmittal letter dated October 9, 1998, addressed to the

Budget Committee, from the City Clerk, Corporate Services Committee)

Recommendation:

The Corporate Services Committee on October 9, 1998, concurred with the recommendations embodied in the report (September 11, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services.

Background:

The Corporate Services Committee on October 9, 1998, had before it a report (September 11, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services providing an update on leasing requirements and strategy; and recommending that:

(1)the Commissioner of Corporate Services be requested to include in the report to be submitted by the end of November on office space rationalization, the detailed leasing strategy to implement the plan;

(2)the Commissioner of Corporate Services be requested to report, in consultation with the Commissioners responsible for locally delivered programs, on the future needs for leased space and opportunities for reduction of such needs and relocation to City owned space; and

(3)this report be referred to the Budget Committee for information.

--------

(Report dated September 11, 1998, from

the Commissioner of Corporate Services

entitled "Corporate Leasing Requirements and Strategy")

Purpose:

To provide an update on leasing requirements and strategy.

Source of Funds:

Not applicable - annual savings of $1.485 million in costs for leased space have already been initiated.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the Commissioner of Corporate Services be requested to include in the report to be submitted by the end of November on office space rationalization, the detailed leasing strategy to implement the plan;

(2)the Commissioner of Corporate Services be requested to report, in consultation with the Commissioners responsible for locally delivered programs, on the future needs for leased space and opportunities for reduction of such needs and relocation to City owned space; and

(3)this report be referred to the Budget Committee for information.

Council Reference/Background/History:

In considering the report from the Commissioner of Corporate Services on locating the Learning Enrichment Centre in the York Civic Centre (Clause 30 of Report 7 of the Corporate Services Committee), City Council decided that " the Chief Administrative Officer be requested to submit a report to Council through the Corporate Services Committee and the Budget Committee, on corporate leasing requirements and a corporate leasing strategy, no later than the first week of September, 1998."

City Council, at its meeting of July 31, 1998, adopted the report of the Commissioner dated May 11, 1998, "Expediting the Disposal of Property and the Reduction of Leased Space" (Clause No. 2 of Report No. 11 of The Corporate Services Committee", which included Appendix B setting out the list of existing leases, advised of the approach used to date to reduce leased space and the savings generated.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Currently, the City leases 223 properties at a cost of approximately $21.4 million annually, including leasing and operating costs. The seven former municipalities leased properties for three main purposes:

(a)to provide space in a specific area to meet service delivery needs, such as welfare offices, libraries, ambulance stations, local offices for public heath and building inspections;

(b)to provide additional general office space above that available in City owned property; and

(c)to provide needed open space for parks, parking or roads purposes.

There are also some leases for special purpose functions, such as the Ferry Docks.

Of the 223 leases, about 90 are for nominal rent or no market rent, and are primarily for open space type uses and for utility easements. Approximately 60 leases are for office uses and the remainder are for local service delivery type functions and special purpose functions. The office space leases are set out on attached Appendix A.

Progress is being made in the short term on the collapsing and renegotiation of current leases to reduce costs, as discussed below.

Development of plans for longer term reductions and rationalization is underway. The departments are currently developing their new organizations, reviewing service delivery options, and downsizing. A number of current city wide studies (for office and civic space consolidation, the study on the new Fire and Ambulance organization, the yards study) will provide the necessary information to establish requirements for leased space. A report on the detailed requirements for leased space and the plan for needed leased space cannot, therefore, be submitted at this time. Given that work required, such reporting will be made in the context of the conclusions of these studies.

This report sets out principles for the reduction of lease costs and, for general office space and service delivery space, strategies to minimize the need for leased space. In addition, the report outlines the work to date in these areas and provides examples where it is anticipated substantial savings can be achieved through the Office and Civic Space Consolidation Study.

(1)Principles for the reduction of lease costs:

Staff of the Facilities and Real Estate Division have begun to reduce costs based on the following principles:

(a)(Relocation of as many City functions as possible and as soon as possible from leased space into owned space;

(b)Leasing space only where area based service delivery requirements cannot be met in City owned space;

(c)Central management of the lease portfolio and space planning in the Facilities and Real Estate Division for coordination and maximization of opportunities; and

(d)Financial evaluation of lease costs versus costs of accommodation in owned space, including consideration of purchase of property where costs will be offset by the reduction in lease payments.

With respect to (d) it is important to note that the total costs for leased space may be, in effect, lower than that for owned space, and decisions about leasing or relocation of a function may need to take this into consideration.

(2)Strategy for the general office space portfolio and progress to date:

Strategy:

(1)Review space needs for the new organization and its operations, and as a result of downsizing.

(2)Relocate to owned space as soon as possible, given financial considerations, and the space plan that is being developed through the Office and Civic Space Consolidation Study.

(3)Explore options for subleasing where the functions can be consolidated in City owned space in the near future but the terms of the lease are longer.

One office consolidation move has been completed - the relocation of the former North York Transportation group to the North York Civic Centre, the lease costs for which were $250,624.00 a year.

Two major leases for general office space contribute $2.12 million to the total lease costs. It is anticipated that these space requirements will be able to be met within owned space as part of the Office and Civic Space Consolidation Study now underway and to be reported to the Council in December.

(i)939 Eglinton Avenue East: 32,657 sq. ft. used by Licensing, which costs a total of $1.08million annually. This lease ends in March of 1999 and Facilities and Real Estate staff are working on relocation to appropriate City owned space.

(ii)20 York Mills: 28,871 sq.ft. used by the former Metro Toronto Housing Company, which costs a total of $1.04 million annually. This lease expires in 2002, and options are being reviewed for reducing this expenditure through sub leasing because the costs to terminate the lease are high. The space needs for the new Housing Company, which also include the former Cityhome, are to be approximately 35,000 sq.ft., down 16,570 from 51,570 sq.ft. that the two groups now occupy. The space reduction will result in savings, with the amount to be determined in the Office and Civic Space Consolidation study.

In addition there are two other major leases that will be reviewed to determine the appropriate disposition.

(i)300 Consilium: 32,783 sq.ft. used by former Scarborough Departments, at a total cost of $878,644.00 annually. This lease will expire in 2003, but includes 9 months free rent from August 1999. The future of this space will be determined in the context of the Office and Civic Space Consolidation Study.

(ii)112 Elizabeth Street: 20,000 sq.ft .used by the Finance Division of the former City of Toronto at a total cost of $834,305.00 annually. The lease expires in 2007 and is a result of a joint initiative with a private developer, and is part of a complex agreement. The project also includes a Cityhome building.

(3)Strategy for the leased space portfolio for locally delivered functions and progress to date:

Strategy:

(1)Review space needs for the new organization and its operations, including new program needs from downloading, and from downsizing.

(2)Relocate to owned space if available and appropriate in the service area.

(3)Negotiate the most cost effective leasing costs.

(4)Examine options such as space sharing and potential for purchase of buildings where costs can be recovered from rent reductions.

The majority of the costs for leasing space are for local service delivery functions and therefore relocation to owned space will not always be possible. However, given the development of the new organization, the review of service delivery and the downsizing initiatives underway, the overall need for space will certainly be reduced, although the amount is not known in detail at this time. But, there also will be additional space needs from the functions yet to be downloaded from the Province, including the enforcement of certain Provincial Offences Act regulations such as for the Building Code Act. (It should be noted that downloading has already increased lease costs for the new City as the costs for certain programs were previously paid by the Province. The lease portfolio, referred to in this report, reflects such costs.)

Leases have and are being collapsed and functions relocated, and other leases are being renegotiated for better terms, with an overall savings of $1.485 million annually. These leases are highlighted on the Appendix A listing and are summarized on page 4 of Appendix A.

It should be noted that the study now underway to determine the organization and operations required for fire and ambulance services will also include a review of space needs. Some of the ambulance sites are leased and these may be no longer required.

Where leases cannot be collapsed, due to current lack of suitable space or the high cost of relocation, short term renewals are being and will continue to be negotiated. In each case, the terms of the leases have been and will be reviewed and improved upon where possible. Where appropriate, early termination dates are included to provide for possible future relocation to owned space.

Given the range of properties involved and the variations of lease situations and opportunities, the Commissioner of Corporate Services should be requested to report in consultation with the Commissioners responsible for the local service delivery functions, on specific strategies for meeting space needs and requirements for the different functions and neighbourhoods they serve.

Conclusion:

Work has been ongoing to reduce lease costs according to the principles and strategies outlined in this report - collapsing of leases in the short term where alternative space is available, and planning for longer term reductions, as a result of more comprehensive space planning for both general office needs and studies to determine needs for area based delivery.

The next steps for lease rationalization will be determined based on the space rationalization studies now underway, which consider the reductions for space needs due to amalgamation, restructuring, service rationalization and downsizing. The report on the Office and Civic Space Consolidation Study, to be submitted to Council in December, will include more detailed plans for the reductions of leased general office space. Reports on space needs for fire and ambulance functions and for yards are also underway. More detailed studies are required on the space needs for other services that must be delivered locally.

Contact Names:

(1)Mark Davies, Project Team Lead, Office and Civic Space Consolidation,

Facilities and Real Estate Division:

Phone 397-0805, Fax 3970805, email mark_davies @metrodesk.metrotor.on.ca

(2)Tony Pittiglio, Project Team Lead, Lease Rationalization, Facilities and Real Estate Division, Phone 392-8155, fax 392-4828, email anthony_pittiglio@metrodesk.metrotor.on.ca

--------

(A copy of the revised "Amalgamated Toronto - Schedule of Offices Leases" attached to the foregoing report was circulated to all Members of Council with the agenda of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, for its meeting of October 20, 1998, and a copy thereof is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

9

Toronto Transit Commission - Sheppard Subway

- Bessarion Station

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

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of Recommendation No. (1) of the Budget Committee contained in the transmittal letter (October13,1998) from the City Clerk.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received for information the report (October 19, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and forwarded it, together with the communication (October 8, 1998) from Mr. Vincent Rodo, General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission, to the Chief Financial Officer for consideration of the funding options contained therein during deliberations of the 1999 Capital Works Program.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following transmittal letter (October 13, 1998) from the City Clerk:

Recommendation:

The Budget Committee on October 13, 1998 recommends that:

(1)the contract for the construction of the Bessarion Station be approved; and

(2)the communication (October 8, 1998) from Mr. Vincent Rodo, General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission be considered in conjunction with the report on the Sheppard Subway funding options being provided by the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer at the October20, 1998 meeting of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee.

Background:

The Budget Committee on October 13, 1998, had before it communication (October 8, 1998) from the General Manager, Toronto Transit Commission relating to the Bessarion Station on the Sheppard Subway.

--------

(Communication dated October 8, 1998 addressed to the

Clerk, City of Toronto from the

General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission)

At its meeting on Wednesday, October 7, 1998, the Commission received a verbal update from J.Sepulis, General Manager - Engineering and Construction concerning the Sheppard Subway Budget/Schedule.

After hearing the above update, the Commission approved a motion that the funding issue regarding Bessarion Station be forwarded to the City Budget Committee, City Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and City Council to advance a decision on the matter prior to November 1, 1998.

Due to the fact that tenders received for construction of Bessarion Station expire on November 1, 1998, it is essential that a decision on whether to proceed with the construction of Bessarion Station be made by City Council at its meeting on October 28, 1998. Attached is a report from our Engineering and Construction staff on the ramifications of not reaching a decision by this deadline. To facilitate this decision, it would be appreciated if this matter could be included on the respective agendas for consideration by the City Budget Committee on Tuesday, October 13, 1998, the City Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee on Tuesday, October 20, 1998 and City Council at its meeting on Wednesday, October 28, 1998.

Your cooperation with respect to the foregoing is greatly appreciated.

--------

(Report entitled "Status of Sheppard Budget and

Bessarion Station Contract Award" from the

Sheppard Subway Department, E&C Branch)

Project Budget Status:

The approved budget for the Sheppard Subway project is $875.4 million. The expenditures to the end of September 1998 were $384.4 million.

The current amount of funds committed in the form of contracts awarded, purchase orders issued, property acquired, etc., but payments not necessarily made, is $700.4 million.

The budget has $175.0 million remaining funding available to cover the balance of the work not yet committed.

The current budget overrun on Sheppard is $51.9 million for a total expenditure of $927.3million. City Finance Department, based on the City's Auditor report, is projecting a total cost overrun of $56.7 million for the project for a total project expenditure of $932.1million by the end of the project.

The project is currently on schedule for completion in June 2002. At this time there are no critical design or construction elements behind schedule.

To the end of September, approximately 35 percent of physical construction was completed.

Bessarion Station Contract Award Status:

The Bessarion Station bids were received on June 3, 1998 and the contract was originally scheduled to be awarded on June 17, 1998. Due to a projected budget overrun for the Sheppard Subway project, award of the station ($33.9 million) was deferred pending the resolution of funding of the projected budget overrun. The Commission was briefed on this issue at the July 9 and September 3 meetings.

While efforts have been initiated to establish a strategy for the funding of Bessarion Station, no funding commitment has been made to date. As the validity of the Bessarion Station bids has already been extended once, and will expire on November 2, 1998, the purpose is to outline the financial and schedule implications of not awarding Bessarion Station on or before November 1, 1998.

There are three options for the eventual construction of Bessarion Station:

Option 1:

Award Bessarion Station prior to the expiration of the current bids on November 2, 1998.

Option 2:

Allow the existing bids to expire on November 2, 1998. Re-tender the Bessarion Station contract on or before February 20, 1999 and commence construction on or before May 1, 1999.

Option 3:

Defer the construction of Bessarion Station until after the Sheppard Subway has opened for revenue service in June 2002.

The implications of the above options are outlined below:

With Option 1, the existing bid price ($33.9 million) would not change and the station would be open to the public when revenue service of the Sheppard Subway line commences in June 2002. It does, however, require that the project budget be increased now to address the projected budget overrun.

It is possible to request a further extension to the validity date of the low bidder but it is uncertain whether the low bidder would be agreeable to a further extension. In addition, the schedule milestones, sequencing of work and other contractual criteria will have to be revised to reflect changes on account of the delay. This could expose the Commission to claims.

With Option 2 there are cost, schedule and construction implications.

While the award of Bessarion Station can be delayed until spring 1999, it will only be possible to complete the station box structure prior to the commencement of revenue service in June, 2002. The Sheppard Subway would be open for service and the completion and opening of Bessarion Station to the public would follow by several months.

A new contract document for Bessarion Station would have to be prepared with the resulting re-design costs. In addition, it is likely that construction prices will continue to rise between now and spring, 1999. There are premiums associated with a contractor completing the station construction while revenue service is in operation. Consequently, the estimated cost of Bessarion Station will increase by approximately $5 million if Option 2 is implemented.

With Option 3, the construction of Bessarion Station would be deferred until the future (i.e. after the commencement of revenue service) and the estimated costs will increase from $33.9 million to approximately $70-$80 million. This is due to the fact that construction would involve excavating the station down to the tunnels, careful dismantling of the tunnel liners (when the subway is not operating) and construction of the station during the nightly shutdown period of the subway. This type of construction is technically complex, risky and expensive.

Conclusion:

In the absence of confirmation of funding to cover the cost of project overrun it is necessary to let the contract bid validity expire.

If a decision is made to fund the construction of Bessarion Station after November 1, 1998, the cost of construction will increase significantly.

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee also submits the following report (October 19, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:

Purpose:

To outline options for financing projected project cost overruns for the Sheppard Subway.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

If the projected amount is financed through the issuance of debentures, debt charges for this project will increase over original estimates.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information and that the financing options contained herein be considered during deliberations on the overall 1999 Capital Works Program.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At its meeting held on September 11, 1998, the Audit Committee received the report "Sheppard Subway Project Cost Overruns" for information. The report identified cost overruns at the current stage of construction of $42.5 million with a further potential $14.4 million being incurred over the next year for a total of $56.7 million. At its meeting on October 1, 1998, the Strategic Priorities and Policies Committee requested the Chief Financial Officer to report on the impact of financing the three options identified by the TTC to deal with these cost overruns.

At its meeting on October 13, 1998, the Budget Committee received a letter from the TTC that outlined three options relating to the Bessarion Station and recommended that the awarding of the relevant contract proceed as scheduled.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Based upon the revised budget of $875.0 million (before cost overruns), it was projected that the City's share of the financing was $297.0 million. This amount has been approved to be provided, before considering development charges, from the issuance of debentures for a term-to-maturity of twenty years. Annual debt charges are projected to be approximately $32.79 million at an interest rate of 6.50 percent from 2003 onwards, including debt charges for funds previously expended for the Eglinton Subway and Wilson Yard projects which were also part of the Rapid Transit Expansion Program. At present, there is a projected cost overrun of $56.7 million. Several options exist to deal with this projected cost overrun such as: 1) award the contract to build the Bessarion Station by November 2^nd and finance the entire cost overrun by the issuance of debentures, 2) delay the construction of the station until May 1, 1999, 3) defer construction until the future that would increase the costs from $33.9 million to approximately $70 to $80 million, or 4) advance the use of funds in the Sheppard Subway Project Reserve Fund.

If the projected cost overrun of $56.7 million is entirely financed through the issuance of debentures over the next three years, annual debt charges, based upon current market conditions, are projected to be an additional $5.4 million for a term of twenty years by the year 2002.

It has been suggested in the TTC Sheppard Subway Budget Briefing, dated July 9, 1998, that an option would be to increase the construction budget by the amount of the overrun, resulting in increased annual debt charges of $5.4 million over the original $32.79 million forecast for a total of $38.19 million, as detailed on the attached exhibit. A portion of the annual debt charges could be offset by approximately $5.0 million, based upon the current projection of development charges that are predicated upon the completion of the Bessarion Station. Since it is anticipated that the development charges will be received after the construction of the station, it is being suggested that they be applied to future debt charges, as they may not be available to be applied against capital expenditures when they are actually being incurred.

The third option would defer the construction of the Bessarion Station to early 1999 or after 2002 with a possible cancellation. If the station is deferred, then an immediate saving would reduce the budget overrun by $33.9 million, leaving a net shortfall of $22.8 million. The cost of construction at a later date has been estimated at between $70 million to $80 million by the TTC as stated in their budget briefing report dated July 9, 1998. This is shown on the attached as Option 3. It should be noted that there also would be a risk that interest rates could increase when the financing is required, given that they are currently at historically low levels.

A fourth option is to proceed with Bessarion Station and advance use of funds in the Sheppard Subway Project Reserve Fund which contains moneys transferred to the City by the Province in July of 1998 as part of the conclusion of the 5 year subsidy agreement. This option would mitigate impacts in 1999 and 2000, but would increase later impacts, depending upon future capital market conditions. However, this option would essentially shift debt charges to future operating budgets by using funds that would be earning interest in the Reserve Fund.

The RTEP Reserve Fund is receiving an annual contribution of $11.8 million during the past two years. Regardless of the decision to issue debt to finance the estimated over-run, it is projected that the Reserve Fund will still require an increase in contribution in the 2000.

Other financing options, including sale/lease back of components of the State of Good Repair capital budget and other scenarios will be more fully explored in the pending Debt Management Plan which will be presented to Budget Committee for consideration with the overall financing strategy for the 1999 Capital Works Program.

Conclusion:

The funding of the projected cost overrun of $56.7 million can be financed through the issuance of debentures for a term of twenty years, resulting in additional annual debt charges of $5.4 million. If the Bessarion Station were deferred, then the projected cost overruns would be reduced by approximately $33.9 million. However, the level of development in its vicinity and related charges would also be reduced and the TTC has stated that construction costs could double if the station is built at a later date with a similar increase in future interest and principal repayments.

It is recommended that the financing options contained in this report be received for information at this time and be considered as part of Council's deliberations on the overall 1999 Capital Works Program.

Contact Name:

Martin Willschick, Manager, Treasury - 392-8072;

E-mail: mwillsch@mta1.metrodesk.metrotor.on.ca

--------

Projected Debt Charges for the Sheppard Subway

($Millions)

Note (1): Includes debt charges for Eglinton Subway & Wilson Yard which are RTEP Projects.

10

Funding Requirements - City Hall Council Chamber and

Main Committee Room

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

(1)striking out the recommendation of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and inserting in lieu thereof the following:

"It is recommended that the Recommendation No. (2) of the Sub-Committee to Consider the Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall, as amended and recommended by the Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team, embodied in the communication dated October 28, 1998, from the City Clerk, be adopted, viz.:

'(2)funding in the amount of $7,000.00 (plus applicable taxes) for the installation of millwork in the Live Production Unit area in the renovated Council Chamber, and funding in the amount of $31,000.00 (plus applicable taxes) for the reinstallation of an existing electronic voting system into the main Committee Room at City Hall be provided from the City Hall Renovation Project Contingency Fund.' "; and

(2)adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that the Commissioner of Corporate Services be requested to submit a report to the Corporate Services Committee outlining a total breakdown of monies spent on the City Hall Council Chamber and main Committee Room and all other renovations pertaining to the move to City Hall.")

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget Committee contained in the following transmittal letter (October13,1998) from the City Clerk:

Recommendation:

The Budget Committee on October 13, 1998 recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council, that:

(1)the report (October 9, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services be received; and

(2)funding for the installation of workstations in the renovated City Hall Council Chamber and the reinstallation of an electronic voting system in the main Committee Room be approved with funds to be allocated from the City Hall renovation project's Contingency Fund.

Background:

The Budget Committee on October 13, 1998, had before it a report (October 9, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services relating to funding requirements for City Hall Council Chamber and the Main Committee Room.

--------

(Report dated October 9, 1998 addressed to the

Budget Committee from the

Commissioner of Corporate Services)

Purpose:

To report on funding for the installation of workstations in the renovated City Hall Council Chamber and the reinstallation of an electronic voting system in the main committee room.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Funds will be allocated from the City Hall renovation project's contingency funds.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Background:

'Live Production Unit'

The Clerk's Division has in recent months completed its organizational design, and during the same period staff have also made significant progress in the Division's review of the City's legislative processes. One of the products of these activities has been the determination that it is necessary, in order to support Council's legislative activities, that there be a special unit (to be known as the Live Production Unit) operating out of dedicated facilities in the renovated council chamber to support the Clerk's centre table staff during Council meetings.

Since the Live Production Unit was not contemplated at the time the original City Hall renovation budget was calculated, it is necessary that additional funds be provided at this time. The Clerk's Division is reallocating approximately $30,000.00 of its transitional funding for some of the technology required for the Unit (such as computers, monitors, audio equipment, printers, speakers and headphones). No funding, however, is available for the installation of the actual work surfaces. The estimated cost for such millwork is $7,000.00, plus applicable taxes.

Main Committee Room

The Council Procedural By-law has been amended so as to provide that recorded votes may be requested in committee and community council meetings. It is proposed that funds be provided to reinstall in the main committee room the electronic voting system which was in place in the City Hall council chamber for the first meeting of the amalgamated Council in January of this year. The system will provide significant efficiencies in the conduct of committee, community council and in-camera council sessions, and in the production of minutes from such meetings. The estimated cost of moving the system is $20,000.00 for conduit installation and the provision of electrical connections, and $11,000.00 to install and program the voting system itself (plus applicable taxes).

Background:

The Sub-Committee to Consider the Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall on October6, 1998, had before it a recommendation for the approval of funds for the expenditures identified in this report. This report is being submitted to the Budget Committee at this time, so that consideration of its recommendations can be given in time for report to the October 28th meeting of City Council.

For the information of the Budget Committee, the recommendations to the Sub-Committee to Consider the Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall included a recommendation that funds be provided from the Corporate Contingency Account.

Subsequent to the Sub-Committee meeting, staff further reviewed the contingency funding reserved for the relocation project and are able to absorb the expenditures identified in this report. I must point out, however, that contingency funds for this project are almost fully exhausted.

Contact Name:

Jeffrey A. Abrams, Director, Secretariat, Printing and Distribution, Clerk's Division, Tel. 392-8670;

jabrams@city.toronto.on.ca

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following transmittal letter (October 28, 1998) from the City Clerk:

Recommendation:

The Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team at its meeting on October 28, 1998, recommended to Council that, at its meeting on October 28, 1998, during consideration of Clause No. 10 of Report No. 21 of The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, entitled "Funding Requirements - City Hall Council Chamber and Main Committee Room", adopt the Recommendations contained in the communication (October 23, 1998) from the Interim Contact, Sub-Committee, Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall, subject to amending Recommendation No. (2) by deleting therefrom the words "Corporate Contingency Account", and inserting in lieu thereof the words "the City Hall Renovation Project Contingency Fund", so that such Recommendation now reads as follows:

"(2)funding in the amount of $7,000.00 (plus applicable taxes) for the installation of millwork in the Live Production Unit area in the renovated Council Chamber, and funding in the amount of $31,000.00 (plus applicable taxes) for the reinstallation of an existing electronic voting system into the main Committee Room at City Hall be provided from the City Hall Renovation Project Contingency Fund".

Background:

The Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team had before it a communication (October 23, 1998) from the Interim Contact, Sub-Committee, Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall, advising that the Sub-Committee, Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall, on October 6, 1998, during its consideration of a report (October 5, 1998) from the City Clerk, entitled "Installation of Certain Systems in the New City Hall Council Chamber and Main Committee Room", recommended to the Special Committee that:

(1)the report (October 5, 1998) from the City Clerk be amended by deleting the words "certain systems" and replacing in lieu thereof "electronic systems", and recommended adoption of the report as amended; and

(2)funding in the amount of $7,000.00 (plus applicable taxes) for the installation of millwork in the Live Production Unit area in the renovated Council Chamber, and funding in the amount of $31,000.00 (plus applicable taxes) for the reinstallation of an existing electronic voting system into the main Committee Room at City Hall be provided from the Corporate Contingency Account.)

11

Security Upgrades to Toronto City Hall

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

"It is further recommended that the following recommendations of the Sub-Committee on the Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall, as recommended by the Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team, embodied in the communication dated October 28, 1998, from the City Clerk, be adopted, viz.:

'It is recommended to the Special Committee that:

(1)City Council support the need for upgraded security at Toronto City Hall by approving the Phase 1 recommendations for securing the 2ndFloor, Council Chambers, Official Parking Garage, Taxi Tunnel, and Employee Parking Garage;

(2)work required for securing the 2nd Floor and Official Parking Garage occur immediately upon receipt of funds;

(3)the Commissioner of Corporate Services report back to Council in February,1999, with the recommendations for the second phase of upgrading security at Toronto City Hall which includes the remainder of the building; and

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

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget Committee contained in the following transmittal letter (October13,1998) from the City Clerk:

Recommendation:

The Budget Committee on October 13, 1998 recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, and Council, the adoption of the report (October 8, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services regarding security upgrades to Toronto City Hall.

Background:

The Budget Committee on October 13, 1998, had before it the following:

(1)a report (October 8, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services relating to security upgrades to Toronto City Hall; and

(2)a report (September 28, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services relating to security upgrades to Toronto City Hall.

--------

(Report dated October 8, 1998 addressed to the

Budget Committee from the

Commissioner of Corporate Services)

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the Budget Committee approve the funding request in the amount of $60,000.00 for the implementation of the first stage of Phase 1 of the security upgrades to Toronto City Hall with the rest of the 1998 transition projects for approval and funding; and

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

Background:

The Special Committee for the Relocation of all of Council to City Hall on October 6^th, 1998, endorsed the report it had before it dated September 28, 1998 from the Commissioner of Corporate Services with regard to security upgrades to Toronto City Hall, which recommended the following:

(1)City Council support the need for upgraded security at Toronto City Hall by approving the Phase 1 recommendations for securing the 2^nd floor, Council Chambers, official parking garage, taxi tunnel, and employee parking garage;

(2)work required for securing the 2^nd floor and official parking garage occur immediately upon receipt of funds;

(3)the Commissioner of Corporate Services report back to Council in February 1999 with the recommendations for the second phase of upgrading security at Toronto City Hall which includes the remainder of the building;

(4)this matter be referred to the Budget Committee meeting on October 13, 1998 for consideration with the rest of the 1998 transition projects for approval and funding of the requested $60,000.00; and

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

In view of the fact that the Special Committee for the Relocation of all of Council to City Hall was meeting prior to the Special Committee to review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team, the Commissioner of Corporate Services is bringing forward this report.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Chris Hubbard, Acting Director, Facilities Management, Telephone: (416) 397-5151; Fax:(416)397-0825.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following transmittal letter (October 28, 1998) from the City Clerk:

Recommendation:

The Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team at its meeting on October 28, 1998, recommended to Council that, at its meeting on October 28, 1998, during consideration of Clause No. 11 of Report No. 21 of The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, entitled "Security Upgrades to Toronto City Hall ", adopt Recommendations Nos. (1) to (4) contained in the communication (October 13, 1998) from the Interim Contact, Sub-Committee, Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall.

Background:

The Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team had before it a communication (October 13, 1998) from the Interim Contact, Sub-Committee, Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall, advising that the Sub-Committee, Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall, on October 6, 1998, during its consideration of a report (September 28, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services, entitled "Security Upgrades to Toronto City Hall":

(A) recommended to the Special Committee that:

(1)City Council support the need for upgraded security at Toronto City Hall by approving the Phase 1 recommendations for securing the 2nd floor, Council Chambers, Official Parking Garage, Taxi Tunnel, and Employee Parking Garage;

(2)work required for securing the 2nd floor and Official Parking Garage occur immediately upon receipt of funds;

(3)the Commissioner of Corporate Services report back to Council in February 1999 with the recommendations for the second phase of upgrading security at Toronto City Hall which includes the remainder of the building; and

(4)the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect to the foregoing; and

(B)requested the Commissioner of Corporate Services to:

(1)undertake a survey of the staff of Toronto City Hall regarding the proposal to reduce staff access through the taxi tunnel; and

(2)report on what conversations have taken place on the practicability of using finger imaging as part of the security process.)

12

Social Development Strategy - Elements, Timelines,

Process and Preliminary Budget

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

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Budget Committee contained in the following transmittal letter (October13,1998) from the City Clerk:

Recommendation:

The Budget Committee on October 13, 1998 recommended to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, and Council, the adoption of the recommendations embodied in the report (September24, 1998) from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services regarding the subject matter.

Background:

The Budget Committee on October 13, 1998, had before it a transmittal letter (October 8, 1998) addressed to the Budget Committee from the City Clerk forwarding the recommendations of the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee embodied in the report (September 24, 1998) from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services.

--------

(Transmittal letter dated October 8, 1998 addressed to the

Budget Committee from the

City Clerk)

Recommendation:

The Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee on October 8, 1998, recommended to the Budget Committee, and Council, the adoption of the attached report (September 24, 1998) from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services respecting the development of a Social Development Strategy.

--------

(Report dated September 24, 1998 addressed to the

Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee from the

Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services)

Purpose:

This report outlines the proposed elements, timelines, processes and preliminary budget for the Social Development Strategy and explains its relationship to the City's Strategic Plan.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The 1998 budget for the Social Development Strategy will be absorbed within the current Community and Neighbourhood Services operating budget. For 1999, it is estimated that $90,000.00 will be required for the spring consultation, the production of a Social Development Atlas, costs related to social reporting and monitoring and the production of a final Social Development Strategy document in the late summer of 1999. Of the $90,000.00, the Department could accommodate approximately $20,000.00 from its 1998 base, as well as the staff resources to support the initiatives thereby requiring the Department to request $70,000.00 in the 1999 budget.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)Council approve the development of a social development strategy and the process and timelines as outlined in this report;

(2)the Community and Neighbourhood Services Department provide in its 1999 budget request an amount of $70,000.00 for developing the Social Development Strategy;

(3)this report be referred to the Budget Committee for consideration in the 1999 budget process;

(4)Council adopt the Social Development Strategy objectives, as follows:

(a)to set the direction for social and community development in the new City of Toronto by establishing a set of clearly articulated goals and monitoring systems;

(b)to involve communities, clients, funders and policy makers, in defining community social needs and priorities;

(c)to channel the results productively into a comprehensive and coherent vision for the future;

(d)to improve service co-ordination and linkages and to rationalize the provision of social and community services across the new City of Toronto; and

(e)to maintain and enhance the reputation of Toronto as the best city in the world to live through the development of dynamic, responsive social policy and the provision of effective services and programs; and

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

Council Reference/Background/History:

At its March 4, 1998, meeting, City Council approved a report which outlined the need for and the purpose and key components of a Social Development Strategy for the City.

As identified in that report, the ultimate purpose of a social development strategy for the City is to contribute to maintaining a strong social infrastructure that meets the diverse needs of communities and residents. The Social Development Strategy will provide the necessary framework for co-ordinating, and integrating the responsibilities for social and health services in the City of Toronto. It will also be the basis for the social well-being component of the Strategic Plan.

The specific objectives of a social development strategy are:

(a)to set the direction for social and community development in the new City of Toronto by establishing a set of clearly articulated goals and monitoring systems;

(b)to involve communities, clients, funders and policymakers, in defining community social needs and priorities;

(c)to channel the results productively into a comprehensive and coherent vision for the future;

(d)to improve the service co-ordination and linkages and to establish broad outcomes to assist in assessing the effectiveness of programs and services in meeting social and health needs across the new City of Toronto; and

(e)to maintain and enhance the reputation of Toronto as the best city in the world to live through the development of a dynamic, responsive social policy and the provision of effective services and programs.

City Council directed that the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services consult with key community stakeholders regarding the development of a social development strategy and report to the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee to outline the elements, timelines, process and preliminary budget. This report is in response to that request.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The three key elements of a social development strategy are:

(1)Social Vision:

With its new and expanded mandate for social infrastructure, the City Council, in partnership with the community, has the opportunity to articulate its vision for the future, and to provide leadership in social planning in the City of Toronto.

(2) Social Plan:

Through a social plan the City will establish the broad strategic framework for the provision of the social and health services and programs provided by the City. The strategic goals and priorities established through the framework form the basis for service planning, management and delivery of a range of human services. It will impact on Parks and Recreation as well.

Social infrastructure planning also provides a strategic framework within which service delivery options can be assessed. An integrated planning approach that focuses on outcomes for communities and residents is a valuable tool to assess how services are best organized, co-ordinated and delivered.

(3)Social Monitoring and Reporting:

A key element of a social development strategy is monitoring and reporting on social conditions in communities, setting targets for improvement, and reporting on social progress. The community-based sector recommends forming a new civic alliance between the City and community sectors to begin to define new standards for health and social well-being in communities. These standards, or outcomes, will support decision-making regarding policy directions, and resource allocation, and provide one basis from which to assess the effectiveness of service delivery across the City.

Process Considerations:

The City is currently involved in a number of strategic planning initiatives, and there are also a number of task force initiatives that are directly relevant to the Social Development Strategy. It is imperative, therefore, that the Social Development Strategy be co-ordinated with and not duplicate the efforts of these other initiatives.

Linkages With Other City Planning Processes:

As outlined in the Chief Administrative Officer's report to the September 24, 1998, Strategic Policy and Priorities Committee, the Social Development Strategy will inform the social well-being component of the Strategic Plan. As the initiative that overarches all the other planning processes, the leadership for co-ordinating between the various strategic initiatives, such as the Official Plan, the Environmental Plan and the Economic Plan, will be through the Strategic Plan process. At a staff level, the Community and Neighbourhood Services Department will have close linkages with other planning processes through the staff working group established for the Strategic Plan. Like the Strategic Plan, the elements of the Social Development Strategy will be co-ordinated with the implementation timeframe for the Strategic Plan.

Community Partnership:

A consistent message emerging from the community-based sector is the need for a civic partnership for social development. The process for the Social Development Strategy forms the basis for that partnership. It is recommended that a community development approach, that recognizes and legitimizes this partnership be adopted in developing this strategy, and that each element of the strategy include community participation.

However, another message that has been clearly heard is that communities are experiencing some consultation fatigue. During the period leading up to amalgamation, and with the numbers of task force initiatives that are currently underway, the City has been very active in consulting on a number of issues. The sentiment being expressed at the community level is that asking for more input and general comment is not productive; that communities are interested in more than expressing their opinion and hence consultation should be action-oriented with tangible results.

Therefore, it is proposed that, at least initially, the Social Development Strategy process be informed through the existing consultation processes related to the task forces and other initiatives, and through recent relevant consultations such as the Children and Youth Action Committee consultations related to the Children's report card held in June and the "More than Bricks and Mortar" consultations held in the fall of 1997.

Linkages With Task Forces, Committees of Council and City Departments:

City Council has already identified priority areas and established task force initiatives to respond to these issues. The task forces and committees most particularly relevant to the Social Development Strategy include: The Children and Youth Action Committee, the Homelessness Action Task Force and the Council Strategy Committee for People Without Homes, the Municipal Grants Review Committee, the Seniors' Task Force, the Access and Equity Task Force and the Community Safety Task Force. Linkages between these initiatives and the Social Development Strategy will be critical. Linkages will also be made to all relevant City departments such as Economic Development, Parks and Recreation, Urban Planning and Development Services and the Chief Administrator's Office.

Proposed Process:

The Strategy will be developed in two phases. The first phase will involve three key activities: developing a draft vision and principles document; developing a Social Development Atlas, and engaging in a consultation process. The second phase will involve developing strategic direction, establishing outcome indicators for social monitoring and reporting, and producing a social plan. Appendix 1 outlines the elements in each of the phases.

Draft Vision and Principles Document:

A draft vision and principles document will be developed through the fall of 1998 by the Department. This draft will be informed by previous relevant work done by the former local municipalities and former Metro, recent consultations with communities, including the "More than Bricks and Mortar" consultations from 1997 related to amalgamation, and the current work of the task forces, committees of Council and the Olympic Bid.

A staff working group will be struck to undertake this work. This group will include representatives from Children's Services, Homes for the Aged, Shelter Housing and Support, Social Services, Public Health, Libraries, Parks and Recreation and the Healthy City Office of Corporate Planning. Leadership for this initiative will come from the Social Development and Administration Division.

As well, representatives from community and business will be invited to provide input to and comments on, the draft as it is being developed.

Social Development Atlas:

Developing and implementing a social plan which is action-oriented and focuses on outcomes requires an in-depth understanding of existing population characteristics and trends in the City. As a first step toward a monitoring and reporting system, the Department has begun work on a Social Development Atlas.

The atlas will bring together a broad range of demographic, socio-economic and administrative/program service data in a GIS (Geographic Information System) application. This approach will facilitate complex spatial analysis of community needs and resources and enhance presentation of population information through maps at a variety of geographical levels - from neighbourhoods to wards to the City as a whole.

The atlas will not only identify key trends and demographic highlights, but also provide a dynamic planning tool for examining where these trends are occurring spatially across the City and over time. The atlas will enable the consideration of population needs in relation to the existing services, programs and other amenities that impact on the quality of community life.

The atlas will inform and support the Social Development Strategy process by:

(1)presenting a clearer understanding of the socio-economic profile of the City;

(2)identifying key highlights and population trends; and

(3)establish a framework for social reporting and monitoring, including developing relevant social indicators.

More concretely, the atlas will bring together maps, tables, illustrations and text regarding key population groups that face a variety of social barriers including poverty and have historically benefitted from social policy and the City's social, health and community services. Among these are children, youths, seniors, low-income families, and ethno-cultural populations.

The development of the Social Development Atlas will also be co-ordinated with other departments, such as Urban Planning and Development Services, and with community-based planning organizations, such as the Community Social Planning Council of Toronto. The process is also being informed by the directions being taken by the various committees and task forces of Council. For example, the Children and Youth Action Committee's development of a Children's Report Card and Youth Profile can give some direction to the Social Development Atlas process.

Through the maps it will be possible to see what changes are occurring and where. Ultimately, the atlas will be an integral piece for establishing a base line to develop appropriate indicators, necessary to monitor the social development of the City.

Consultation Process:

Once the draft vision and principles document and the Social Development Atlas are complete, it is proposed that the City consult with the community and stakeholders. The purpose of the consultation is twofold:

(1)to receive comments and input on the draft vision and principles document; and

(2)to provide input in developing strategic directions, and identifying outcome indicators .

It is proposed that this consultation occur in early Spring of 1999.

Since there will be no formal public consultation while developing the draft vision and principles paper, it will be important that it be well circulated in the community and that adequate public consultation forums be made available. It is recommended that these public consultations take place from February 15, 1999 to April 30, 1999, through the Community Councils.

Developing the Social Plan:

Following the consultation, the Department will oversee developing a social plan, which will include a social vision and principles and will identify strategic directions for the City. Throughout this process, the Department will also provide opportunities for representatives from the community-based sector and business to provide input and comment on the document.

Social Monitoring and Reporting:

As the strategic directions become clear, and all the inputs from committees, the task forces, the community, funders and agencies have been collected and evaluated, decisions can be made on what indicators will be established and how the monitoring and reporting functions will be carried out. This will be developed through the late spring of 1999.

Political Accountability:

Recognizing the already heavy commitments by Councillors to the existing task forces and committees, it is proposed that the Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee have responsibility for providing political direction to the Social Development Strategy. Since the Social Development Strategy will form the social planning component of the City's Strategic Plan, its progress will also be monitored through the Strategic Policy and Priorities Committee as part of the reporting on the Strategic Plan process.

Preliminary Budget Considerations:

The Department will absorb the costs of developing the draft vision and principles document and the Social Development Atlas within the 1998 operating budget. However, funds of approximately $90,000.00 will be sought through the budget process in 1999 for costs related to the consultation process, developing a social monitoring and reporting tool, and the production and distribution of the final Social Development Strategy report. A preliminary breakdown of this budget is identified in Appendix 2.

Conclusions:

The Social Development Strategy will be a critical strategic framework for the planning and managing of community social and health services in the City of Toronto, and will be one expression of a new civic partnership between the City and community-based sector for social development. It will also be the basis for the social well-being component of the Strategic Plan. The implementation process proposed in this report builds on the existing work underway through City task forces and committees related to social development issues. It provides opportunities for community input throughout the process, including public consultation through the Community Councils. Finally, this initiative is closely co-ordinated with the Strategic Plan process. Upon Council approval, the Department will begin the first phase of developing this strategy.

Contact Name:

Nancy Matthews, Tel: 392-8614/Fax: 392-8492

--------

Appendix 1

Proposed Social Development Strategy Time line /Process

February 1999

February-April 1999

July 1999Social PlanSocial Monitoring

And Reporting

- Vision- Atlas

- Principles- Indicators

- Strategic Directions

--------

Appendix 2

Social Development Strategy Preliminary Total Budget for 1999*

Community Consultations, Spring 1999$20,000.00

Social Monitoring and Reporting$35,000.00

Production and Distribution

of Final Report$35,000.00

Total:$90,000.00

*Please note: Community and Neighbourhood Services Department will accommodate $20,000.00 of the $90,000.00 total.

13

Yonge/Dundas Redevelopment Project - Settlement of Claims

- 291 Yonge Street, Toronto (Ward 24 - Downtown)

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

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the report (October 14, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services subject to Recommendation No. (3) being renumbered Recommendation No. (4) and the addition of the following Recommendation No. (3):

"(3)that after all settlements have been reached pursuant to the foregoing Recommendation 2, the Commissioner of Corporate Services be requested to advise the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee of the final result."

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee submits the following report (October14,1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services:

Purpose:

To authorize the settlement of disturbance damage and business loss claims with two tenants resulting from the expropriation of 291 Yonge Street and to have Council clarify that it is only those financial settlements exceeding authority previously delegated to the Chief Administrative Officer, which must specifically come forward for the approval of Committee and Council.

Financial Implications:

Financing has previously been approved by Council and is available in Capital Account No.216692.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)authority be granted to enter into settlement agreements with Yusuf Gul and with Lee Wang and Daniel Wang for compensation for disturbance damage and business loss resulting from the expropriation of the property located at 291 Yonge Street, on the terms set out in the body of this report;

(2)Council confirm that the Chief Administrative Officer has authority to approve settlements under the Expropriations Act within the limits as set out in Clause No. 1 of Report No. 11 of the Corporate Services Committee adopted as amended by Council at its meeting held on July 29, 30 and 31, 1998; and

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

Background:

At its meeting held on July 8, 9 and 10, 1998, Council approved, as amended, Clause 26 of Report No. 10 of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee approving Yonge/Dundas Redevelopment Project. One of the recommendations adopted by Council was that "approval of final financial settlements with land owners be granted by Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council".

Comments:

Pursuant to the decision of the Ontario Municipal Board sitting as a joint board under the Consolidated Hearings Act, Expropriation Plans were registered July 14, 1998 for the properties being acquired. Owners and tenants were served with Notices of Expropriation and Notices of Possession pursuant to the provisions of the Act with possession of the properties by the City on January 15, 1999. Statutory offers of compensation pursuant to the provisions of Section 25 of the Expropriations Act have been served on all registered owners.

The City has aggressively been negotiating settlement agreements with affected tenants in order to minimize the disturbance damage and business loss resulting from the expropriation of the properties. The owners of the properties located at 285 and 291 Yonge Street have given up possession of the properties to the City, and the City is currently managing these properties until vacant possession on January 15, 1999. A full and final settlement has been negotiated with two tenants located at 291 Yonge Street whereby they would be entitled to occupy their premises for three and one-half months rent free and be compensated their costs, each in the amount of $750.00. These settlements are considered fair and reasonable to both the City and the tenants, and it is recommended that the settlements be approved.

Settlement negotiations are ongoing with other tenants of expropriated property, particularly where there is no business loss whereby the tenants would be compensated their reasonable relocation costs with actual invoices supporting the amount to be paid. Other small businesses are actively seeking premises to relocate their business. Financial Statements have been received by the City. The City's consultants, PricewaterhouseCoopers, are analyzing these statements and preparing reports recommending compensation for disturbance damage and business loss.

As these are small businesses and the owners do not have available the necessary capital to pay for deposits and relocation costs in advance of payment by the City, it is important that settlements be approved in a timely manner. The time required to negotiate settlement agreements and obtain approval of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council would prove to be a hardship on many of the business owners. At its meeting of July 29, 30 and 31, 1998, by it adoption of Clause No. 1 of Report No. 11 of the Corporate Services Committee, Council delegated certain authorities in property matters to either the Chief Administrative Officer or the Commissioner of Corporate Services. Included in such standing delegated authorities to the Chief Administrative Officer was authority to settle expropriations where the settlement is $250,000.00 or less above the statutory offer.

Accordingly, it is recommended that the specific recommendation included in the Council approval of the Yonge/Dundas Redevelopment be read in conjunction with Council's subsequent delegation to the Chief Administrative Officer to approve certain expropriation settlements so that it is only those settlements exceeding the Chief Administrative Officer's delegated authority which must receive the specific approval of Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council.

Conclusion:

The two settlements with Gul and Wang are considered fair and reasonable, and approval is recommended.

Contact Name:

Bob Johnston, Johnston Donald Associates Inc., Telephone: (905) 501-9099; Fax: (905) 501-0455;

E-Mail: jdassoc@interlog.com; (spp98191.wpd).

Insert Table/Map No. 1

appendix a - yonge/dundas redev proj map (dev parcels)

14

Appeal to Ontario Municipal Board - Equalization Factors

by Former City of Toronto

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

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (October 15, 1998) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

To seek City Council's approval to withdraw the application of the former City of Toronto at the Ontario Municipal Board for a review of the Equalized Assessments and Equalization Factors for Metropolitan Toronto as published in the Ontario Gazette in July 1993.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

None.

Recommendation:

That the application to the Ontario Municipal Board made by the former City of Toronto for a review of the Equalized Assessments and Equalization Factors for Metropolitan Toronto as published in the Ontario Gazette in July, 1993 be withdrawn, and that staff be authorized to take any necessary action to implement this.

Council Reference/Background/History:

The Council of the former City of Toronto, at its meeting held on October 12 and 15, 1993 adopted Clause No. 58 of Executive Committee Report No. 19 and in so doing directed the City Solicitor to file an application to the Ontario Municipal Board in respect of the equalization factors for Metropolitan Toronto which were published in the Ontario Gazette in July, 1993. At that time, Council also authorized the retention of the law firm Poole Milligan, specialist in assessment law, to undertake the hearing before the Ontario Municipal Board on behalf of the City.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Following the instruction of the former City Council, an application was filed with the Ontario Municipal Board in 1993 pursuant to section 51 of the Assessment Act. However, the Board was asked to hold the application in abeyance until discussions with the Regional Assessment Commissioner and other affected municipalities were completed. At the time that the application was filed, the issue was solely one of tax apportionment of levies among the various municipalities in Metropolitan Toronto whose interest at the time were not necessarily the same as the City of Toronto's. The provincial government in 1993 decided not to permit a tax apportionment in Metro based on equalized assessment and as a result the issue became less critical. However, the issue of education grants remained relevant. Counsel appeared at the Ontario Municipal Board on a motion to narrow the issues in this appeal on August 2, 1996 and at that time the matter was adjourned sine die pending receipt of the 1997 Equalization Factors. At that time, the Metropolitan Separate School Board, which was also a party to this application, withdrew from this matter, leaving the City as the sole applicant.

The Ontario Municipal Board has now set this matter down for November 13, 1998 at which time the Board is requesting that the City advise whether or not it wishes to continue with its application.

Staff in the Department of Finance and the Department of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism have been consulted and have determined that there is very little, if any, value in pursuing this appeal since the amalgamation of the former municipalities within Metro into the new City of Toronto. As a result of amalgamation, the equalization factors do not affect any grants or grant allocations for the City and consequently there is no benefit to the City in pursuing this matter. The purpose of this report therefore is to request City Council's authority to withdraw this application.

Conclusions:

This report recommends that the application to the Ontario Municipal Board by the former City of Toronto for a review of the Equalized Assessments and Equalization Factors for Metropolitan Toronto as published in the Ontario Gazette in July, 1993 be withdrawn as this application is of no benefit in light of the amalgamation of the old municipalities into the new City of Toronto.

Contact Name:

Mary Ellen Bench, 392-7245.

15

Status of Negotiations - A Proposal for Eliminating the

City's Obligation to Provide an Annual Subsidy to the

Toronto Harbour Commissioners

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

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having adopted the recommendations of the confidential report (October 19, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, which has been forwarded to members of Council under separate cover.

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a confidential report (October 19, 1998) from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, such report to remain confidential in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act.)

16

Financial Impact to the City of Toronto

- Recent Provincial Actions

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

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (October 19, 1998) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to report on the preliminary financial impact to the City resulting from Provincial actions.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

A variety of Provincial actions as described in this report will cause a preliminary net shortfall of $10.4 million.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)Council request the Province for a $10.4 million grant or offset from the City's next Local Services Realignment (LSR) installment payment;

(2)should staff discussions with Provincial authorities not result in significant results or meaningful action, the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer be authorized to deduct $10.4million (or appropriate updated amount) from either the school board repayment or the next LSR installment.

Council Reference/Background/History:

Over the past several months since Council adopted the 1998 Operating Budget, the Province has taken a variety of steps which will have a deleterious financial impact on the City.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

As result of Provincial actions, the City will experience negative financial implications from the following issues:

(1)The delay in receiving the assessment rolls from the Province will result in an investment income loss of approximately of $12.3 million and penalty income loss, from rate payers who are traditionally overdue on payment of their accounts, of $5 million.

(2)The City has not yet received a supplementary assessment tape from the Province and therefore is foregoing investment and penalty income. Our preliminary estimate is a $711,000.00 investment income loss.

(3)In April of 1998, the City's estimated cost for services provided by the Ontario Property Assessment Corporation (OPAC) was $24.7 million (this figure was received from the Province). In September the City received an invoice from OPAC for $25.9 million, an increase of $1.2 million. The City's budget estimates did not provide for this additional cost.

The Province has taken some action to partially offset these financial implications:

(1)At the end of June, the Province made payments to the Toronto District School Board and the Toronto District Separate School Board ($479 million in total) on behalf of the City. The City is expected to repay these funds to the to the Province at the end of October. The reason for this action is to allow the City to earn investment income on these funds and thereby compensate the City for the delay in the assessment rolls. The City will earn approximately $7.2 million in investment income on these funds.

The City has paid the school boards its third quarterly payment at the end of September and the fourth quarterly payment is due December 15th. A report will be brought forward to the Budget Committee at its meeting of November 10th to discuss the City's payment arrangements with the school boards.

(2)The Province has extended the payment date for the first and second installments of the LSR arrangements. The delay in these $65 million installments will provide the City with an additional $1.6 million in investment income. It should be noted that Council approved payment of these installment amounts at its meeting of October 2, 1998.

All of the above results in a $10.4 million net shortfall to the City (see table below). Given the lack of information received from the Province and the Finance Department's intention to further review each of the items, the shortfall is a preliminary estimate.

--------

Summary - Net Loss to the City from Provincial Actions

The Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer has written a letter to the Deputy Minister of Finance expressing the City's concerns. City officials have requested a meeting with Provincial officials to discuss these issues and to arrive at a solution which will enable the Province to fulfill its commitment that its actions in this regard would be revenue neutral. Council will be informed on the outcome of these discussions.

Should the discussions not resolve the shortfall issue Council would have the following recommended options:

(1)request Provincial authorities for a $10.4 million grant;

(2)request Provincial authorities for a $10.4 million offset in the City's next LSR installment payment; or

(3)Council authorize the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer deduct $10.4 million from either the school board repayment or the LSR installment payment.

Even if the Province were to extend the repayment date for the school board funds, the City would not earn sufficient investment income ($3.7 million) for the 1998 calendar year to compensate for the shortfall. Also, the City is not required to make any other payments to the Province that are larger than the school board repayment. Therefore delaying a payment to the Province is not a feasible option.

Contact Name:

Len Brittain, Director of Treasury & Financial Services, Telephone: 392-5380, Fax: 392-3649; E-mail: lbrittai@city.toronto.on.ca

17

Other Items Considered by the Committee

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

(a)Audit Division Staff Redeployment

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having received the report (October 6, 1998) from the Executive Director of Human Resources.

(October 6, 1998) from the Executive Director of Human Resources concluding that it is the objective of the Chief Auditor and Human Resources staff to find permanent suitable alternate reemployment for the remaining two employees from the Audit Division, and recommending that this report be received for information.

(b)Toronto City Hall - Accommodation Of Press Gallery

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having recommended that Council during consideration of Clause No. 2 of the Corporate Services Committee Report No. 15, approve the construction of the Press Gallery with funding to be taken from the Transition Reserve Fund.

(October 13, 1998) from the City Clerk, forwarding the action of the Budget Committee from its meeting of October 13, 1998, and recommending to the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee and Council, that:

(1)the construction of the Press Gallery be approved with funding to be taken from the Transition Reserve Fund; and

(2)usage of the Press Gallery be provided free of charge to members of the press and media

(c)Motion - Updating The Payments-in Lieu Process For Provincial And Federal Properties In The City Of Toronto

The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee reports having referred the Motion from Councillor Saundercook to the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer for report back to the Committee.

(October 9, 1998) from the City Clerk, referring a motion by Councillor Saundercook from the October 1 and 2, 1998, Council meeting and recommending that:

(1)City Council immediately contact other municipalities across Ontario and ask them to contact the province requesting them to revisit the payments-in-lieu process; and

(2)Council instruct staff to produce a report for the next regular meeting of Council on the payments-in-lieu payable for provincial and federal properties in the City of Toronto.

Respectfully submitted,

CASE OOTES,

Chair Pro Tem

Toronto, October 20, 1998

(Report No. 21 of The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, including additions thereto, was adopted, as amended, by City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998.)