CITY CLERK

ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE

REPORT No. 5

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on September 28 and 29, 1999

1 Request for Proposal for the Acquisition of 2,000 Optical Scan Vote Tabulators
and 100 Touch Screen Voting Units

2 Code of Conduct for Members of Council Inclusive of Lobbyist Provisions

3 Municipal Code

4 Appeals Reserve - 1999 Access and Equity Grant Program

5 Terms of Reference for the Personnel and Office Consolidation Sub-Committees

6 Use of Injunctions to Prevent the Use of "Lookalike" Tickets

7 Outstanding Realty Taxes - 71 Milvan Drive (Ward 6 - North York Humber)

8 Demolition of 22 Luverne Avenue - North York

9 Sheppard Subway - Don Mills Station Initiation of Civil Lawsuit to Recover Contamination Costs

10 Application for Approval to Expropriate Interests in Land, Sheppard Subway/Sheppard Widening Project Multiple Partial Interests Vicinity of Intersection of Bayview Avenue and Sheppard Avenue East (Ward 9 - North York Centre South, Ward 10 - North York Centre - Ward 12 - Seneca Heights)

11 23 Fraser Avenue - Sale of City-Owned Property (Ward 20 - Trinity Niagara)

12 Sale of 80 Turnberry Avenue (Ward 21 - Davenport)

13 Declaration as Surplus 795 Middlefield Road - Central Laundry Facility (Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern)

14 Declaration as Surplus 111-117 Richmond Street East - Municipal Car Park No. 63 (Ward 24 - Downtown)

15 Declaration as Surplus Westerly Portion of 110 Wildwood Crescent (Ward 26 - East Toronto)

16 Declaration as Surplus 118A-120 Pearl Street - Toronto District Heating Corporation (TDHC) - (Ward 24 - Downtown)

17 Potential Redevelopment of 1631 Queen Street East (Ward 26 - East Toronto)

18 Purchase of 1531 Eglinton Avenue West (Ward 28 - York Eglinton)

19 Request from the York Community Alliance for Office Space at 2696 or 2700 Eglinton Avenue West (Ward 28 - York Eglinton)

20 Tax Adjustment - Municipal Act Sections 442 and 443

21 Other Items Considered by the Committee

City of Toronto

REPORT No. 5

OF THE ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE

(from its meeting on September 7, 1999,

submitted by Councillor Lorenzo Berardinetti, Chair)

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on September 28 and 29, 1999

Request for Proposal for the Acquisition

of 2,000 Optical Scan Vote Tabulators

and 100 Touch Screen Voting Units

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, amended this Clause by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that:

(1) the City Clerk be directed to include in the negotiations with the successful proponent, the subletting of voting equipment to other interested parties; such subletting to be supervised by City of Toronto staff to ensure the proper use of the equipment, and to be at a profit;

(2) the report dated September 22, 1999, from the City Clerk, entitled 'Request for Proposal for the Acquisition of Optical Scan Vote Tabulators and Touch Screen Voting Units', be received;

(3) the copy of the Request for Proposal, Procurement No: FA.49.089-99 for the Supply and Delivery of an Integrated Election Management System, issued by the Corporation of the City of Mississauga, and forwarded to Council by the City Auditor, as directed by the Audit Committee, be received; and

(4) the communication dated September 27, 1999, from the City Clerk, forwarding the recommendations of the Audit Committee with respect to the Request for Proposal for the acquisition of Optical Scan Vote Tabulators and Touch Screen Voting Units, be received.")

The Administration Committee recommends:

(A) the adoption of the following Recommendations Nos. (1), (2) (a), (3) and (4), embodied in the confidential report (September 2, 1999) from the City Clerk, viz:

"(1) authority be granted to enter into a contract with Election Systems and Software Inc. (ES&S) for the acquisition of up to 1,850 optical scan vote tabulators and up to 100 touch screen voting units, including all necessary support and service agreements, at a capital cost not to exceed $13.05 million ($1.0 million in 1999 and $12.05 million in 2000), such contract to be in accordance with the Request for Proposal and the Proposal submitted, and on terms and conditions satisfactory to the City Clerk, and in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor;

(2) the final number of optical scan vote tabulators and touch screen voting units to be acquired be subject to:

(a) the Clerk's determination, in consultation with all Members of Council, of the final number of voting places that will be required for the 2000 municipal election;

(3) the contract include suitable enforceable performance guarantees which ensure the equipment acquired by the City remains fully operational for a period of at least fifteen years and that any recount costs associated with the performance of the equipment will be assumed by the supplier; and

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

(B) the adoption of following Recommendations Nos. (3), (9) and (10) embodied in the confidential report (August 24, 1999) from the City Auditor:

"(3) all financial justification analyses in regards to capital acquisitions be reviewed in detail by the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer prior to submission to Council. Such analyses should include the following:

(a) an analysis of all options in regards to the project (eg leasing or purchasing);

(b) sources of financing; and

(c) quantification of savings/benefits;"

"(9) the Chief Administrative Officer be directed to prepare a policy in connection with the participation of City election staff in the elections of other jurisdictions; and

(10) a standard reporting format be developed by the Chief Administrative Officer in regards to the preparation of reports which recommend the selection of suppliers responding to a request for proposal."

The Administration Committee reports, for the information of Council, having referred the following motion to the City Clerk for report thereon directly to Council for its meeting scheduled to be held on September 28, 1999, respecting the cost involved:

Moved by Councillor Mahood:

"That the City Clerk be requested to re-examine the issue on the basis of looking at strictly renting the equipment for the next election with a possible option to buy."

The aforementioned confidential reports (August 23, 1999 and September 2, 1999) from the City Clerk and the confidential report (August 24, 1999) from the City Auditor, respecting the Request for Proposal for the Acquisition of Optical Scan Vote Tabulators and Touch Screen Voting Units, were forwarded to Members of Council under confidential cover.

The Administration Committee submits the following report (August 30, 1999) from the Chief Administrative Officer:

Purpose:

This report responds to a request from the Administration Committee for additional information with respect to financing options, the feasibility of renting the equipment from other jurisdictions and the ongoing maintenance costs of the batteries in the tabulators.

Source of Funds:

The Elections Voting and Vote Tabulation System was approved as part of the 1999-2003 Capital Works Program. One million was approved for expenditure in 1999 and $12.05 million was committed for 2000.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Council Background/Reference:

On July 13, 1999 the Administration Committee considered a joint report (June 15, 1999) from the Chief Administrative Officer, Acting Commissioner, Corporate Services, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and City Clerk recommending that the City Clerk be given authority to enter into a contract with Election Systems and Software Inc., the proponent with the highest evaluated score, for the acquisition of the necessary optical scan vote tabulators and touch screen voting units, in accordance with the Request for Proposal and the Proposal submitted, and on terms and conditions satisfactory to the City Clerk, and in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor.

The Administration Committee requested the Chief Administrative Officer to report to the September 7, 1999 meeting of the Administration Committee:

(i) on the various other options, including leasing and rental, in consultation with the proponents who submitted this as part of their proposal, such report to include financial comparisons to the purchasing options;

(ii) including information on the feasibility of borrowing this equipment from other jurisdictions; and

(iii) on the ongoing cost of maintenance of the batteries used for these voting units;

The Committee also requested the City Auditor for the September 7, 1999 meeting of the Administration Committee to:

(i) review the business case and the financial and technical evaluation of the proposals, including a rent-to-buy option, where included as part of the proposals;

(ii) review and evaluate the systems used in Vancouver, Ottawa, Chicago, Cook County, Philadelphia and Seattle; and

(iii) requested the appropriate staff to provide to the Members of the Committee and Councillors, this week on a confidential basis, additional information on the evaluation criteria, weighting and ranking, including copies of the resultant independent testing authority for compliance with the standards of the U.S. and Federal Elections Commission.

Previous Council Approvals on this Issue:

On March 2, 3 and 4, 1999, Council approved the 1999-2003 Capital Works Program which included $13.05 million for the acquisition of a vote counting system. Council directed the Clerk to prepare a report on the process for Election 2000, including updated costs of a recommended voting system and the costs and benefits of vote tabulation options. The 1999 expenditure of $1.0 million is subject to Council's direction on the Election 2000 process and approval of a specific voting system.

On June 9, 10 and 11, 1999, Council approved the use of voting place optical scan vote tabulators for the City of Toronto elections, with touch screen voting units to be used for institutional voting and the advance voting program. The Clerk was directed to report on the results of the Request for Proposal, together with a recommendation on the award of the contract, to the July 13, 1999 Administration Committee meeting.

Comments and/or Justification:

(1) Other Financing Options:

The Request for Proposal directed the proponents to provide any financing options or plans available to the City of Toronto. Only Election Systems & Software Inc. (ES&S) indicated it would be willing to discuss lease to purchase or full service rental options if of interest to the City of Toronto.

The recommended vendor, Election Systems & Software, was contacted by Finance Department staff and asked to provide the City with lease and rental options for our consideration. It should be noted that no attempt has been made to negotiate prices and/or lease rates in regard to any of the options presented by ES&S. However, if the decision to proceed with this acquisition is confirmed, the City Clerk, together with appropriate city staff will enter into negotiations with the successful vendor in regard to the specific equipment and services required.

For the purposes of this analysis all options were standardized in terms of equipment and the services the City would receive from ES&S. Furthermore, in order to facilitate a more meaningful comparison between the purchase/lease options and the rental option, the estimated useful life of the equipment was standardized. The rental option provided to the City by ES&S was for 3 elections. However, the estimated useful life of the equipment is expected to be 15 years. Following the 2006 election no additional capital spending is anticipated for the purchase and lease options until 2015. The average annual cost to the city of either the purchase or lease options for the first 7 years is approximately $2.72 million and $2.86 million respectively. In contrast, the average annual cost for the next 8 years would be approximately $385,000 in the case of either option - a substantial reduction in costs. With the rental option, additional rental costs will be incurred in each election year subsequent to the 2006 election.

The analysis contained in Appendix "A", provides details with respect to the capital requirements of the vote tabulating equipment as well as yearly service, storage and operating costs. All cash flows associated with the acquisition and maintenance of the equipment were then discounted in order to facilitate a comparison of costs. It should also be noted that our analysis assumed a seven-year term for the debenture required to purchase the equipment. The length of the term was again, chosen to facilitate a comparison of the three options. Should the City proceed with this acquisition the choice of term would depend on the market conditions for debt at the time of the purchase and be factored into the city's longer term capital financing strategy.

Our analysis reveals the rental option would be the most expensive for the City. The number of units, the nature of the equipment and the customization required limit the opportunities for ES&S to rent the units when not in use by the City of Toronto. We have been informed by ES&S that they would essentially be building the equipment for rent exclusively by the City.

The lease option also proved to be more expensive than purchasing the machines outright. It should be noted that the lease options are actually lease-to-purchase options, where the City owns the equipment at the end of the lease. In general, the attraction of a lease is the ability to defer a portion of the purchase price (as well as the decision to buy or not) until the end of the lease term. However, ES&S has not deferred a portion of the purchase price (that is, the residual value is zero). Rather, the entire value of the equipment has been included in the yearly lease payment. As with the rental option, ES&S would have limited alternatives if we did not actually purchase the equipment, and this is reflected in their financing arrangements.

The analysis also addressed the financial impact of purchasing modems for each of the tabulators and the differences in cost associated with service agreements available to the City. Our analysis revealed that purchasing modems adds a substantial net cost to the acquisition and maintenance of the vote tabulating equipment. By purchasing the modems the City will save close to $500,000 (in current dollars) for telephone lines and operators but at a cost of approximately $2 million in increased capital spending. It is recommended that, subject to operational requirements, this be considered in the negotiations with the vendor as a means to reduce the cost of this project.

With respect to the service agreements offered by ES&S our analysis revealed that a limited service agreement is the most cost effective. It is also the preferred service agreement of the Clerk's Department. The primary difference between the two agreements is that the full service agreement includes election programming, testing and other Election Day support that can be performed with existing Clerks personnel.

The outcome of our analysis is not surprising. Elections equipment, while continually being improved upon, does not become obsolete as quickly as other information technology equipment. Furthermore, by using the same equipment/process for a number of elections in succession, the public and staff will become more familiar and proficient with the equipment and its use. Because of the long useful life of the equipment, estimated at 15 years, the customized nature of the equipment and software and the number of units we require this equipment does not lend itself to lease or rental. Further, Clerk's staff have advised us that service agreements are structured so as to require the vendor to upgrade software or hardware during the tenure of these agreements, thereby ensuring the city continues to benefit from new technology that will improve our election system and process. As noted previously, ES&S has indicated they will have a difficult time renting or leasing the equipment when not in use by the City. As such, the rental and lease options are not as attractive as they might be for more generic types equipment.

Based on our analysis the most cost effective method of acquiring the vote tabulating equipment is to purchase the equipment as was originally approved by Council as part of the 1999 Capital Works Program.

(2) Renting the Equipment from Other Jurisdictions:

The recommended optical scan vote tabulator and touch screen voting unit are currently in use in several jurisdictions in the United States. In addition, Venezuela has 7,350 tabulator units.

It is not possible to rent the equipment from any jurisdiction in the United States as their voting day precedes Ontario's municipal voting day by only a few days. The US voting day is the Tuesday after the first Monday in November, Ontario's is the second Monday in November. (In the year 2000, the US voting day will be held on November 8, 2000 and Toronto's municipal election will be held on November 14, 2000.)

The tabulator units in Venezuela were modified to satisfy the particular needs and election laws of the country. For example:

(a) There are no printers in the tabulator units. Venezuela's law requires the election results to be printed on legal size paper so a separate large printer is attached to the unit to print out the results. Not having a printer in the unit means it would not be possible to print either the zero tape, the results tape or any audit reports in the voting place;

(b) The tabulator units are programmed for Spanish. Extensive software reprogramming would be necessary to convert the units to English;

(c) The tabulators have been programmed for a four column ballot. Toronto has traditionally used a three column ballot. A four column ballot leaves less space for candidates' names and numbers beside the names;

(d) The tabulator units each have a six pound battery. In addition to the added weight of shipping the units, there are some costs to properly maintain the batteries. (See item number 3 of this report.); and

(e) The units do not contain serial ports which would be required for any future growth applications.

Venezuela conducts elections on a fairly regular basis. They had elections in November 1998 (Governors and Senate), December 1998 (President), July 1999 (Assembly) and will be conducting another election in the fall of 1999. As elections can be called on short notice, it is doubtful Venezuela would be willing to commit in advance to share the equipment.

For the foregoing reasons, there currently is no viable opportunity for renting the recommended optical scan vote tabulator from another jurisdiction.

(3) Cost of Battery Maintenance:

The recommended optical scan vote tabulators have an optional internal backup battery. The tabulator utilizes this 12 volt 7 Ah lead acid battery for backup in the event of a power failure. The battery is completely sealed and can be operated, charged or stored in any position. The life expectancy of the battery is approximately five years however there are certain maintenance steps that must be taken to insure that the battery's service life is not inadvertently shortened.

Storage time and temperature both have an effect on the life of the battery. When stored at 68 degrees Fahrenheit the approximate charge retention is as follows: 1 month = 97 percent, three months = 91 percent, and six months = 85 percent. However, higher storage temperatures do have an adverse effect on the batteries charge retention. One situation that should be avoided is allowing batteries to fully discharge, whether in storage or in a tabulator. If this occurs, lead sulfate will form on the negative plates of the battery. This sulfate acts as an insulator and the more advanced the sulfation the lower the charge acceptance of the battery. For this reason it is recommended that the batteries be put through a charge program approximately every six months. With the expected number of tabulators required for the City (approximately 2000) this equates to 100 man hours every six months or approximately $3,600.00 per year.

Conclusion:

Based on staff's analysis, the most cost effective method of acquiring the vote tabulating equipment is to purchase the equipment as was originally approved by Council as part of the 1999 Capital Works Program.

There is currently no viable opportunity for renting the recommended optical scan vote tabulator from either Venezuela or an American jurisdiction.

To maintain a battery within the vote tabulator is a relatively inexpensive option for the Clerk's division to maintain. The City Clerk should determine the necessity of the battery in the purchase of vote tabulators.

Contact Names:

Val Sequeira, Manager, Administration Committee and Finance 397-4225

John Hollins, Director of Elections 392-8019

Comparison of Alternatives for the Acquisition of Vote Tabulating Equipment

Assumptions:

Inflation:

Inflation was assumed to be zero. All costs (purchase/lease and service agreements), except storage will be determined when the contract is signed. The cost of storage applies equally to the purchase and lease alternatives. Storage costs are not applicable to the rent alternative. However, given the rate of inflation in recent years the impact would not be material.

Discount Rate:

The appropriate discount rate has been assumed to be the City's cost of borrowing.

Equipment Life:

The equipment is expected to last at least 15 years or 5 elections. A conservative estimated useful life of three elections has been chosen for the purposes of this analysis. In addition a useful life of three elections allows for a comparison with the information provided by the vendor with respect to the rental option.

Insurance:

Existing insurance policies will cover this new equipment.

Storage:

The Clerks Department has estimated that 10,000 square feet of storage space will be required at a cost of $9.00 per square foot.

Salvage Value:

As noted in the preamble to the Appendix, the number of units, the nature of the equipment and the customization required limit the opportunities for the vendor to rent the units when not in use by the City. For this same reason we have assumed that when the City is finished with the equipment the resale and/or salvage value will be zero.

Revenues:

As per information provided by the Clerks Department, the City could net $100,000 per year undertaking contract elections. This is based on the experience of the former Municipality of North York. North York averaged $50-75,000 in net revenues during non-election years with 425 machines. In addition, the Clerks Department is in early discussion with Calgary and Edmonton to run their municipal elections during our non-election years. Additional net revenues of $300,000 and $200,000 respectively are anticipated. We have not included these amounts in our analysis.

Residual Value:

According to the vendor the residual value has been included in the yearly leasing cost.

Operators and Telephones:

This line item includes telephone lines, operators, supervisors and software.

Tax Rate:

GST (7 percent less 4 percent rebate) and PST (8 percent) have been included in the purchase cost when calculating the required debt financing. In the lease and rental options GST and PST must be remitted at the time of each payment.

The Service Agreements could be subject to both GST and PST. However, a definitive calculation of applicable taxes for the election year Service Agreements would require a detailed breakdown of each component. For the purposes of comparing options the tax applicable to the election year Service Agreements includes both GST and PST. One would expect the actual election year taxes to be lower than we have estimated.

The Administration Committee also submits the following report (August 23, 1999) from the City Clerk:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to respond to a request from the Administration Committee on the provision of orientation sessions for candidates, agents and scrutineers, the use of non-composite ballots and a request to the Province to amend its legislation to allow a municipal ballot design similar to the ballot used in Provincial elections.

Source of Funds:

Not applicable.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Council Background/Reference/History:

At its meeting of July 13, 1999 the Administration Committee requested the City Clerk to report to the September 7, 1999 meeting of the Administration Committee on the following:

"6. 4(i) give consideration to and report on providing orientation sessions for candidates, agents and scrutineers; and

(ii) report to the aforementioned meeting of the Administration Committee on the option of using a non-composite ballot, and on the option of requesting a change in Provincial legislation to allow a ballot design based upon the Provincial ballot"

Comments and/or Justification:

4(i). Provision of Orientation Sessions for Candidates, Agents and Scrutineers:

Prior to the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 (hereafter referred to as the Act), municipal election legislation provided for Provincial regulations governing the use of vote-counting equipment. These regulations required a public testing of the equipment to be conducted.

Subsection 42(3) of the Act now directs the clerk to:

"At least 30 days before voting day, the clerk shall,

(a) establish procedures and forms for the use of,

(i) any voting and vote-counting equipment authorized by by-law, and

(ii) any alternative voting method authorized by by-law; and

(b) provide a copy of the procedures and forms to each candidate."

All the former municipalities conducting automated elections in 1997 adopted the provisions of the former Provincial regulations to continue the practice of holding a public testing of the equipment.

In both the 1997 municipal election and the 1998 Ward 1 by-election, candidates or their scrutineers were invited by City staff to witness the testing of the vote-counting equipment. During this testing session, the operation of the equipment was explained to candidates and they were given the opportunity to mark ballots and insert them into the equipment prior to the actual testing.

In addition, the Candidate's Guide, which was made available to all candidates, made reference to the use of vote-counting equipment.

Leading up to the 1997 municipal election, four candidate information sessions were held. In addition to general election information (e.g., legislated dates), the financial requirements of the Act were fully explained.

It is the intention of the City Clerk to once again conduct these sessions for candidates, agents and scrutineers during the 2000 municipal election.

4(ii). (a) Use of a Non-Composite Ballot:

Prior to the enactment of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, the authority to decide whether separate or composite ballots were to be used rested with the municipal council. The Act was amended to give the Clerk this authority out of recognition that this was an administrative not a political decision.

The last known use of separate ballots in the City of Toronto was 1969.

A separate ballot provides for only one office, question or by-law. A composite ballot is one that combines the separate ballots for all offices, questions or by-laws. If separate ballots are used, the City would require six ballot styles, one each for mayor, councillor and the four school board trustees, plus additional ballots for any questions or by-laws. In deciding whether to use composite or separate ballots, several factors must be considered.

Firstly, the security of the ballots, from the time voting begins to the end of voting day needs to be considered. It is fundamental to the integrity of the election that all ballots be accounted for. Multiple ballots, coupled with five different voting entitlements based on elector qualifications, places a profound burden on election officials, particularly during the 5:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. rush. It is imperative that voters receive the ballots that they are entitled to and that the ballots in the voting place balance at the close of voting. All of these variables present an unusually high risk of error.

Secondly, there is the issue of costs. If each voter is entitled to an average of three ballots, three times as many ballots would have to be produced. While the cost per ballot would be less, with the costs of padding, counting and packaging, the overall costs for the ballots would not be substantially reduced.

In trying to locate a municipality that was still using separate ballots, staff at the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing were unable to provide us with a name.

(b) Ballot Design:

The Provincially regulated form for the municipal ballot is currently identical to that used for Provincial elections in that it is reverse printed (black background with white lettering) and contains a circular space for marking the ballot. This ballot design is used by those municipalities that have a manual count.

When a municipality uses vote-counting equipment, it is necessary to modify the ballot design to match the capabilities of the equipment. Using a ballot that is similar to the Provincially regulated form is not possible when utilizing optical scan tabulators.

Contact Name:

John Hollins, Director of Elections, City Clerk's Division

Telephone: (416) 392-8019 E-mail: jhollins@city.north-york.on.ca

The Administration Committee also submits the following communication (July 20, 1999) from City Clerk, Audit Committee:

Committee Action:

The Audit Committee reports having approved the following request to the City Auditor from the Administration Committee and having directed him to submit his report to the Audit Committee:

(1) That the City Auditor review the business case and the financial and technical evaluation of the proposals, including a rent-to-buy option, where included as part of the proposals; and

(2) That the City Auditor review and evaluate the systems used in Vancouver, Ottawa, Chicago, Cook County, Philadelphia and Seattle, based on information in the City Clerk's Department.

Background:

The Audit Committee, on July 19, 1999 considered the following request from the Administration Committee to the City Auditor:

"(1) That the City Auditor review the business case and the financial and technical evaluation of the proposals, including a rent-to-buy option, where included as part of the proposals; and

(2) That the City Auditor review and evaluate the systems used in Vancouver, Ottawa, Chicago, Cook County, Philadelphia and Seattle",

and submit a report thereon to the meeting of the Administration Committee, to be held on September 7, 1999.

The Committee's action is noted above.

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a confidential report (September 2, 1999) from the City Clerk, such report to remain confidential in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act, save and except the following recommendations embodied therein:

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) authority be granted to enter into a contract with Election Systems and Software Inc. (ES&S) for the acquisition of up to 1,850 optical scan vote tabulators and up to 100 touch screen voting units, including all necessary support and service agreements, at a capital cost not to exceed $13.05 million ($1.0 million in 1999 and $12.05 million in 2000), such contract to be in accordance with the Request for Proposal and the Proposal submitted, and on terms and conditions satisfactory to the City Clerk, and in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor;

(2) the final number of optical scan vote tabulators and touch screen voting units to be acquired be subject to:

(a) the Clerk's determination, in consultation with all Members of Council, of the final number of voting places that will be required for the 2000 municipal election, and

(b) Council's direction on the advance vote strategy for multi-residential buildings;

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

(City Council also had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a confidential report (August 24, 1999) from the City Auditor, such report to remain confidential in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act, save and except the following recommendations embodied therein:

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the City Clerk not proceed with the acquisition of vote tabulating equipment until the financial analyses recommended in this report have been presented to, and evaluated by, Council;

(2) the City Clerk be requested to provide detailed financial analyses on the following:

(a) the costs, advantages and disadvantages associated with the renting of vote tabulation equipment on an election by election basis; and

(b) the costs, advantages and disadvantages of conducting the 2000 election with present vote tabulating equipment supplemented with the acquisition of new or rented equipment;

(3) all financial justification analyses in regards to capital acquisitions be reviewed in detail by the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer prior to submission to Council. Such analyses should include the following:

(a) an analysis of all options in regards to the project (eg leasing or purchasing);

(b) sources of financing; and

(c) quantification of savings/benefits;

(4) the City Clerk be requested to conduct site visits in connection with the upcoming US elections in November in order to observe the operation of various vote tabulation equipment in actual election situations;

(5) any contract with potential suppliers of vote tabulating equipment include suitable enforceable performance guarantees which ensure the equipment acquired by the City remains fully operational for a period of at least fifteen years;

(6) the City Clerk forward a detailed plan for Council's consideration concerning the number and location of voting places for the year 2000 election and its impact on both the number of tabulating units required and its impact on the operating budget for the year 2000 election;

(7) the City Clerk forward a detailed plan to Council concerning the advisability of expanding the number of advance polls and its impact on both the number of tabulating units required and on the operating budget for the year 2000 election;

(8) the composition of future staff teams set up for the purpose of evaluating proposals be communicated to the Chief Administrative Officer for review and comment;

(9) the Chief Administrative Officer be directed to prepare a policy in connection with the participation of City election staff in the elections of other jurisdictions; and

(City Council also had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a confidential report (August 23, 1999) from the City Clerk, such report to remain confidential in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act.)

(City Council also had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (September 22, 1999) from the City Clerk:

Purpose:

This report responds to a request from the Administration Committee for additional information with respect to the feasibility of renting the equipment for the next election with a possible option to buy.

Source of Funds:

The Elections Voting and Vote Tabulation System was approved as part of the 1999-2003 Capital Works Program. One million was approved for expenditure in 1999 and $12.05 million was committed for 2000.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Council Background/Reference:

On September 7, 1999, the Administration Committee recommended to Council:

"(A) (1) the adoption of the following Recommendations Nos. (1), (2) (a), (3) and (4), embodied in the confidential report (September 2, 1999) from the City Clerk, viz:

It is recommended that:

(2) the final number of optical scan vote tabulators and touch screen voting units to be acquired be subject to:

(a) the Clerk's determination, in consultation with all Members of Council, of the final number of voting places that will be required for the 2000 municipal election;

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

(2) the adoption of the following Recommendations Nos. (3), (9) and (10) embodied in the confidential report (August 24, 1999) from the City Auditor:

(a) an analysis of all options in regards to the project (eg leasing or purchasing);

(b) source of financing; and

(c) quantification of savings/benefits;

(9) the Chief Administrative Officer be directed to prepare a policy in connection with the participation of City election staff in the elections of other jurisdictions; and

(B) referred the following motion to the City Clerk for report thereon directly to Council for its meeting scheduled to be held on September 28, 1999, respecting the cost involved:

Moved by Councillor Mahood:

That the City Clerk be requested to re-examine the issue on the basis of looking at strictly renting the equipment for the next election with a possible option to buy."

Comments and/or Justification:

The Request for Proposal directed the proponents to provide any financing options or plans available to the City of Toronto. Only Election Systems and Software Inc. (ES&S) indicated it would be willing to discuss lease to purchase or full service rental options if of interest to the City of Toronto.

The recommended vendor, Election Systems and Software, was contacted by Finance Department staff and asked to provide the City with rent to purchase options for our consideration. It should be noted that no attempt has been made to negotiate prices and/or rates in regard to any of the options presented by Election Systems and Software.

For the purposes of this report, staff advised Election Systems and Software to base their rental quotation on the same hardware/software requirements as set out in the Request for Proposal, i.e. 2,000 optical scan voting tabulators and 100 touch screen voting units, in order to compare the purchase and rental options.

The figures provided by Election Systems and Software indicate that a one year rental with a purchase option would cost the City $8,952,245.00 (including CDPD modems, exclusive of GST and PST). The terms of this proposal include:

(1) all the necessary hardware and software, together with the services of a Project Manager and election day support;

(2) the equipment to be provided is the standard Model 100 and Votronic, no customization of the equipment is included;

(3) if the City chose to exercise its purchase option, 75 percent of the rental cost ($6,714,184.00) would be applied to the purchase price and 25 percent of the rental cost ($2,238,061.00) would be a non-refundable rental fee; and

(4) the purchase prices for the hardware and software would be the same as those submitted by Election Systems and Software in its response to the City's Request for Proposal.

If the City were to purchase all 2,000 optical scan vote tabulators and 100 touch screen voting units now, the purchase price would be $12,282,229.00 (this includes CDPD modems and service costs for the 2000 election). If the City chose the rent to purchase option, the City would pay $8,952,245.00 now and have the equipment available for the 2000 election. If the City then chose to exercise its purchase option, the City would be required to pay an additional $5,568,045.00 within 90 days of the November 2000 election, for a total cost of $14,520,290.00. In other words, it would cost the City approximately $2,238,061.00 to defer the purchase decision until after the 2000 election.

If the City chose to not exercise its purchase option after the 2000 election, it will cost the City $8,952,245.00 to use the equipment for the one election and the City would not own any voting equipment for future elections.

Election Systems and Software has indicated that should the City decide to rent only 1,250 optical scan vote tabulators, the per unit cost would increase by $225.00, adding a further $281,250.00 to the rental costs as compared to an outright purchase.

Staff recommends the City purchase the equipment for the following reasons:

(1) the above noted figures clearly indicate that the outright purchase of the voting equipment is the most cost effective method of acquiring the equipment;

(2) purchasing the equipment is in accordance with Council's earlier decision;

(3) staff's analysis of various financing options (contained in the City Clerk's report dated September 2, 1999 and the Chief Administrative Officer's report dated September 7, 1999) support the purchase option;

(4) the proponent has indicated a willingness to include in the contract enforceable performance guarantees to ensure the equipment will remain fully operational for a period of at least fifteen years and that any recount expenses associated with the performance of the equipment will be paid by the proponent;

(5) purchasing the equipment now allows the City to customize the equipment to its particular needs, and

(6) election equipment technology does not advance so rapidly that the equipment would be obsolete after one election. Elections staff are of the opinion that the recommended system will meet the election needs of the City for the next fifteen years.

Conclusions:

The Chief Administrative Officer, in his report to the Administration Committee on September 7, 1999, identified the rental option as the most expensive for the City and concluded "the most cost effective method of acquiring the vote tabulating equipment is to purchase the equipment as was originally approved by Council as part of the 1999 Capital Works Program".

The analysis undertaken by Elections staff and Finance staff with respect to the rent to purchase option also concludes that the outright purchase option is the most attractive for the City.

Contact Name:

John Hollins, Director of Elections

Telephone No. 392-8019 e-mail: jhollins@city.north-york.on.ca

Val Sequeira, Manager, Administration Committee and Finance

Telephone No. 397-4225 e-mail: vsequeir@mtal.metrodesk.metrotor.on.ca)

(City Council also had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (September 27, 1999) from the City Clerk:

Recommendations:

The Audit Committee recommends that:

(1) the City Clerk issue a new Request for Proposal for the vote tabulation equipment for the election in November 2,000, with specific requirements for purchase, rental, rent-to-buy and leasing options; and

(2) the proposal also include the right of the City to sublet the voting equipment to other jurisdictions.

The Audit Committee reports, for the information of Council, having requested the City Auditor to forward directly to Council a copy of the Mississauga Proposal Call for vote tabulation equipment.

Background:

The Audit Committee, on September 27, 1999 had before it a joint confidential report (August 24, 1999) from the City Auditor and the City Solicitor respecting the request for proposal for the acquisition of 2000 Optical Scan Vote Tabulators and 100 Touch Screen Voting Units.

The Committee's action is noted above.)

(City Council also had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a copy of a Request for Proposal for the Supply and Delivery of an Integrated Election Management System, issued by the Corporation of the City of Mississauga, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

Code of Conduct for Members of Council

Inclusive of Lobbyist Provisions

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, amended this Clause by:

(1) deleting the words "or is authorized to refuse disclosure of", as embodied in the first paragraph of Section III of Attachment 1, and inserting in lieu thereof the words "or required to refuse to disclose", so that such paragraph shall now read as follows:

"III. Confidential Information:

Confidential information includes information in the possession of the City which the City is either prohibited from disclosing, or required to refuse to disclose, under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, (MFIPPA) or other legislation. Generally, MFIPPA restricts or prohibits disclosure of information received in confidence from third parties of a corporate, commercial, scientific or technical nature, information that is personal, and information that is subject to solicitor-client privilege.";

(2) amending Recommendation No. (3) embodied in the report dated June 29, 1999, from the Chief Administrative Officer, as amended by the Administration Committee, to read as follows:

"(3) the Code of Conduct apply to Council and all other appointments to City agency, boards and commissions, subject to any necessary (legal) modification, as described in Section XIII of the Code of Conduct, including the Toronto Police Services Board and Boards of Directors of City-controlled corporations;"; and

(3) adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that:

(a) the Striking Committee be requested to submit a report to the next meeting of City Council to be held on October 26, 1999, outlining recommendations for appointment to the Ethics Steering Committee; and

(b) the following motion be referred to the Chief Administrative Officer for further consideration in conjunction with the preparation of Terms of Reference for a Lobbyist Registration Process, following consultation with Members of Council:

Moved by Councillor Mihevc:

'It is further recommended that the Code of Conduct include a provision to preclude any "Consultant Lobbyists", "Corporate In-House Lobbyists" and "Organization In-House Lobbyists" from serving as a City appointee on any City agency, board or commission.' ")

The Administration Committee recommends:

(1) the adoption of the report (June 29, 1999) from the Chief Administrative Officer subject to amending Recommendation No. (3) embodied therein to read as follows:

"(3) the Code of Conduct apply to Council appointees on City Agencies, Boards and Commissions subject to any necessary (legal) modification, as described in section XIII of the Code of Conduct;"; and

(2) that the Province of Ontario be requested to provide legislation authorizing the enactment by municipalities and their local boards, of lobbyist registration by-laws including enforcement provisions, based upon the New Ontario Lobbyist Registry legislation:

The Administration Committee submits the following report (June 29, 1999) from the Chief Administrative Officer:

Purpose:

As directed, this report provides a single reference source on the provincial and federal legislation that govern the conduct of Council members and it recommends a Code of Conduct that supplements those laws. Other municipal Councils such as the Region of Halton, the Tasman (New Zealand) District Council, and the former municipalities of York and Toronto, have adopted a Code of Conduct. A Code of Conduct provides members with a common basis of acceptable conduct. It assists in the day-to-day work of Council members by presenting practical examples of conduct that are applicable to many situations and groups, including lobbyists. Formalized standards of conduct also aid in identifying potential problems that can lead to misunderstanding or criticism.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

There are no new costs associated with implementing the recommendations of this report.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the Code of Conduct be used as the vehicle for Council members to deal with lobbyists since the City lacks the legal authority to enact and enforce an effective lobbyist registry system;

(2) the Code of Conduct for Members of Council in Attachment 1 to this report be adopted;

(3) the Code of Conduct apply in spirit and intent to Council appointees and others who serve on City agencies, boards, commissions and other bodies, subject to any necessary (legal) modification, as described in section XIII of the Code of Conduct;

(4) an "Ethics" Steering Committee be created to recommend a process for monitoring the implementation of the Code of Conduct and to consider the additional policy matters raised in this report with the assistance of CAO, Legal, Clerk's and Audit staff as required; and

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

Council Reference and Background:

On June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, Council adopted the report from the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) titled, Interim Report on a Registry of Lobbyists and Related Matters. In accordance with the report recommendations the CAO was directed to:

(i) establish in consultation with the City Solicitor and City Clerk, more clear and specific Code of Conduct/Conflict of Interest provisions for Councillors than those in existing legislation;

(ii) assess with the City Solicitor, the specific legislative authority of the City to establish lobbyist registration provisions and identify an appropriate process in light of previous municipal experience, the new Municipal Act, and new Provincial legislation respecting lobbyists;

(iii) ensure that the employee Conflict of Interest provisions under development are inclusive of expectations on dealing with lobbyists; and

(iv) ensure inclusion of ethical matters and provisions in the purchasing procedure report.

Council amended the report by directing that the Federal government experience with its registry of lobbyists and disclosure be addressed, and that the matter of lobbyists registration when dealing with either politicians or City staff, be reported to the Corporate Services Committee.

On October 1, 1998 Council also referred two related additional motions to the CAO. The first motion requested the inclusion of similar conduct provisions for citizen members of agencies, boards and commissions in the code of conduct for members, including issues such as acting as lobbyists. The second motion requested that there be no lobbying of any member of Council by a member of a City agency, board or commission on behalf of a third party.

Comments and Context:

This report addresses the directives of Council in the following sequence:

(i) an assessment of lobbyist legislation in other jurisdictions and its pertinence and applicability to the City;

(ii) an overview of member conduct governed by law, presented by categories of behaviour to add clarity to the relevant Acts (Appendix 1);

(iii) a summary of all governing Acts for Council members' easy reference (Appendix 2);

(iv) a Code of Conduct for members consisting of policies that supplement the law, including lobbyist provisions (Attachment 1); and

(v) other policy matters for the future consideration of Council and possible inclusion to the Code of Conduct.

Lobbyists and Recommended Processes for the City of Toronto:

(a) Purpose and Characteristics of Existing Legislation:

Lobbying is usually defined as direct or indirect efforts to solicit members' support and influence government decisions on behalf of another party or an organization, often away from public scrutiny. In the Province of Ontario, Bill 69, An Act to amend the Members' Integrity Act and to enact the Lobbyists Registration Act, 1998, was proclaimed into force in December of 1998. Under this Act, Ontario became the first province in Canada to adopt lobbyist provisions. In this regard, Ontario joins the government of Canada, the United States Federal government and several of its states, Australia and Germany, among others. These governments have implemented registry provisions for lobbyists in order to:

(i) assuage concerns about public policy decisions being made behind closed doors;

(ii) monitor and restrict situations where undue influence over elected members may occur;

(iii) reinforce conflict of interest and code of conduct standards for elected members in the carrying out of their official duties; and

(iv) instill confidence in the public and provide them with access to information on lobbyists.

Existing lobbyist registration systems across jurisdictions have common features such as defined categories of lobbyists and types of lobby organizations. All require registration of the organization's name and address, the names of individual lobbyists, and areas of the organization's interests. Some systems also require the names, addresses and principal activities of lobbyist clients. Most, but not all, of the registries containing this information are considered public information, but the implications of being registered vary considerably across jurisdictions. For example, once registered, some jurisdictions refuse lobbyist firms/groups access to government business, whereas this is uncommon in the North American context. In some jurisdictions, detailed financial information from lobbyist firms such as expenses and overhead costs is required, and some require photographs of lobbyists to be submitted. It should be pointed out that all of these systems require significant resources to administer, manage, verify, advise upon, rule upon and enforce.

In Canada, Industry Canada through the Office of the Ethics Counsellor, is responsible for managing the lobbyist registry system. A Lobbyist Registration Branch has been established and an Annual Report is produced containing operating information and statistical data. For example, the report lists the subject matter of lobbying activities, as well as the names of federal departments and agencies contacted by lobbyists. The number of lobbyists registered and the number of lobbyists active are also provided for each of three categories of lobbyists (i.e., a total of 1,273 active lobbyists in the year 1997 to 1998). The federal government has also developed as part of its lobbyist registry system, a simple, non-statutory Code of Conduct for Lobbyists.

In the Province of Ontario, the Integrity Commissioner is responsible for managing the lobbyist registry, associated operations and information provision. The Province has specifically excluded routine constituency work from lobbyist registration requirements. Senior levels of government have the authority to impose the investigative, evidential, enforcement and offence provisions necessary for an effective lobbyist registry system. At the Province of Ontario, failure of lobbyists to comply with the Act can result in fines of up to $25,000.00.

(b) The Municipal Context:

Relationships between lobbyists and members, if conducted outside the realm of public scrutiny, can erode public confidence in Council and weaken public participation in government. At the municipal government level this is of particular relevance because of the frequency of direct contact with the general public and the nature of the City's responsibilities and authorities, including the often high-value capital projects and long-term contracts that it manages.

Council directed staff to examine the Lobbyist Registration Act, 1998 and the Municipal Act for any new authority in this regard conferred on municipalities. The provincial lobbyist legislation replicates that of the Federal government to a significant degree and no mirror image provision for the municipal level of government was included. Nor do the proposals for a new Municipal Act alter the authority of the City in this regard. Ontario municipalities lack the legal authority to enact and enforce an effective lobbyist registration system.

Previous municipal experiences in attempting to establish an effective lobbyist registry have been fraught with legal and administrative difficulties. As presented in more detail in the 1998 CAO report, Interim Report on a Registry of Lobbyists and Related Matters, the former City of Toronto enacted a by-law in 1989 to register lobbyists. Those who communicated with members or senior staff without having first registered, were subject to a fine. Most aspects of the by-law, including definitions, making an "appearance", monitoring and enforcement, proved to be unworkable. Continual changes and legal challenges lead to the repeal of the by-law in under a year.

As an alternative to the registry by-law, the former City then enacted a Lobbyist Disclosure By-law. This changed the onus to the "applicant", rather than the lobbyist, to file a completed form with the Clerk. Staffing and administration was put in place with the penalty for not filing being that the matter would not be placed on the agenda of Council. In February of 1993, the Lobbyist Disclosure By-law was also repealed due to difficulties with procedures and administration. Problems included, for example, missed agenda items important to City business, legal and other disagreements, continual amendments to professional and other party exemptions, and ever-increasing lists of applications exempt from the disclosure requirements.

Of particular interest is that during the time the by-laws had been in force and lobbyist information had been collected, the degree of public use of the information was scant. Specifically, there had been only five cases of file review by a member of the press or Council and none by the general public, during a period covering about two and one-half years. Additionally, the data was insufficient to ascertain whether the information and disclosure forms provided value to Council members when they came before Committees where lobbying was indicated.

(d) Establishing Policy Respecting Lobbying:

Lobbying is acknowledged as an acceptable part of government processes, but municipalities are legally constrained in terms of their power and authority to establish, enact and enforce lobbyist by-laws to manage the process. Independent of the presence of any specific City legislation to govern lobbying, however, there are several mechanisms by which lobbyist behaviour and interaction with government officials is regulated including:

(i) industry codes with which lobbyists representing a member sector must comply;

(ii) professional codes of conduct with which lawyers and other professionals acting as lobbyists must comply; and

(iii) the Criminal Code, for example, which covers influence peddling, bribery and fraud, municipal corruption and interference with the performance of official acts.

The City can manage lobbying attempts in several ways other than by establishing a lobbyist registry system. First, the independent regulation mechanisms noted above apply. Second, the purchasing and procurement policies of the City of Toronto ensure certain safeguards and integrity in dealing with external organizations. Third, Council may determine that it is in the best interests of public policy decisions to severely restrict or completely ban lobbyist activity when issuing certain competitive calls. In such cases, Council will have determined that the avoidance of intense lobbying of members and staff will maintain the integrity of the evaluation process for proposals. These special circumstances are normally characterized by high-value, high profile, long-term or intensely political matters. Fourth, adopting a Code of Conduct provides another set of checks and balances by establishing standards of conduct that are also applicable when dealing with lobbyists.

Given that the City does not possess the legal authority to enact and enforce an effective lobbyist registry system, it is recommended that the matter of the lobbying of elected members be dealt with through the provisions of the Code of Conduct for Members of Council.

Legislated Conduct of Members of Municipal Council:

A Code of Conduct must be consistent with the existing statutes governing the conduct of members. Four pieces of provincial legislation govern the conduct of members of Council:

(i) the Municipal Act, and the Council Procedural By-law passed under section 55 of that Act;

(ii) the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act;

(iii) the Municipal Elections Act, 1996; and

(iv) the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

The Criminal Code of Canada also governs the conduct of members of Council.

Council has directed that legislative requirements in the governing Acts be presented in a single document to provide a practical reference source. Since certain aspects of member conduct are referred to in more than one Act, descriptive categories of conduct have been developed to cross-reference them. Appendix 1 contains a brief explanation of the categories and cites the Acts that regulate them, as follows:

(1) "General" conduct contained in legislation includes the general standard of conduct of members of Council, and declaration of conflict of interest; and

(2) "Specific Types of Prohibited Conduct" contained in legislation includes:

(i) breach of (public) trust and fraud;

(ii) "influence peddling" including undue influence upon Council, and the offering and acceptance of extra benefits and gifts;

(iii) secret commissions;

(iv) misuse of information including the use of insider information for a personal benefit, the disclosure of confidential information, and the disclosure of personal information and other contravention of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act;

(v) City property or funds including false return on public funds, refusal to deliver municipal property, and voting illegally on financial matters;

(vi) eligibility or requirements of office including non-compliance with the requirements of office or absence from meetings, holding incompatible offices or employment, loss of citizenship or residency, conduct unbecoming, and defamatory statements (libel and slander); and

(vii) municipal elections including interfering with ballots, furnishing false information to election officers, procuring votes, bribery or another "corrupt" practice, and non-compliance with financial or other matters.

Appendix 2 contains useful summaries of each separate Act and the Procedural By-law. In addition to this report, members will also be provided with a handout document that contains actual excerpts of the sections of each Act governing the conduct of Council members.

Authority to Develop a City of Toronto Code of Conduct for Council Members:

The legislated provisions for conduct tend to emphasize economic, or pecuniary, matters such as bribery, or voting on a matter in which one has a personal financial interest, or exceeding the allowable maximum election campaign expenditure. Those matters are outside the direct control of the municipality since it has no separate existence and can only act within the powers delegated to it by the Province. In turn, the Province is limited as to what it can delegate to a municipality, so that, for example, the Province may not give, nor may a municipality take, power over (federal) criminal matters. Nor may a Council pass by-laws that conflict with provincial legislation since by-laws are subordinate laws.

Under current legislation, a Council may still, however, establish principles and standards of behaviour to govern the conduct of its members if those matters are not covered by an Act, such as non-financial (i.e., non-pecuniary) interests, or conduct simply not addressed. The authority for passing a Code of Conduct in Ontario can be found in section 102 of the Municipal Act that allows the passage of by-laws "for the governing of the conduct of its members as may be deemed expedient and are not contrary to law." Typically, a written Code of Conduct helps to ensure that all members are provided with a common basis for acceptable conduct. Such formalized standards supplement existing legislation in a manner consistent with that legislation and do not replace the conduct of members required by law.

Codes/Policies Respecting Conduct in Other Jurisdictions:

In developing the Code of Conduct for Members of Council a number of related policies applying to employees, Councillors, or both, were reviewed. These included municipal jurisdictions outside of Canada such as Los Angeles, England and Wales, and the Tasman District Council in New Zealand. The Ontario Members Integrity Act, 1994 and similar documents from other provinces including Alberta were reviewed. Additionally, codes of conduct in related fields and professions such as that of the Institute of Public Administration of Canada for public sector employees, and that of the Ontario Professional Planners Institute, were examined for relevance. Materials from other municipalities in Ontario, such as the Regions of Halton and Peel and the City of Mississauga were reviewed, as were materials from the seven former municipalities now comprising the amalgamated City of Toronto, namely, East York, Etobicoke, Metropolitan Toronto, North York, Scarborough, Toronto and York.

Of these jurisdictions, the Region of Halton, the Tasman District Council, provincial governments, and the former municipalities of York and Toronto have, or had, Codes of Conduct for members of Council. In the former City of York, the code of conduct also applied to all employees and appointed representatives of the City. Etobicoke and other cities, such as Mississauga and Los Angeles, had or have policies for the conduct of elected officials on specific matters only, for example, breach of confidentiality, statements made by a member about a City employee, or on the restrictions and disclosure of gifts.

The variance among jurisdictions can be illustrated using provisions on gifts and benefits as an example. Some jurisdictions impose only general prohibitions that leave all interpretations open. They permit the acceptance of non-monetary gifts or advantages of "insignificant value" provided they will not raise doubts about the independence or impartiality of the member, or, will not "place the member or Corporation under any obligation or compromise". In contrast, other jurisdictions prohibit entirely the receipt of any benefit or item. Still other jurisdictions, in recognition of the reality of the working environment of members, impose a monetary value threshold over which a gift, or service, or benefit must be disclosed.

Rationale for a City of Toronto Code of Conduct:

The Acts governing the conduct of members are narrow in scope and are directed at a limited number of matters. They do not include much beyond participation in decision-making and voting matters, nor do they address many situations where an attempt by others to influence the decisions of Council members may prove problematic. For example, the Acts are generally not concerned with the acceptance of gifts (that are not bribes), the use of staff to work on election campaigns, or the use of confidential information. Combined with the need to manage in an open, fair and transparent manner given their frequent interaction with constituents, Council directed staff to develop Code of Conduct provisions more clear and specific than those currently provided by legislation.

Rather than stating undefined goals, it is assumed that including specific standards and examples in a Code of Conduct is more useful to members. Accordingly, for example, items exempted as a gift or benefit should be specified. Similarly, examples of the types of confidential information that no member should use for personal gain or benefit, or for the benefit of others, should be provided.

Respecting the identification and handling of lobbying activities, definitions of lobbyists by the type of activity consistent with the definitions used in Canada at both the federal and provincial levels of government are useful. Furthermore, a practical checklist of questions to aid members in distinguishing lobbying from routine constituency matters, public advice seeking, public deputation processes, and regular business communications, will be of assistance.

It is, therefore, recommended that the Code of Conduct for Members of Council contained in Attachment 1 to this report be adopted. It is further recommended that Council establish an "Ethics" Steering Committee to recommend a process for monitoring the implementation of the Code of Conduct.

Future Policy Considerations:

The Council has within its authority the power to pass more formal policies and specific by-laws, some with penalty provisions, providing such provisions are compatible with the existing legislation governing the conduct of municipal members of Council. Council can also request special legislation or amendments to existing Acts.

While not being recommended for inclusion to the Code of Conduct at this time, a number of policy areas merit further consideration. It is recommended that the "Ethics" Steering Committee consider the following policy matters with the assistance of CAO, Legal, Clerk's and Audit staff as required

(a) Employment of Relatives:

Legislation governing the conduct of members and the Code of Conduct states that no member should engage in activities in which they have a direct or indirect interest. Council could interpret this to mean that no member shall participate in the hiring, supervision or ongoing assessment of the job performance of a relative, and establish policy accordingly.

(b) Statements Respecting Staff:

Council could establish policy to strengthen accountability for statements made by members about employees. For example, a member could be required to clarify to the Council any statement attributed to him or her regarding a member of City of Toronto staff. Similarly, other than statements made at a Council meeting, Council could also require all statements quoted in the media that criticize a member of staff to also be clarified by the member.

The CAO, City Solicitor and City Clerk were directed by Council in June, 1999 to report on a system to prevent the disclosure of confidential reports and matters to the press and to include the actions that could be taken against any individual found to have released such information. Staff will address this in a separate report to Council that examines both the legal avenues and operational methods of prevention including penalty provisions for such disclosure.

(d) Post-Service Restrictions:

At both the federal and provincial governments, post-service restrictions on employment are in place respecting former elected senior officials (and senior staff). The purpose is to prevent the receipt of benefits by virtue of knowledge or influence obtained by previously holding office. Exceptions are provided if the contract or benefit is in respect of further duties in the service of the Crown. An additional intent is to also prevent government lobbying activity on behalf of a company by a member previously elected to that government.

Council does not possess the authority to regulate the activities of its former members, but it may wish to consider approving a purchasing policy to provide notification of the involvement of former Council members in competitive calls. In February 1998, Council adopted such a policy with regard to former senior management employees of the area municipalities, agencies, boards and commissions, hired by a firm bidding on a City contract. Council should consider whether a similar policy is appropriate for incorporation to the Code of Conduct for members. Council may also determine, for example, that there should be restrictions on such involvement by former members.

(e) Gifts and Benefits:

Stringent restrictions on the acceptance and giving of gifts and benefits by members has been, or is, in place in the former City of Toronto, the Cities of Montreal and Los Angeles, and the provinces of Nova Scotia and Ontario, among others. Council may wish to establish limitations in the Code specific to the acceptance or giving of any gift or personal benefit similar to the following example:

"No member shall accept any gift or personal benefit exceeding $200.00 in value that normally accompanies the responsibilities of office and is received as an incident of protocol, custom, or social obligations. Nor shall any member accept any gift or personal benefit where the total value received directly or indirectly from one source in any twelve-month period exceeds $200.00. Any gift received over the $200.00 limit for which it would be an insult to the donor to refuse even after explanation of the City policy, would automatically become a gift to the City and the property of the City as a whole as opposed to any individual member."

Similarly, Council may wish to include in the Code, a policy that specifies an upset limit on the value of any gift given by a member as an incident of protocol, custom or social obligation.

Conclusion:

Lobbying is acknowledged as an acceptable part of government processes. Seeking to manage rather than eliminate the lobbying of its members, Council directed staff to report on the feasibility of establishing a lobbyist registration system. Council also directed staff to develop a Code of Conduct with more clear and specific provisions than those contained in the legislation governing the conduct of Council members.

Ontario municipalities lack the legal authority to enact and enforce an effective lobbyist registration system and the proposals for a new Municipal Act confer no such authority. There are, however, several mechanisms other than a lobbyist registry that will assist the City to manage lobbying. First, there are independent codes that regulate the conduct of professional and industry groups, including their members who are lobbyists. Second, various policies of the City of Toronto ensure certain safeguards and integrity in dealing with external organizations. Third, Council can severely restrict or completely ban lobbyist activity when issuing certain competitive calls. Fourth, adoption of a Code of Conduct will provide another set of checks and balances.

This report is recommending the adoption of a Code of Conduct that is consistent with, and supplementary to, legislated requirements. The four provincial Acts and the federal legislation governing the conduct of members, are narrow in scope and directed at a limited number of matters.

They do not address many of the situations where an attempt by others to influence the decisions of Council members may prove problematic. In contrast, the provisions of the recommended Code of Conduct in Attachment 1 to this report, cover the following areas pertinent to members in carrying out their official duties:

(i) Preamble including key statements of principle;

(ii) Statutory Provisions Regulating Conduct;

(iii) Gifts and Benefits;

(iv) Confidential Information;

(v) Use of City Property, Services and Other Resources;

(vi) Election Campaign Work;

(vii) Business Relations;

(viii) Conduct Respecting Current and Prospective Employment;

(ix) Conduct at Council;

(x) Conduct Respecting Staff (and Schedule to Code on Roles/Responsibilities);

(xi) Conduct Respecting Lobbyists;

(xii) Discreditable Conduct;

(xiii) Applicability to Agencies, Boards, Commissions and Other Bodies; and

(xiv) Compliance with the Code of Conduct.

In addition, Appendices 1 and 2 of this report provide members with useful references to provincial and federal legislation and Council procedural policy, governing the conduct of members.

To the degree permitted in legislation and subject to any legal modifications as necessary, the Code of Conduct is also expected to apply to Council appointees and other representatives on agencies, boards and commissions. In addition, staff of Legal, Clerks and the CAO, are collaborating to ensure that other City policies and the matter of non-disclosure of confidential information are compatible with the provisions of the Code of Conduct for Members of Council.

Attachment 1

Code of Conduct for Members of Council

City of Toronto

Preamble:

Improving the quality of public administration and governance can be achieved by encouraging high standards of conduct on the part of all government officials. To this end, adoption of the Code of Conduct for Members of Council is one of several initiatives being undertaken by the City of Toronto during its first term as a unified City. The public is entitled to expect the highest standards of conduct from the members it elects to local government. In turn, such standards will protect and maintain the City of Toronto's reputation and integrity. The Code of Conduct supplements and is compatible with the laws governing the conduct of members.

The key statements of principle that underline this are as follows:

(i) Members of Council shall serve and be seen to serve their constituents in a conscientious and diligent manner;

(ii) no member of Council shall use the influence of their office for any purpose other than for the exercise of his or her official duties;

(iii) Members of Council are expected to perform their duties in office and arrange their private affairs in a manner that promotes public confidence and will bear close public scrutiny; and

(iv) Members of Council shall seek to serve the public interest by upholding both the letter and the spirit of the laws and policies established by the Federal Parliament, Ontario Legislature, or the City Council.

I. Statutory Provisions Regulating Conduct:

This Code of Conduct is consistent with the existing statutes governing the conduct of members. Four pieces of provincial legislation govern the conduct of members of Council as follow:

(i) the Municipal Act, and the Council Procedural By-law passed under section 55 of that Act;

(ii) the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act;

(iii) the Municipal Elections Act, 1996; and

(iv) the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

The Criminal Code of Canada also governs the conduct of members of Council.

II. Gifts and Benefits:

No member shall accept a fee, advance, gift or personal benefit that is connected directly or indirectly with the performance of his or her duties of office. One example would be that no member should act as a paid agent before Council, or a committee of Council, or any agency, board, or commission of the City. Another example would be that no member should refer third parties to a person, partnership, or corporation in exchange for payment or other personal benefit.

Examples of exceptions to the non-acceptance of gifts or personal benefits by members in relation to their official duties are:

(i) compensation authorized by law;

(ii) such gifts or benefits that normally accompany the responsibilities of office and are received as an incident of protocol, custom, or social obligations;

(iii) a political contribution otherwise reported by law;

(iv) services provided without compensation by persons volunteering their time;

(v) suitable memento of a function honouring the member;

(vi) food, lodging, transportation and entertainment provided by provincial, regional and local governments or political subdivisions of them, by the Federal government or by a foreign government within a foreign country;

(vii) food and beverages consumed at banquets, receptions or similar events; and

(viii) communication to the offices of a member, including subscriptions to newspapers and periodicals.

III. Confidential Information:

Confidential information includes information in the possession of the City which the City is either prohibited from disclosing, or is authorized to refuse disclosure of, under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, (MFIPPA) or other legislation. Generally, MFIPPA restricts or prohibits disclosure of information received in confidence from third parties of a corporate, commercial, scientific or technical nature, information that is personal, and information that is subject to solicitor-client privilege.

The Municipal Act allows information that concerns personnel, labour relations, litigation, property acquisitions, the security of the property of the City or a local board, and matters authorized in other legislation, to remain confidential. For the purposes of the Code of Conduct, "confidential information" also includes this type of information.

No member shall disclose or release by any means to any member of the public, any confidential information acquired by virtue of their office, in either oral or written form except when required by law or authorized by Council to do so. Nor shall members use confidential information for personal or private gain, or for the gain of relatives or any person or corporation. As one example, no member should directly or indirectly benefit, or aid others to benefit, from knowledge respecting bidding on the sale of City property or assets.

Under the Procedural By-law (authorized under s. 55 of the Municipal Act), where a matter that has been discussed at an in-camera (closed) meeting remains confidential, no member shall disclose the content of the matter, or the substance of deliberations, of the in-camera meeting.

The following are examples of the types of information that a member of Council must keep confidential:

(i) items under litigation, negotiation, or personnel matters;

(ii) information that infringes on the rights of others (e.g., sources of complaints where the identity of a complainant is given in confidence);

(iii) price schedules in contract tender or Request For Proposal submissions if so specified;

(iv) information deemed to be "personal information" under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act; and

(v) statistical data required by law not to be released (e.g., certain census or assessment data).

IV. Use of City Property, Services and Other Resources:

No member of Council should use, or permit the use of City land, facilities, equipment, supplies, services, staff or other resources (for example, City-owned materials, web sites, Council transportation delivery services and Councillor global budgets) for activities other than the business of the Corporation. Nor should any member obtain financial gain from the use or sale of City-developed intellectual property (for example, inventions, creative writings and drawings), computer programs, technical innovations, or other items capable of being patented, since all such property remains exclusively that of the City.

V. Election Campaign Work:

Members are required to follow the provisions of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996. No member shall use the facilities, equipment, supplies, services or other resources of the City (including Councillor newsletters) for any election campaign or campaign related activities. No member shall undertake campaign-related activities on City property during regular working hours. No member shall use the services of persons during hours in which those persons receive any compensation from the City.

VI. Business Relations:

No member shall act as a paid agent before Council, its committees, or an agency, board or commission of the City except in compliance with the terms of the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.

VII. Conduct Respecting Current and Prospective Employment:

No member shall allow the prospect of his or her future employment by a person or entity to detrimentally affect the performance of his or her duties to the City.

VIII. Conduct At Council:

Members shall conduct themselves with decorum at Council in accordance with the provisions of the Council Procedural By-law.

IX. Conduct Respecting Staff:

Only Council as a whole has the authority to approve budget, policy, Committee processes and other such matters. Accordingly, members shall direct requests outside of Council approved budget, process or policy, to the appropriate Standing Committee.

Under the direction of the Chief Administrative Officer, staff serve the Council as a whole, and the combined interests of all members as evidenced through the decisions of Council. Members shall be respectful of the role of staff to advise based on political neutrality and objectivity and without undue influence from any individual member or faction of the Council.

Accordingly, no member shall maliciously or falsely injure the professional or ethical reputation, or the prospects or practice of staff, and all members shall show respect for the professional capacities of the staff of the City.

No member shall compel staff to engage in partisan political activities or be subjected to threats or discrimination for refusing to engage in such activities. Nor shall any member use, or attempt to use, their authority or influence for the purpose of intimidating, threatening, coercing, commanding, or influencing any staff member with the intent of interfering with that person's duties, including the duty to disclose improper activity.

In practical terms, there are distinct and specialized roles carried out by Council as a whole and by Councillors when performing their other roles. The key requirements of these roles are captured in the Schedule to the Code of Conduct and include dealing with constituents and the general public, participating as Standing Committee members, participating as Chairs of Standing Committees, and participating as Council representatives on agencies, boards, commissions and other bodies. Similarly, there are distinct and specialized roles expected of City staff in both the carrying out of their responsibilities and in dealing with the Council.

X. Conduct Respecting Lobbyists:

The term "lobbyist" includes the following:

(i) "consultant lobbyist" means a person who, for payment, lobbies on behalf of a client and includes, but is not limited to, government relations consultants, lawyers, accountants, or other professional advisors who provide lobbying services for their clients;

(ii) "corporate in-house lobbyist" means an employee of a corporation that carries on commercial activities for financial gain and who lobbies as a significant part of their duties;

(iii) "organization in-house lobbyist" means an employee of a non-profit organization, when one or more employees lobby public office holders and where the accumulated lobbying activity of all such employees would constitute a significant part of the duties of one employee; and

(iv) "volunteer lobbyist" means a person who lobbies without payment on behalf of an individual, corporation, or organization.

Lobbying is usually defined as direct or indirect efforts to solicit members support and influence government decisions on behalf of another party or an organization, often away from public scrutiny. Lobbying activity is to be distinguished from routine constituency matters, or advice seeking by members of the public, or contacts by members or employees of government conducting official business. Lobbying is also distinguishable from matters that are the subject of Committee deputation, or other processes that are a matter of public record where individuals are named and their interest and organizational affiliation identified.

Members shall be vigilant in their duty to serve public interests when faced with lobbying activity. Members can use the following as a guide to assist in identifying whether they are being lobbied:

(i) During the past year, has the contact person attempted to influence you personally, for example, in any legislative or administrative action that would have benefited him or her or his or her employer financially?

(ii) Does the contact person do business or seek to do business with the City?

(iii) Is the contact person seeking to influence outcomes outside a public forum on a matter involving, for example, a license, permit or other entitlement for use currently pending before the City?

(iv) Is the contact person a provincially or federally registered lobbyist employer or a client of a registered lobbyist? (Refer to the respective Web Sites)

(v) Is the contact person a provincially or federally registered lobbyist or lobbying firm?

(vi) Does the contact person fall within the definitions provided above?

XI. Discreditable Conduct:

All members of Council have a duty to treat members of the public, one another and staff fairly and to ensure that their work environment is free from discrimination and harassment. The Ontario Human Rights Code applies, as does the Human Rights, Harassment and Hate Activity Policy Framework adopted by Council at its meeting of December 16 and 17, 1998.

XII. Applicability to Agencies, Boards, Commissions and Other Bodies:

This Code of Conduct also applies in spirit and intent subject to any necessary (legal) modification, to appointees of Council and to other representatives who serve on City agencies, boards, commissions and other bodies. In legislation, the provisions of the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act also apply to local boards as defined in the Act, with decision-making power.

Advisory bodies like the Advisory Committee for Home for the Aged, or advisory boards to City operated community centres, for example, are not subject to the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act and are also excluded from the Code of Conduct. Council does not usually appoint advisory-only members and, in most cases, staff determine operations, policy and budget recommendations to Council. An advisory-only body (committee, or working group, for example) may determine that it is appropriate for its members to declare any pecuniary interest in a matter under discussion by the entity, to not participate in such discussion, and to leave the room during the discussion. An exception to this requirement may be where the interest relates to the general or shared interest or expertise that resulted in their participation in or appointment to the advisory body.

XIII. Compliance with the Code of Conduct:

Members of Council are accountable to the public through the three-year election process. Between elections they may become disqualified and lose their seat if convicted of an offence under the Criminal Code of Canada or for failing to declare a conflict of personal interest under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, for example.

This Code of Conduct is an agreement by members on their expected conduct. It is adopted by confirmatory by-law, as opposed to a specific by-law with an offence provision (that could be enforced under the Provincial Offences Act and could result in a fine of up to $5000.00). While they may not be prosecuted or fined under it, members acknowledge the importance of the principles contained in this Code of Conduct and agree to support and adhere to it.

As the head of the Council, the Mayor has as one of his or her duties, to be vigilant and active in causing the laws for the government of the municipality to be duly executed and obeyed. Complaints or concerns from any person regarding alleged non-compliance with the Code by a member may be made to the Mayor in writing.

--------

Schedule to the Code of Conduct

Roles and Responsibilities of the Council, Members and Staff

Members of Council and staff of the City are both servants of the public and they are indispensable to one another. The Council directs the business of the City and passes by-laws, or resolutions as appropriate, for decisions adopted by Council.

Council has delegated responsibility to the Chief Administrative Officer for the administration of the affairs of the City in accordance with the by-laws adopted. This means that under the direction of the CAO, staff have the responsibility and the authority to provide consultation, advice and direction to Council and to implement Council approved policy. Accordingly, staff establish the appropriate administrative policies, systems, structures and internal controls to implement the goals and objectives of Council, and to manage implementation within the resources at their disposal.

The Council should expect a high quality of advice from staff based on political neutrality and objectivity irrespective of party politics, the loyalties of persons in power, or their personal opinions.

(a) The Whole Council, for example:

(i) exercises the authority delegated by the provincial legislature to the municipality and does not possess authority separate to that derived from provincial statute;

(ii) is the legislative arm of the municipality and makes laws, determines property taxation levels, allocates expenditures and holds civic staff accountable by providing them with direction, assigning resources and monitoring policy decisions as implemented by staff;

(iii) must have a quorum in order to vote to amend or enact by-laws;

(iv) in a Committee-of-the-Whole meets as a general Committee to discuss and vote on which recommendations shall be forwarded to Council for subsequent decision;

(v) may not amend or pass any by-law where Council meets as a Committee-of-the-Whole;

(vi) may sub-delegate administrative authority where the delegation does not entail a power to determine or adjudicate rights; make policy; or take legislative action;

(vii) receives all reports of all Standing Committees and other designated bodies for their acceptance, amendment, deferral or referral as the Council deems appropriate;

(viii) holds regular and special meetings of Council in open session; a Committee-of-the-Whole meeting in open or closed session for legal, personnel or property matters of a sensitive nature; and

(ix) follows the procedures it establishes in the Council Procedural By-law.

(b) The Mayor, for example:

(i) sees that the laws for the government of the Corporation are duly executed and obeyed;

(ii) oversees the conduct of the subordinate officers in the government and administration and sees that all proven negligence, carelessness and violation of duty are dealt with;

(iii) communicates information and recommendations to the Council from time to time that will tend to the improvement of the government;

(iv) presides at all meetings of Council and ensures that all proceedings and conduct are enacted in accordance with the Procedural By-law;

(v) is the Chair of the Policy and Finance Committee and is by right of office a member of all other Committees of Council and entitled to vote as a member;

(vi) may summon a special meeting of the Council within a specified time period, as well as when requested to do so in writing by a majority of members;

(vii) represents the views and interest of the City, its residents and taxpayers at a variety of official, public, ceremonial and intergovernmental events; and

(viii) signs all By-laws and may sign debentures and promissory notes on behalf of the municipality.

(i) represent the views of the public and exercise judgement to make decisions on behalf of them;

(ii) respond to resident inquiries or refer such inquiries to appropriate staff or other organizations and generally provide assistance to constituents;

(iii) participate in Council meetings and undertake the activities within the authority, operations and procedures of Council as outlined in (a) above;

(iv) choose among alternatives and reconcile conflict among competing priorities;

(v) stay informed and keep up to-date;

(vi) in Council, correct deficiencies in the system; and

(vii) in Council, determine the overall system and structure of the Corporation.

(d) Standing Committees as a Whole, for example:

(i) recommend policy and program development and advice, service targets, priorities and budget requirements of the respective departments to Council;

(ii) explain the requirements, purpose and rationale of respective department programs;

(iii) request reports as required to aid in their decisions on recommendations to Council;

(iv) report and make recommendations to Council on policy matters referred to them;

(v) provide access to public communication and deputation on matters within their purview;

(vi) participate in joint meetings of Standing Committees as required;

(vii) examine all accounts connected with discharging its duties or under its supervision in accordance with the Procedural By-law, the Purchasing By-law and other by-laws; and

(viii) monitor and recommend on the budgets of agencies, boards and commissions reporting for that purpose through the respective Standing Committee.

(e) Standing Committee Chairs, for example:

(i) review, identify and prepare agenda items and priorities with Department Heads and Clerk's Secretariat as assigned;

(ii) ensure program polices and priorities are established by the Committee;

(iii) are often called upon at Council to answer questions on Committee recommendations;

(iv) conduct meetings, provide direction, ensure fair and open discussion of agenda items in accordance with established procedures (Procedural By-law);

(v) may call special meetings of the Standing Committee when the Chair or members feel it is necessary to do so;

(vi) participate in and may chair, joint meetings of Standing Committees;

(vii) shall be ineligible for membership on the Policy and Finance Committee; and

(viii) ensure that matters within the mandate of the Policy and Finance Committee are forwarded there for appropriate action.

(f) Council Members on Agencies, Boards and Commissions, generally:

(i) perform as part of a Board, most of the same roles as Standing Committees;

(ii) balance their role as the custodian of the City's tax dollars and representative of Council policies, with that of their fiduciary and other duties as a Board member;

(iii) provide specialized advice and expertise to aid in decision-making; and

(iv) provide an essential link between the body and Council such that Council positions can be conveyed to the body and vice-versa.

(g) Staff of the City, for example:

(i) provide timely and useful advice to Council and its Committees;

(ii) carry out specific directives, motions and policies approved or delegated to them by the Council;

(iii) follow the intent of Council directions;

(iv) alert Council to legal limitations of proposals, or changes in legislation, or unintended impacts of decisions;

(v) administer the organization and are responsible for day-to-day tasks in operations management;

(vi) recommend policies, programs and budgets to Standing Committees and Council;

(vii) respond to public inquiries and advise on Council approved policies;

(viii) use allocated resources appropriately;

(ix) stay informed and up to-date;

(x) undertake research and review and report on findings;

(xi) evaluate staff assigned and correct any performance as required; and

(xii) encourage the development of staff under their supervision.

--------

Appendix 1

Descriptive Categories of Conduct across Acts

Certain aspects of member conduct are referred to in more than one Act. In order to assist Council members in understanding and referencing the requirements across these Acts, descriptive categories of conduct have been developed as presented below. References are made to the Acts that regulate them as summarized in Appendix 2.

(1) General:

(i) General standard of conduct of members of Council; and

(ii) Declaration of conflict of interest.

No member of Council should engage in any financial or other activity, which would tend to impair the member's independence of judgement or decision, or that is incompatible with the proper discharge of his or her official duties in the public interest. No member should use his or her office to seek to influence a decision, made or to be made by another person, so as to further the member's personal interest or improperly to further another person's personal interest.

When a member is called upon by official duties to deal with any matter in which the member has a direct or indirect personal pecuniary interest, the member must declare that interest and refrain from any discussion or voting on the matter.

References: The Municipal Act, s.94 (1) declaration of office of member of council, etc. and s. 100 investigation by judge of charges of malfeasance. The Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, s. 2 indirect pecuniary interest; s. 3 interest of certain relatives deemed that of member; s. 4, where s. 5 does not apply; and s. 5 when present at meeting at which matter considered.

(2) Specific Types of Prohibited Conduct:

(a) Breach of Trust Conduct:

(i) Breach of (public) trust; and, fraud.

A member of Council as a public official is held to a higher standard than is a private person for the same activity. A breach of trust occurs when there is an abuse of the public trust by an act (including an omission) done to further or promote private ends or to obtain, directly or indirectly, a benefit. Fraud involves intentional deception, where one individual obtains an advantage over another by false suggestions or suppression of the truth.

References: The Criminal Code, s. 122 breach of trust by public officer (this section has been applied in cases where the facts did not support a charge of municipal corruption under s. 123). The Municipal Act, s. 94(1) declaration of office of member of Council, etc. and s. 100 investigation by judge of charges of malfeasance.

(i) "Influence Peddling":

- Undue influence upon Council; and

- Offering and acceptance of extra benefits and gifts.

A member of Council demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept a loan, reward or other economic benefit for their vote, assistance in having a proposal adopted or defeated, or performing or omitting to perform an official act. These actions must relate to a member's responsibilities respecting voting on resolutions or performing official acts.

References: The Criminal Code, s. 123(1) municipal corruption. The Municipal Act s. 94(1) Declaration of office of member of Council, etc.

(i) Secret commissions.

A member of Council, as an agent for the municipal corporation, "corruptly" demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from any person, a benefit as consideration for doing or not doing anything in relation to the business of the municipal corporation. The term "corruptly" means secretly, or without timely and adequate disclosure of the benefit to the municipal corporation.

Reference: The Criminal Code, s. 426 secret commissions.

(i) Misuse of information.

This conduct includes the:

(i) use of insider information for a personal benefit;

(ii) disclosure of confidential information; and

(iii) disclosure of personal information and other contravention of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

References: The Criminal Code, s. 122 breach of trust by public officer. The Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, s. 48 offences. Council Procedural By-law clause 15.1(f), (authority per s. 55 of the Municipal Act).

(b) City Property or Funds:

(i) False return on public funds.

A member of Council entrusted with public revenues knowingly provides a false statement of any sum or balance of money entrusted to, or controlled by, the member.

Reference: The Criminal Code, s. 399 false return by public officer.

(i) Refusal to deliver municipal property.

A member refuses or fails to deliver municipal property held by the member to a person who is authorized to demand it and does demand it.

Reference: The Criminal Code, s. 337 public servant refusing to deliver property.

(i) Voting illegally on financial matters.

Members are required to take action or to refrain from taking action in connection with certain financial matters respecting sinking funds and temporary loans.

Reference: The Municipal Act, s. 175(1) liability of members for diversion of sinking fund; s. 175(3) disqualification; s. 176 statement of treasurer as to amount required for sinking fund; s. 177 penalty where council neglects to levy for sinking fund; s. 187(10) penalty for excess borrowings; and, s. 187(11) penalty for misapplication of revenues by Council.

(i) Non-compliance with the requirements of office or absence from meetings.

A member fails to make the prescribed declaration of office within the prescribed time.

The member is absent from Council meetings for three successive months without a Council resolution authorizing the absence.

Reference: The Municipal Act, clauses 38(b) and (c) vacancies; and, s. 95(1) declaration of office.

(i) Holding incompatible offices or employment; and

(ii) Loss of citizenship or residency.

A member can be disqualified from holding office if the member accepts an incompatible office or employment, if the member loses his or her Canadian citizenship, or if the member ceases to meet certain residency or ownership requirements.

Reference: The Municipal Act, s. 37(1) persons disqualified from being members of Council.

(i) Conduct unbecoming;

(ii) Defamatory statements (libel and slander).

Procedural sanctions apply to improper conduct at committee or Council meetings. Statements made by a member in his or her public capacity at a meeting of Council or one of its committees are subject to a qualified "privilege" from defamation actions. This privilege does not extend to words spoken or written maliciously. The statement must also be relevant to the issue before Council.

References: The Council Procedural By-law passed under s. 55 of the Municipal Act, Part V Order and Decorum and Conduct of Members, s. 14-16; s. 115 Improper conduct at meetings. Court decisions on the defence of qualified privilege in defamation actions.

(d) Municipal Elections:

(i) Interfering with ballots;

(ii) Furnishing false information to election officers; and

(iii) Procuring votes.

Reference: The Municipal Elections Act, 1996, s. 89 offences.

(i) Bribery or another "corrupt" practice.

A "corrupt practice" includes an offence under section 89 of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, that a judge finds was "knowingly" committed.

Reference: The Municipal Elections Act, 1996, s. 90(1) corrupt practices - certain offences knowingly committed; s. 90(2) and (3) corrupt practices - bribery.

(i) Non-compliance with requirements respecting election campaign finance matters (expenses, contributions, and records).

Reference: The Municipal Elections Act, 1966, s. 92(2) election campaign finance offences, individuals; s. 92(3) additional penalty; s. 92(5) offences by candidate.

(i) Non-compliance with any other provision of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996.

Reference: The Municipal Elections Act, 1996, s. 94 general offence.

--------

Appendix 2

Summary of Each Act Governing the Conduct

Of Municipal Members of Council

Four pieces of Provincial legislation govern the conduct of members of Council as follow:

(i) the Municipal Act, and the Council Procedural By-law passed under section 55 of the Municipal Act;

(ii) the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act;

(iii) the Municipal Elections Act, 1996; and

(iv) the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

Federally, the Criminal Code of Canada governs the conduct of members of Council.

Part I: The Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1990 ("MA")

Canadian municipalities are often described as "creatures of statute" as they have no separate constitutional existence. Their powers are limited to what is set out in Provincial legislation. The Municipal Act is the general Provincial Act under which municipal corporations are created and which sets out the general powers, duties and responsibilities of municipalities. The Municipal Act includes provisions that specifically regulate the conduct of members of Council.

Conduct:

(1) General standard of conduct of members - declaration of office [MA s. 94(1)]:

Every member of Council, before entering on the duties of office, made a declaration of office in which the member solemnly promised to conduct him or herself as follows:

(a) to truly, faithfully and impartially, to the best of the member's knowledge and ability, execute the office of Councillor or Mayor of the City of Toronto;

(b) to have not received, nor to receive, any payment or reward, or promise thereof, for the exercise of any partiality or malversation* or other undue execution of such office; and

(c) to disclose any pecuniary interest, direct or indirect as required by and in accordance with the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.

*"Malversation": Corrupt behaviour in position of trust; corrupt administration of public money, etc.;

Related provision: Investigation by judge of malfeasance - If Council passes a resolution requesting a judge of the Ontario Court (General Division) to investigate any matter relating to a supposed malfeasance, breach of trust or other misconduct on the part of a member of the council, the judge shall make the inquiry and with all convenient speed, report to Council the result of the inquiry and the evidence taken [MA s. 100(1)].

(2) Non-compliance with Municipal Act requirements re office or absence from meetings - Penalty, seat declared vacant [MA s. 38(b) and (c), s.95 (1)]

The seat of a member of Council becomes vacant if the member:

(a) neglects or refuses to accept office, or to make the prescribed declaration noted above, within the prescribed time [MA s. 38(b)]; or

(b) is absent from Council meetings for three successive months unless authorized to do so by a Council resolution [MA s. 38(c)].

Related provision: A member who is in default of making the prescribed declaration is also deemed to have resigned [MA s. 95(1)].

(3) Holding incompatible offices or employment; loss of citizenship or residency - Penalty, disqualification from holding office [MA s. 37].

A member, under the Municipal Act and other legislation, can become disqualified from holding office. Cases of disqualification based on a member's conduct include the following:

(a) if the member becomes a judge, a Member of Parliament ("MP"), a Member of Provincial Parliament ("MPP") or a Senator;

(b) if the member accepts employment with the City or its local boards (subject to certain exceptions) that is not under a leave of absence;

(c) if the member accepts employment as a Crown employee at the level of a deputy minister or at a level as prescribed in regulations under the Public Services Act;

(d) if the member ceases to be a Canadian citizen; and

(e) if the member ceases to be a resident in the City, the owner or tenant of land in the City or the spouse of an owner or tenant in the City [MA s. 37(1) and (2)].

(4) Voting illegally respecting financial matters - Penalties, disqualification from office for two years, personally liable for amounts diverted [MA ss. 175, 176, 177 and 187].

There are provisions that require members to take action or to refrain from taking action in connection with certain financial matters respecting sinking funds and temporary loans.

(a) Sinking funds ("trust funds"):

(i) Vote to divert sinking funds - Money levied for a sinking fund (a debt account) is not to be diverted (i.e., used to pay any part of the current or other expenditures of the corporation) [MA s. 174]. If a member votes to apply money raised for a special purpose or collected for a sinking fund the member is personally liable for the amount so applied and is disqualified from holding any municipal office for two years [MA s. 175].

(ii) Council neglects to levy for sinking fund - If Council neglects in any year to levy the amount required to be raised for a sinking fund, each member of Council is disqualified from holding any municipal office for two years, unless the member shows that he or she made reasonable efforts to procure the levying of the amount required [MA s. 177].

Background and related provisions: A "sinking fund" is established as a means of retiring debenture debt. The by-law authorizing the issue of sinking funds debentures provides that during the term of the debenture the Council will levy a specific sum to pay the interest charges. The specific sum, with estimated interest at a rate not exceeding the statutory maximum, capitalized legally, must be sufficient to pay the principal amount of the debentures as it becomes due.

Separate debt accounts are to be kept for the interest and for the sinking fund or instalments of principal [MA s.169]. The monies required to meet these obligations form a special and prior charge on the annual revenues for the Corporation. The sinking fund is so regarded as a trust fund. An encroachment for general purposes upon the amount attributed to the fund constitutes a breach of trust, as when expenditures have been made to the extent that the balance on hand is insufficient to make these payments, there has been a violation of section 169.

The Treasurer is required to provide Council with a statement as to the amount required for any amount required for a sinking fund previous to the striking of the annual rate [MA s. 176(1)].

(b) Temporary Loans:

(i) Knowingly votes for current borrowing that exceeds statutory limit - If Council authorizes the borrowing of or borrows a larger amount than is permitted under section 187 (25-50 percent of the uncollected balance of the estimated annual revenue), every member who knowingly votes for this is disqualified from holding any municipal office for two years [MA s.187 (10)].

(ii) Votes for misapplication of revenues - If Council authorizes the application of any revenues of the corporation that are "charged" with the repayment of a loan for a purpose other than the repayment of the loan secured by the charge, the members who vote for the application are personally liable for the amount so applied [MA s. 187(11)].

(iii) Misapplies revenues - Any member of Council or officer of the corporation who applies any revenues of the corporation that are "charged" with the repayment of a loan for a purpose other than the repayment of the loan secured by the charge are personally liable for the amount so applied [MA s. 187(12)].

Part II: The Council Procedural By-law ("PB"):

Passed under sections 55(2) and 102 of The Municipal Act.

Council is required to adopt a procedural by-law governing the calling, place and proceedings of meetings. [MA s. 55(2)] Council may also pass by-laws for governing the conduct of its members as may be deemed expedient and are not contrary to law [MA s. 102]. Council's Procedural By-law, By-law No. 23-1998, "To Govern the Proceedings of the Council and the Committees thereof", includes provisions that deal with the conduct of members at meetings of Council and its Committees.

Conduct:

Improper conduct at Committee meetings and meetings of Council - Penalty, Member called to order, expelled from meeting [PB ss. 14 to 16, and s. 118]

Part V of the Procedural By-law deals with order and decorum and conduct of Members at meetings. Sections 15.1 and 16 prohibit specific activities, for example, use of unparliamentary language.

Part III: The Municipal Conflict Of Interest Act, R.S.O. 1990 ("MCIA"):

The Municipal Conflict of Interest Act sets out a prescribed code of conduct for members of Council to follow when they have a "pecuniary interest, direct or indirect in any matter". This Act also applies to members of local boards as defined in the MCIA.

The purpose of the MCIA is to ensure that members of Council make decisions based on the public interest and not based on the personal economic interests of the members. The MCIA seeks to achieve this purpose by requiring any member who has a pecuniary interest in a matter to disclose that interest and to not participate in the discussion and decision on the matter. By taking these actions the member has removed the conflict of interest that would otherwise occur if the member failed to make the required disclosure or, with or without disclosure, participated in the decision-making process.

Conduct:

Specifically, a member having a pecuniary interest in a matter under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act must:

(a) disclose their interest and the general nature of that interest prior to any consideration of the matter at the meeting or, if absent from the meeting, disclose that interest at the next meeting they attend;

(b) not take part in any vote or discussion of the matter;

(d) leave any "in camera" meeting (a meeting not open to the public) during which the matter is under consideration; or

risk the following penalties - forfeiture of office, disqualification from holding office for up to seven years, and restitution [MCIA ss. 5, 9 and 10].

(1) Determination of Pecuniary Interest under the Act [MCIA ss. 1 to 5]:

Pecuniary interest is not defined in the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act but it includes any economic interest, as opposed to a philosophical, ideological or political interest, of the member. Motive, and the extent of a member's interest involved, are irrelevant to the question of whether or not there is a pecuniary interest under the MCIA. Whether or not the subject matter before Council would result in an advantage or disadvantage to the member, it is the presence of the pecuniary interest that requires a declaration in order to remove any presumption of bias.

Direct Pecuniary Interest:

In general, a direct pecuniary interest is one to which the member is directly linked without the intervention of another legal person.

Indirect Pecuniary Interest:

An indirect pecuniary interest is one involving another legal person where the person or corporation having a financial relationship with the member might experience an economic benefit or avoidance of economic loss. Thus, the direct and indirect interests of the parents, spouses and children of member, if known to the member, are deemed to also be the pecuniary interests of the member [MCIA ss. 1(definitions) and 3]. A member has an indirect pecuniary interest in a matter [MCIA ss. 1 (definitions) and 2] if:

(a) he or she, or his or her nominee, is a shareholder, director or senior officer of a private corporation;

(b) has a controlling interest in, or is a director, or senior officer of a public corporation; or

Exceptions:

The MCIA contains some practical exceptions to what is a pecuniary interest for the purposes of section 5 of the MCIA. For example, a member is not required to disclose a pecuniary interest arising only by reason of an interest held in common with electors generally. This exception also applies where the member's interest is not different from that of the community in general, so that, for example, the Council decision on a planning matter would not provide a special benefit to the member. Interests are excepted which are so remote or insignificant that they cannot reasonably be regarded as likely to influence the member [MCIA ss. 1(definitions) and 4].

Determination as to whether an individual member of Council has a conflict of interest in a matter is an issue that the member must determine with independent legal advice if necessary. The City Solicitor may be required to provide the Council as a whole with legal advice on a matter before it and is not in a position, therefore, to advise an individual member.

Part IV: The Municipal Elections Act, 1996 ("MEA"):

The Municipal Elections Act, 1996 regulates the holding of municipal elections. The Act includes provisions that penalize a council member who is a candidate for re-election for conduct that is held to be an offence or corrupt practice.

Conduct:

(1) Commits an offence under section 89 - Penalty, fine of up to $5000 [MEA s. 89]:

Section 89 includes offences that relate to voting and ballots, as well as the following offences:

(a) procuring votes by inducing a person to vote when they are not entitled to or publishing a false statement of a candidates withdrawal [MEA s. 89(d) and (g)]; and

(b) furnishing false information to election officials [MEA s. 89(h)].

(2) Commits a "corrupt practice" - Penalties, a fine up to $5000, or imprisonment for up to six months, or both, disqualification from voting for four years, forfeiture of office, and ineligibility for elected or appointed office for six years [MEA ss. 90 and 91]:

A "corrupt practice" includes an offence under section 89 of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 that a judge finds was knowingly committed [MEA s. 90(1)] and bribery [MEA ss. 90(2), & (3)].

The penalty under s. 91 of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 also applies if a candidate is convicted of an offence under the Criminal Code (Canada) in connection with an act or omission that relates to an election to which this Act applies.

(3) Non-compliance with expenses and contributions requirements - Penalties, fine up to $5000, forfeiture of office, and ineligibility for elected or appointed office until after the next regular election has taken place [MEA s. 92(5)]:

The penalty of ineligibility for office applies to the following conduct:

(a) incurring election expenses that exceed the maximum expenses permitted under s. 76 of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996; or

(b) filing a financial statement or auditor's report on the candidate's election campaign finances that is incorrect or does not otherwise comply with s. 78 of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 [MEA s. 92(5)].

(4) Commits an offence of contravening any provision of the MEA, 1996 - Penalty, fine of up to $5000, if no other penalty is provided in the Act [MEA s. 94]:

This "general offence" provision applies where the conduct is not already covered by one of the specific offence provisions noted above.

Part V: The Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.O. 1990 ("MFIPPA"):

A municipal corporation and its local boards are "institutions" under the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. MFIPPA provides a right of access to information under the control of an institution. MFIPPA also requires that the institution protect the privacy of an individual's personal information existing in the institution's records and sets out rules regarding the collection, retention, use, disclosure and disposal of personal information in the institution's custody or control. MFIPPA does not have any special provisions that deal with access to the records of a member of Council or a member's access to the municipal corporation's records. However orders of the Provincial Information and Privacy Commissioner and a court decision have dealt with these matters as noted below.

A member of Council's personal constituency records are not considered to be the records of the municipal corporation for purposes of requests for information under MFIPPA as these records are not in the "custody or control" of the municipal corporation. One of the reasons given for this decision was the fact that, except under unusual circumstances, a member of Council (other than the Mayor as head of Council) is generally not considered to be an "officer" of a municipal corporation.

Disclosure of records containing personal information by the municipal corporation to a member of Council and to Council must be in accordance with the disclosure rules under MFIPPA. For example, in orders of the Information and Privacy Commissioner, the disclosures to a member of Council of certain mailing lists, general property data information that was not a public record, and information on a zoning infraction matter, were found to be disclosures of personal information in contravention of MFIPPA. In a court decision, a Council resolution directing the disclosure of a list of names of welfare recipients was declared null and void. One of the Judge's reasons for this decision was that a mere expression of interest and concern by a municipal Council about a particular issue did not justify the disclosure of the information. There must be evidence of sufficient need for Council to have the information. The decision related to the interpretation of a specific exception in MFIPPA, but it illustrates the general approach taken to the release of personal information.

Conduct: "Wilfully" discloses or maintains personal information in contravention of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, obstructs or misleads the Information and Privacy Commissioner, or fails to comply with an order of the Commissioner - Penalty, fine of up to $5000 [MFIPPA 48].

Part VI: The Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1985 ("CC"):

The Criminal Code of Canada sets out the actions (or "non actions") of a person that are considered criminal offences. Respecting the actions of members of a municipal Council, there are two offences that specifically apply. The first offence is that of "municipal corruption" [CC s. 123], more commonly referred to as "influence peddling" covering bribes, loans and so on. The second offence is that of a "public servant refusing to deliver property" [CC s. 337]. The Courts have also judicially interpreted the offences of "breach of trust" and "fraud" [CC s. 122], and "secret commissions" [CC s. 426], as applying to improper conduct by a member of Council. As noted below there are also other public service offences that do not specifically refer to members of Council, but which in the future a judge may judicially interpret as being applicable.

Conduct:

Offence Specific to Members of Council:

(1) Accepts benefits for a corrupt practice (commonly known as influence peddling) - Penalty for offence of "municipal corruption", imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years [CC s. 123]

The offence of "municipal corruption" occurs when a municipal official (defined as a member of council or any municipal office holder) demands, accepts, offers or agrees to accept a loan, reward or benefit of any kind for:

(a) the officer's vote;

(b) assistance in having a proposal adopted or defeated; or

The corrupt practice must relate to the member's responsibilities respecting voting on resolutions and performing official acts.

Offences Previously Applied to Members of Council:

(2) Commits fraud or a breach of trust in connection with his or her duties as a member of Council whether or not the fraud or breach of trust would be an offence if it were committed in relation to a private person. Penalty for offence of "breach of trust by public official", imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years [CC s. 122]:

Section 122 of the Criminal Code refers to an "official" and the Courts have judicially interpreted the applicable definition to include an elected member of a municipal Council. Section 122 imposes a broader liability on a public official than on a private person who was involved in the same activity. This section has been applied in the following cases, for example, where the facts did not support a charge of municipal corruption under section 123:

(a) where a mayor misled a constituent on the value of the constituent's land and endeavoured to procure the land for his personal profit; and

(b) where a member of Council accepted undeclared benefits from a person, who was carrying on business with the municipality.

(3) As an agent for the municipal corporation, corruptly demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from any person, a benefit as consideration for doing or not doing anything in relation to the business of the agent's principle. Penalty for offence of "secret commissions", imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years [CC s. 426]:

In applying this offence to the conduct of a member of Council a judge judicially interpreted the relationship between a municipal corporation and a member of Council as one of principal and agent within the meaning of those terms in the offence of "secret commissions" [CC s. 426]. As used in this section, the term "corruptly" means secretly, or without timely and adequate disclosure to the principle of the benefit.

Public Service Offences that may be Extended to Members of Council:

(4) Refuses or fails to deliver municipal property held by the member to a person who is authorized to demand it and does demand it. Penalty for offence of "public servant refusing to deliver property", imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years [CC s. 337]:

For this section to apply, a judge would have to find that a member of Council is "employed in the service of a municipality" within the meaning of those terms in the offence of "public servant refusing to deliver property" [CC s. 337].

(5) Knowingly furnishes a false statement or return in connection with public monies entrusted to the member. Penalty for offence of "false return by public officer", imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years [CC s. 399]:

*Alternate penalties and disqualification:

The penalties noted above are the specific penalties that are set out in the sections. As these penalties are not offences for which a minimum punishment is prescribed, a judge could issue an alternative order (for example, a conditional discharge) or impose alternative penalties (including fines) [CC Part XXIII, Sentencing].

If a member is sentenced to a term of imprisonment, the member is disqualified from holding office as a member of Council during the time he or she is serving the sentence [s. 37(2) of the Municipal Act and s. 17(3) of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996]. If a member of Council is convicted of an indictable offence and sentenced to imprisonment for two years or more and at the time the member holds an office under the Crown or other [Federal] public employment, the office or employment immediately becomes vacant [CC s. 750].

Municipal Code

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Administration Committee recommends the adoption of the report (August 25, 1999) from the City Clerk.

The Administration Committee reports, for the information of Council, having requested the City Clerk to provide information to the Administration Committee respecting the target date for the completion of the by-law status register project referred to in the aforementioned report.

The Administration Committee submits the following report (August 25, 1999) from the City Clerk:

Purpose:

To recommend that a Municipal Code be adopted for the City of Toronto, and that a request for proposals (R.F.P.) be issued for the purposes of initial Code preparation.

Funding Sources:

During the course of amalgamation it was recognized that consideration should be given to the development of a new City of Toronto Municipal Code and funds totalling up to $100,000 were provided in 1998 (and subsequently carried forward) in the capital transition budget (C-TS009-V00905). It is anticipated that the costs for professional services for designing, formatting, editing and publishing the Code in camera ready, electronic and internet/intranet ready formats will be in the range of up to $40,000. Additionally, one time costs in the range of up to $17,000 for software licences and training are required to position the City to maintain and update the Code in-house. Future funding commitments on an annual basis for updating the Code with new and amended by-laws, distribution costs (including hardcopy and internet/intranet access to the Code), and materials and supplies are anticipated to be in the range of up to $10,000. Some portion of the annual costs may be recoverable through the sale of copies of, or subscriptions to, the Municipal Code in hardcopy or CD form.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) a Municipal Code be developed for the City; and

(2) the City Clerk be authorized to issue a Request for Proposals (R.F.P.) for the initial preparation of a Municipal Code, with on-going maintenance of the Code to be performed by the City of Toronto.

Background:

The City Clerk is required under the Municipal Act to maintain the records of Council (including by-laws) and make them available for inspection. Since its inception, the new City of Toronto has adopted over 1,400 by-laws. In addition, approximately 184,000 by-laws from the former municipalities (dating from 1834) are considered to be by-laws of the new city, resulting in over 185,000 by-laws that must be managed. Difficulties arise in determining the status of these by-laws since there currently exists no single, reliable source providing a legally accepted consolidation of base by-laws as they exist at a particular date in time. In order to provide accurate information in a timely and efficient manner, the City of Toronto must address ways to handle the volume and complexity of the current by-law situation that the harmonization of key by-laws alone will not solve. The development of a Municipal Code, together with the compilation of a by-law status register, is an effective and efficient solution that will provide necessary "one stop" information service, on a broad scale (via hard copy or internet/intranet access) to all users.

Comments:

Current By-law Issues:

There is large scale demand for by-law information from staff, the public and the courts. The City Clerk's Division alone fields approximately 1,800 requests for by-law information per month. Many of these requests are repetitive, and are for the most often requested administrative and general purpose by-laws of the City. Additionally, the office handles regular large scale distribution of by-laws (including certified copies) after each council meeting. Despite this demand, staff and the public are currently unable to easily access by-law information in a "user friendly" form. There is dependence on a small number of staff who are familiar with the by-laws and the multitude of indexes and record keeping systems that are used to manage this information.

Over time many amendments to a base by-law may be passed. One example is the former Metro Licensing By-law No.20-85 which has over 100 amendments to date, all of which must be examined to determine if a particular section of the by-law has changed or is in force. As a result, it is difficult to determine the status of current provisions. Departments have attempted to maintain office consolidations, which while helpful, have no legal standing. The alternative has been to produce certified copies of the base by-law and each amending by-law. While the by-law harmonization process will address this issue to some extent, over time the same issues and problems will reoccur with the passing of amendments and new by-laws.

Efforts to research by-laws are further hampered by the fact that by-laws are traditionally published in a chronological rather than subject fashion, which makes it difficult to know precisely all by-laws dealing with a particular topic on an annual basis, let alone on an on-going basis. By-laws from the former municipalities that are still in force must be accessed by subject in a multitude of ways, from printed lists to computerized searches, forcing staff and the public to expend considerable effort to find by-laws related to a particular topic.

A Municipal Code:

The issues outlined above are not unique to this municipality. In an effort to find a solution to the ever growing issues surrounding the management of by-laws, some municipalities maintain administrative and general application by-laws in the form of up-datable Municipal Codes. Three of the former municipalities (Toronto, Etobicoke and York), and approximately 20 other Ontario cities and towns, including Kanata, Kitchener, London, Sarnia and Thunder Bay, have codified their by-laws. These Codes result in single source access to by-laws currently in force.

A Municipal Code is a compendium of general application and administrative by-laws of the municipality, expressed in "clear language", and arranged topically into chapters that are easily searchable. By-laws of a similar nature are organized by topic or type, and are continually updated so that all enactments regarding a specific subject are together in one chapter or volume. As a result, the current status of a by-law and the latest amendments are easily determined. In effect, a Municipal Code replaces the need for the abundance of office consolidations (and ensuing maintenance and legal issues) by providing a legally accepted and certified document containing the most requested administrative and general application by-laws in force. The authority for the enactment of a Municipal Code is contained in section 104 of the Municipal Act.

Codes are generally arranged into two parts - Administrative By-laws (such as those which define administrative functions or procedures, such as the Council rules of procedure) and General Application By-laws (such as those which regulate or affect in some way the behaviour of the general public, such as a property standard by-law). Other by-laws, such as those which might change frequently or be of limited scope (i.e., by-laws authorizing specific agreements, or confirmations of Council proceedings) are not included in a Municipal Code, and are best tracked and managed through the use of a comprehensive by-law register system. The City Clerk's Division is currently undertaking a By-law Status Register project, independent of the Municipal Code, to provide an inventory of all 185,000 by-laws including by-law status information.

The greatest benefit of a Municipal Code is that staff and the public can see at a glance the current legislation of the City, expressed in clear language. It eliminates the necessity to refer to a base by-law plus numerous amendments to determine whether a particular by-law or section of a by-law is in force. There is a corresponding improvement in service provision in terms of timeliness and accuracy. The topical arrangement of the Code results in the added advantage of having all enactments regarding a specific subject together in one volume.

The ongoing harmonization of City of Toronto by-laws provide an opportunity to prepare a Municipal Code, since the harmonized by-laws will become new base by-laws. In conjunction with the by-law harmonization process, a Municipal Code would provide an opportunity to change the current chronological layout of the by-laws to a more user friendly consolidated subject arrangement. As such, the Code would be a positive reflection of the amalgamation process - providing tangible evidence of the progress towards the harmonization of the various municipal by-laws - while anchoring the work of the by-law harmonization group.

Scope of the New City of Toronto Municipal Code:

The proposed scope of the initial Code would include harmonized or new general application and administrative by-laws passed since January 1, 1998. Additional chapters would be added to the code by staff of the City Clerk's Division, as new and harmonized by-laws are passed by Council. Subsequently, the Code would be updated/amended by supplements as Council approved changes to Code chapters. It is anticipated that zoning by-laws and parking and traffic by-laws would need to be considered separately in the future due to their size and complexity, and therefore would not be included in the initial Municipal Code. Consideration would be given to electronic access and distribution of the Municipal Code via the internet/intranet as the primary means of delivery, as well as through limited hardcopy distribution.

Implementation and Maintenance - Options:

A Municipal Code project would consist of two main components - (1) initial development and implementation, and (2) maintenance (updating). During the initial development, project management responsibilities for the initial Code would be shared between Legal Services and the City Clerk's Divisions, with input from the Corporate Information and Technology Division, and the Purchasing and Material Management Division as required. Staff of the City Clerk's Division would be responsible for coordinating the initial production and distribution processes associated with the Code, as well as subsequent up-dating. Staff of the Legal Division would provide legal advice and assistance as required, including the review of the draft Code chapters. The Legal Division would also be requested to advise on the development and implementation of standards for the production of by-laws.

Options considered for the development and maintenance of a Municipal Code, included:

(1) initial Code developed externally, with long term maintenance provided in-house;

(2) in-house development/maintenance; and

(3) external development/maintenance.

These options were evaluated against cost, staff resource commitment, timing and training requirements. Option 1 (develop externally and maintain internally) proved to be the most cost effective method on an annual basis and provided quick delivery of a Code. It also provided control over the issuance of supplements - assuring an efficient turn around time. Staff resource commitment and training were minimized with this option, allowing the City to take advantage of the professional experience available externally for the initial development of the Code (avoiding the potential costs of trial and error during the course of development), and facilitating the development of a product that could be maintained in-house. Additional benefits of professional services provided by Municipal Code companies include: editorial assistance and documentation; drafting of Municipal Code chapters (in plain language); suggestions for format and layout to facilitate updating of Code; clarification and analysis of by-laws, and flagging inconsistencies where required.

Conclusions:

The City of Toronto must address ways to handle the growing volume and complexity of current by-laws, that harmonization of key by-laws alone will not solve. A Municipal Code is an effective and efficient solution that will provide user friendly "one stop" information, on a broad scale (via hard copy or internet/intranet access) to all users.

The Legal Division, Purchasing and Materials Management Division and Corporate Information and Technology Division have been consulted in the preparation of this report.

Contact Name:

Lorna Hinds

Indexing Co-ordinator

Telephone 392-7022

Fax 392-2980

E-mail: lhinds@toronto.ca

Appeals Reserve - 1999 Access

and Equity Grant Program

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, amended this Clause, by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that the report dated September 23, 1999, from the Chief Administrative Officer, be received.")

The Administration Committee recommends the adoption of the report (August 26, 1999) from the Chief Administrative Officer.

The Administration Committee reports, for the information of Council, having referred the communication (September 3, 1999) from the Secretary General, Canadian Polish Congress, to the Chief Administrative Officer with a request that he meet with representatives of the Congress and report thereon directly to Council for its meeting scheduled to be held on September 28, 1999.

The Administration Committee submits the following report (August 26, 1999) from the Chief Administrative Officer:

Purpose:

This report presents the recommended allocations from the $5,000.00 appeals reserve of the Access and Equity Grant Program for agencies which appealed to the Administration Committee.

Funding Sources:

An appeals reserve of $5,000.00 is provided within the 1999 Access and Equity Grant Program approved budget.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the appeal fund of $5,000.00 be allocated to Artists Against Racism ($1,500.00) and Deejinta Beesha ($3,500.00); and

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

Council Reference/Background/History:

Municipal Grants are provided under the general authority in Section 113(1) of the Municipal Act.

On July 13, 1999, the Administration Committee considered a report, 1999 Allocations: Access and Equity Grant Program, which recommended allocations totalling $439,000.00 to 53 organizations approved by Council at its meeting of July 27, 28 and 29, 1999. It further recommended that a report be submitted on the allocation of the $5,000.00 reserve for appeals.

Comments:

Three organizations appealed and provided written or verbal presentations to the Administration Committee during its consideration of the allocations report. The three appellants were: Artists Against Racism, Chinese Canadian National Council (Toronto Chapter), and Deejinta Beesha. Each of the three organizations were recommended for funding, two of whom requested increases to their allocation and the third, The Toronto Chapter of the Chinese Canadian National Council, requested that the budget of the Access and Equity Grant Program be increased to respond to the growing needs of the City's diverse communities.

The following is a summary of the proposals submitted by the two organizations requesting additional funds:

(1) Artists Against Racism (AAR) was founded in 1996 to promote antiracism in Canada. It has produced a series of anti-racism posters, billboards, concerts, booklets, etc. AAR is requesting funds to undertake their 1999 Public Education Campaign. Funding support is provided for its poster campaign in subways and interior transit sites.

(2) Deejinta Beesha (Somali Multi Service Centre) was established in 1994 by a coalition of Somali organizations to foster the positive settlement and integration of Somalis into Canada and to support Etobicoke agencies and the larger Etobicoke community in recognizing the positive contribution Somalis make. They are seeking funds to deliver educational workshops for the community to address the issues of hate crime against Somalis and women in particular.

Staff have reviewed the grant proposals, the original recommendations, and considered the information presented in the deputations.

The recommendation for the appeals reserve of $5,000.00 is based on further consideration to projects which are a high priority such as providing assistance to victims of hate crime and assistance to women. The recommended allocation of the appeals reserve fund is identified below:

Organizations Recommended for the 1999 Appeals Reserve Allocation:

Agency Appeal Reserve

Recommended
1999

Total Grant

(1) Artists Against Racism $1,500.00 $5,000.00

(2) Deejinta Beesha $3,500.00 $6,000.00

Total Recommendations $5,000.00

Conclusion:

The recommendations regarding the allocation of the appeals reserve respond to agency deputations. The increased allocations to these organizations will enhance implementation of the City's access and equity objectives.

Contact:

Ceta Ramkhalawansingh - 392-6824

Cassandra Fernandes - 392-3834

--------

The Administration Committee also had before it a communication (September 3, 1999) from the Secretary General, Canadian Polish Congress, respecting the way in which their application for a grant was handled; and advising that they are bewildered by the decision-making process and disappointed at the manner with which they were treated.

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (September 23, 1999) from the Chief Administrative Officer:

Purpose:

To report on the meeting held with the Canadian Polish Congress regarding the 1999 Access and Equity Grant to the Congress.

Funding Sources:

There are no financial implications.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At its meeting of September 7, 1999, the Administration Committee considered the Chief Administrator's report regarding appeals to the 1999 Access and Equity Grants Program and the communication of September 3, 1999, from the Secretary General, Canadian Polish Congress. The Committee referred the communication to the Chief Administrative Officer and requested that staff meet with representatives of the Congress and report thereon directly to Council for its meeting scheduled for September 28, 1999.

The Access and Equity grant program received requests totalling $979,115.50. The allocations report which was approved by Council on July 27, 28 and 29, 1999 approved grants to 53 of 58 applicants for a total of $439,000.000 and made provision for an appeal process. On June 30, 1999, the City's Access and Equity Unit sent a letter to all recipients along with the grant recommendations report. The letter informed applicants that the Administration Committee would consider the report on Tuesday, July 13, 1999, and the process for making appeals to the Administration Committee.

The Canadian Polish Congress was awarded $3,500 under the Access and Equity Grants Program, as well as $5,000.00 under the Millennium Grants Program.

Comments:

Access and Equity staff met with representatives of the Canadian Polish Congress on September 22, 1999. The communication from the Canadian Polish Congress dated September 3, 1999, advised that because they depended on volunteers, they did not have adequate time to respond to the appeal deadline. They also stated that this was the first application for a grant and that they knew little about the process. They also requested that the grant level be increased from $3,500 to $7,000. In response to issues raised, the following topics were covered during this meeting: the access and equity grants allocation criteria and funding envelope, appeals process, the type of activities funded under the Access and Equity Grants program, the settlement pattern for the community, support offered by the City to the Polish community and support needed to assist the community.

The Canadian Polish Congress advised staff that although they have been in operation since 1944 they had not sought funding from external bodies. They are a national umbrella organization which acts as an advocate locally, provincially and nationally on behalf of the Polish community. Of their membership, 27 are Toronto based groups, whose activities are mainly cultural or social services. Until recently their work has focussed on issues in Poland and on national issues, such as the treatment of veterans regarding their access to benefits. The organization is in the process of developing their work at a local level and requires support to improve their community's access to services as well as to increase their participation at the local level. They have planned a conference for November, 1999 which will be used for a needs assessment and as the basis for identifying community priorities.

The representatives of the organization were informed of the Grants Fair being planned by the City for November and to which their Toronto based members would be invited. As well, they indicated that they would like staff to work with them to assist with arranging information sessions on the City's permit and purchasing processes, as well as sessions on the civic structure given by Access Toronto.

Conclusion:

The meeting between staff and the organisation was a useful and fruitful dialogue which will contribute to building community capacity and increasing interaction between the municipality and the City's Polish community.

Contact:

Ceta Ramkhalawansingh - 392-6824)

Terms of Reference for the Personnel and

Office Consolidation Sub-Committees

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Administration Committee recommends the adoption of the report (July 20, 1999) from the Chief Administrative Officer, subject to amending Item No. (1) (c) embodied in the Terms of Reference of the Personnel Sub-Committee contained in Appendix 1 to read as follows:

"(1) (c) review progress reports on the implementation of policy matters relating to all human resource issues, including but not limited to equity goals and workplace wellness, health and safety initiatives;".

The Administration Committee reports, for the information of Council, having appointed Councillor David Miller as the Chair of the Personnel Sub-Committee.

The Administration Committee submits the following report (July 20, 1999) from the Chief Administrative Officer:

Purpose:

To establish terms of reference for the two sub-committees established by Administration Committee at its special meeting of July 21, 1999.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

There are no financial implications arising from the recommendations in this report.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(I) the terms of reference for the Personnel Sub-Committee be adopted as presented in Appendix No. (1), viz:

"(1) Responsibilities:

The Personnel Sub-Committee shall deal with personnel issues and practices, and specifically shall:

(a) consider reports and deputations on policy matters relating to human resource issues;

(b) review progress reports on staff downsizing;

(c) review progress reports on the implementation of human rights policy, equity goals and workplace wellness, health and safety initiatives, among others;

(d) review and report to the Administration Committee on such human resource policy matters as are referred to it by the Administration Committee."

(2) Reporting and/or Sunset Date:

The sub-committee's term shall be concurrent with the term of Council.

(3) Membership:

The members of the sub-committee shall be:

(a) Councillor Lorenzo Berardinetti;

(b) Councillor Gerry Altobello;

(d) Councillor David Miller.

(4) Reporting Relationship:

The sub-committee shall report to the Administration Committee.

(5) Reason For Establishing The Sub-Committee:

The sub-committee is established to allow for in-depth review of human resource issues that time would otherwise not permit given the range and number of matters before the Administration Committee.

(6) Staff Resources:

The sub-committee shall be supported by the City Clerk and the Executive Director of Human Resources without the need for the appropriation of additional funds;";

(II) the terms of reference for the Office Consolidation Sub-Committee be adopted as presented in Appendix No. (2), viz:

(1) Responsibilities:

The Office Consolidation Sub-Committee shall consider reports relating to the office consolidation master plan.

(2) Reporting and/or Sunset Date:

The sub-committee shall be dissolved at the end of the term of the current City Council.

(3) Membership:

The members of the sub-committee shall be:

(a) Councillor Lorenzo Berardinetti;

(b) Councillor John Adams;

(d) Councillor Ron Moeser (Chair).

(4) Reporting Relationship:

The sub-committee shall report to the Administration Committee.

(5) Reason For Establishing The Sub-Committee:

The subcommittee is established to allow for review and discussion of strategic issues relating to office space consolidation that time would otherwise not permit given the range and number of matters before the Administration Committee.

(6) Staff Resources:

The sub-committee shall be supported by the City Clerk and the Chief Administrative Officer or designate without the need for the appropriation of additional funds;"; and

(III) the necessary City officials be authorized to give effect thereto.

Council Reference/Background/History:

The Administration Committee, at its special meeting on July 21, 1999, constituted a Personnel Sub-Committee and an Office Consolidation Sub-Committee and requested that the Chief Administrative Officer prepare revised terms of reference for each.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The proposed terms of reference for the two sub-committees have been prepared in accordance with Section 104(3) of the procedural by-law, which requires that:

"Any recommendation to establish a special committee, task force, advisory committee or sub-committee shall include terms of reference outlining:

(a) the matters to be dealt with;

(b) a reporting date and a sunset date, beyond which Council approval is required for its continuation;

(d) the Standing Committee to which the special committee, task force, advisory committee or sub-committee shall report to;

(d) the reason why the work cannot be undertaken by an existing Standing Committee; and

(e) identification of the staff and other resources required to support the work of the special committee, advisory committee, task force or sub-committee, and a determination that they are available within existing resources."

Conclusions:

Proposed terms of reference for the two sub-committees established by the Administration Committee at its special meeting of July 21, 1999 are attached in Appendices No. (1) and (2). The terms of reference have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the procedural by-law.

This report has been prepared in consultation with the City Clerk.

Appendix No. (1)

Personnel Sub-Committee

Terms of Reference

(1) Responsibilities:

The Personnel Sub-Committee shall deal with personnel issues and practices, and specifically shall:

(a) consider reports and deputations on policy matters relating to human resource issues;

(b) review progress reports on staff downsizing;

(c) review progress reports on the implementation of human rights policy, equity goals and workplace wellness, health and safety initiatives, among others;

(d) review and report to the Administration Committee on such human resource policy matters as are referred to it by the Administration Committee."

(2) Reporting and/or Sunset Date:

The sub-committee's term shall be concurrent with the term of Council.

(3) Membership:

The members of the sub-committee shall be:

(a) Councillor Lorenzo Berardinetti;

(b) Councillor Gerry Altobello;

(d) Councillor David Miller.

(4) Reporting Relationship:

The sub-committee shall report to the Administration Committee.

(5) Reason For Establishing The Sub-Committee:

The sub-committee is established to allow for in-depth review of human resource issues that time would otherwise not permit given the range and number of matters before the Administration Committee.

(6) Staff Resources:

The sub-committee shall be supported by the City Clerk and the Executive Director of Human Resources without the need for the appropriation of additional funds.

--------

Appendix No. (2)

Office Consolidation Sub-Committee

Terms of Reference

(1) Responsibilities:

The Office Consolidation Sub-Committee shall consider reports relating to the office consolidation master plan.

(2) Reporting and/or Sunset Date:

The sub-committee shall be dissolved at the end of the term of the current City Council.

(3) Membership:

The members of the sub-committee shall be:

(a) Councillor Lorenzo Berardinetti;

(b) Councillor John Adams;

(d) Councillor Ron Moeser (Chair).

(4) Reporting Relationship:

The sub-committee shall report to the Administration Committee.

(5) Reason For Establishing The Sub-Committee:

(6) Staff Resources:

The sub-committee shall be supported by the City Clerk and the Chief Administrative Officer or designate without the need for the appropriation of additional funds.

--------

The Administration Committee reports, for the information of Council, having also had before it a communication (September 2, 1999) from Ms. Anne Dubas, President, CUPE Local 79, urging the Administration Committee to include the review of restructuring and redesign reports in the Personnel Sub-Committee's list of responsibilities.

--------

Ms. Anne Dubas, President, CUPE Local 79, appeared before the Administration Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

Use of Injunctions to Prevent the

Use of "Lookalike" Tickets

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, amended this Clause, by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that:

(1) the City immediately take whatever legal action is required to prevent the issuance of 'lookalike' parking tickets; and

(2) the City Solicitor be requested to retain outside legal Counsel, if he is unsure of his ability to vigorously pursue the objective of Council to prevent the issuance of 'lookalike' parking tags.")

The Administration Committee recommends:

(1) the adoption of the report (August 12, 1999) from the City Solicitor subject to amending the Recommendation embodied therein to read as follows:

"It is recommended that the issue of "lookalike" parking tickets be referred to the Police Services Board and the Chief of Police for investigation as to whether the use of "lookalike" parking tickets warrants prosecution under the Criminal Act;";

(2) that the Province of Ontario be requested to consider taking action on the copyright violations that appear to be taking place respecting the use of "lookalike" parking tickets;

(3) that the Chair of the Administration Committee be requested to write to the Attorney General of the Province of Ontario requesting an amendment to the Provincial Offences Act to create a provincial offence for the use of "phony" parking tags that resemble the prescribed form of parking tags;

(4) that this matter be referred to the Provincial Offences Act Task Force; and

(5) that the Chief of Police be requested to report to the Provincial Offences Act Task Force respecting this matter.

The Administration Committee submits the following report (August 12, 1999) from the City Solicitor:

Recommendation:

It is recommended that incidents of the use of "lookalike" parking tickets be referred to the Toronto Police Service for investigation as to whether the use warrant proceedings under the Criminal Code.

Background:

This report is submitted in response to a request made by the Corporate Services Committee at its April 19, 1999 meeting when it was considering a report advising of action taken by the Audit Committee at its March 1, 1999 meeting. The Corporate Services Committee requested that the City Solicitor report on a strategy for instituting litigation injunctions for quasi-criminal or criminal proceedings against parties who issue "lookalike" tickets.

Comments:

In a November 23, 1998 report to the Emergency and Protective Services Committee, I concluded that the City lacks legal standing to challenge phony parking tags, or lookalike parking tags, in the civil courts since the City cannot establish that it suffers any particular loss as a result of such tags. My report also concluded that the City has no standing to challenge the phony parking tags on the basis of a copyright infringement as any current copyright rests with the Province.

The City's lack of legal standing to challenge the phony tags in civil court precludes the City from instituting injunction or other legal proceedings in relation to such phony tags.

In my November 23, 1998, report I noted that Metropolitan Toronto Legal Department staff had suggested to the Ministry of the Attorney General staff that the Provincial Offences Act be amended to create a provincial offence for the use of phony tags that look like the prescribed form of parking tags. At that time the Ministry indicated that this suggestion would be considered as part of the streamlining reform. However, the streamlining legislation which is now in force does not create any such offence.

One other statute which could be investigated for possible action in relation to phony parking tags is the Criminal Code. The phoney parking tickets do not all look the same. Some bear very little relation to the form of parking infraction notice prescribed under the Provincial Offences Act and the one used in the City of Toronto. Others appear to be almost identical. My November 23, 1998, report noted that on at least one occasion a person who issued look-alike parking tags was charged under the Criminal Code with fraud under $5,000, attempted fraud under $5,000, attempt to defraud the public and the use of the mail to defraud the public. On August 19, 1998 the person pleaded guilty to one of the charges and was convicted and sentenced to 28 days in jail (to be served intermittently), two years probation and 100 hours of community service. The Court also ordered the person to make restitution of $2,400.

Whether the facts of any particular case warrant similar charges under the Criminal Code is an issue that would need to be assessed by the police, with advice from the provincial crown attorney.

Conclusions:

There is no legal basis on which the City can commence injunction proceedings or other legal proceedings in relation to lookalike parking tags. However, on at least one occasion a person was convicted of one or more Criminal Code offences in relation to the use of such tags. Recent incidents of the use of such tags should be referred to the Toronto Police Force for investigation.

Contact Name:

George McQ. Bartlett, Director of Prosecutions, 392-6756

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a sample of the Parking Infraction Notice used by the Toronto Police and a "lookalike" Parking Violation Notice, submitted by Councillor Howard Moscoe, North York-Spadina.)

Outstanding Realty Taxes - 71 Milvan Drive

(Ward 6 - North York Humber)

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Administration Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (August 11, 1999) from the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services:

Purpose:

To seek authority to pay outstanding realty taxes from the proceeds of the sale of this property.

Financial Implications:

$20,290.68 being the outstanding realty taxes for the period January-June 1999 is being requested to be funded from the sale proceeds of 71 Milvan Drive in the amount of $535,000.00 as approved by City Council at its meeting on March 2, 3 and 4, 1999.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the outstanding realty taxes which accrued during the City's ownership of 71 Milvan Drive be paid from the proceeds of the property sale; and

(2) the appropriate City official's be authorized and directed to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto.

Background:

The property at 71 Milvan was acquired in August 1997 by the former City of North York for non-payment of taxes. City Council approved the sale of this property at its meeting held on March 2, 3 and 4, 1999 and the transaction closed on June 30, 1999.

Real Estate owned by the City is normally tax exempt, the exception being when it is leased to or occupied by others, at which time it becomes taxable. The report recommending this sale indicated that the former owners of the property continued to occupy the premises during the City's ownership although there was never a lease agreement nor was the arrangement acknowledged by either party.

As in completing most transactions, the realty taxes were apportioned, with the Vendor being responsible for those prior to the closing date and the purchaser for any subsequent taxes. The 1999 taxes outstanding for the period to June 30, 1999 totalled some $20,290.68. Past City practice, in the sale of surplus property, has been to pay outstanding amounts such as this from the proceeds of the sale.

Conclusions:

Payment of outstanding taxes is a normal adjustment on the sale of real estate. This report requests authority to pay outstanding realty taxes for the period of January 1, 1999 to June 30, 1999 from the sale proceeds.

Contact Name:

Roland Mayr, Facilities and Real Estate (416)392-1166, Fax No.: (416)392-1880.

(A copy of the map attached to the foregoing report was forwarded to all Members of Council with the September 7, 1999, agenda of the Administration Committee and a copy thereof is also on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

Demolition of 22 Luverne Avenue - North York

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, struck out and referred this Clause back to the Acting Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services for further consideration.)

The Administration Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (August 10, 1999) from the Acting Commissioner, Urban Planning and Development Services:

Purpose:

To approve the expenditure of $6499.00 plus GST to be paid to Greenspoon Bros. Limited to undertake demolition of the subject premises, such costs to be applied, without interest to the tax rolls and collected in the same manner as real property taxes.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Funding Source: Account No. 100 MS1 0002 5530.

Although the costs associated with the demolition will be added to the tax account and would not normally have financial implications, the repayable period would have an impact as the monies owing would be partially outstanding for a five-year period.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) Council approve the expenditure of the aforementioned funds to effect demolition plus an additional $4000.00 to fence the lot after demolition;

(2) Greenspoon Bros. Limited be engaged to demolish the building; and

(3) the amount expended be repayable over a five-year period.

Council Reference/Background/History:

These premises have been vacant for approximately 20 years and are currently boarded. Neighbourhood complaints and investigation indicate that the property is in very poor condition and present unsafe conditions to persons in or about the property, specifically, the lack of handrails and guardrails on open stairways and areaways. Graffiti is sprayed on the exterior walls and boarding. Pictures are attached.

With little maintenance and no evidence of occupancy, the property has become a target for vandalism.

The property is the subject of a work order dated June 5, 1998 citing 10 exterior items. The interior condition is unknown.

A conviction was registered against the owner on August 8, 1997 and a fine of $200.00 imposed for failing to comply with an Order dated November 18, 1996. A further charge is returnable August 6, 1999 in the Ontario Court of Justice with respect to the current Order. These charges have had little impact in effecting compliance.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Three estimates were requested and two were received to effect the demolition.

Greenspoon Bros. Limited $6499.00 plus GST

Romano Contracting Limited $7000.00 plus GST

On May 21, 1999, the owner Frederick Hill, was notified in a letter of this Department's intentions to proceed with a report to Council to request authorization to demolish the building. Mr. Hill did not respond.

Conclusions:

The demolition of the building on this site and the fencing of the lot will eliminate a focal point for a potential accident and vandalism.

Contact Name:

Donna Perrin, North District Manager

Municipal Licensing and Standards and Court Services, 395-7020

(A copy of the photographs attached to the foregoing report was forwarded to all Members of Council with the September 7, 1999, agenda of the Administration Committee and a copy thereof is also on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

Sheppard Subway - Don Mills Station

Initiation of Civil Lawsuit to Recover

Contamination Costs

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Administration Committee recommends the adoption of the report (July 19, 1999) from the City Solicitor, subject to amending Recommendation No. (1) to read as follows:

"(1) the City Solicitor be authorized to commence proceedings against Imperial Oil Limited and any others that may be implicated in respect of contamination encountered during the excavation of the Don Mills Station of the Sheppard Subway system and that such authority include authority to recommend a settlement of any such lawsuit on terms satisfactory to the City Solicitor, in consultation with the TTC, or to appeal such proceedings, or to take any such steps as may be necessary in the opinion of the City Solicitor in respect of the matter;" .

The Administration Committee submits the following report (July 19, 1999) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

To obtain authority to commence legal proceedings against Imperial Oil Limited and/or any other parties that may have liability in respect of contamination encountered during the excavation of the Don Mills Station of the Sheppard Subway.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

TTC staff advises that sufficient funds have been included for the Sheppard Subway Project in the 1999-2003 Capital Program, as approved by City Council on March 2, 1999.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the City Solicitor be authorized to commence proceedings against Imperial Oil Limited and any others that may be implicated in respect of contamination encountered during the excavation of the Don Mills Station of the Sheppard subway system and that such authority include authority to settle any such lawsuit on terms satisfactory to the City Solicitor, in consultation with the TTC, or to appeal such proceedings, or to take any such steps as may be necessary in the opinion of the City Solicitor in respect of the matter; and

(2) the appropriate City staff be authorized to take such action as required to give effect to these recommendations.

Council Reference/Background/History:

During the design of the Don Mills Station, soils boreholes indicated that hydrocarbon contamination from the Imperial Oil Limited (Esso) gas station at 2500 Don Mills Road had migrated into the City owned road allowance on Sheppard Avenue which had to be excavated in order to construct the Don Mills Station. As a result, provisions were included in the Don Mills Station contract for the contractor to excavate and dispose of the expected volume of contaminated material.

Excavation of the Station is now complete and the costs for removal of contaminated soils are being finalized.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

Imperial Oil Limited was notified during property negotiations that hydrocarbon contamination had been found in the road right-of-way and that it was the intention of the TTC and the City of Toronto to recover the incremental costs for the removal of contaminated soil (i.e., the cost over and above the cost to remove non-contaminated material). At that time, negotiation with Imperial Oil Limited was underway to acquire a temporary easement from the Esso gas station at 2500 Don Mills Road for the construction of the Don Mills Station. Imperial Oil Limited was reluctant to negotiate any settlement related to contamination found in the City owned right-of-way at that time.

The incremental cost to remove contaminated material from the station excavation includes the cost to dispose of contaminated soil, additional inspection and testing costs, and the provision for a clay cap on top of the station box to reduce contaminated water seepage into the finished subway structure. Overall incremental costs currently estimated at approximately $1 million can be demonstrated. As Imperial Oil Limited has not shown any inclination to voluntarily recognize their responsibility for these incremental costs to date, it is necessary to initiate a civil lawsuit to recover these costs.

The lawsuit will be initiated by my staff as the contamination affects the City owned property. TTC legal and technical staff would provide support for the lawsuit. Specialized consultant services may be required and would be the subject of a separate report. Staff of the TTC's Legal Department and the TTC's Sheppard Subway Project have been consulted and concur with this report.

Conclusions:

A civil lawsuit against Imperial Oil Limited (2500 Don Mills Road) or such others as may be identified is necessary to attempt to recover the additional costs for the removal of contaminated soil from the City owned road allowance in the vicinity of the Don Mills Road and Sheppard Avenue.

Contact Name:

Graham Rempe, Solicitor, Legal Services--Litigation Division

Telephone: 392-2887

Application for Approval to Expropriate Interests in Land,

Sheppard Subway/Sheppard Widening Project Multiple

Partial Interests Vicinity of Intersection of Bayview Avenue and

Sheppard Avenue East (Ward 9 - North York Centre South,

Ward 10 - North York Centre - Ward 12 - Seneca Heights)

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Administration Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (August 20, 1999) from the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services:

Purpose:

To authorize the initiation of the expropriation of property interests required for road widening, intersection improvements and associated utility relocations, in the vicinity of the intersection of Bayview Avenue and Sheppard Avenue East, in conjunction with the completion of the Bayview Subway Station.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Financing has previously been approved by Council and is available in Sheppard Subway Capital Account TC-392. Inasmuch as the road widening is a Transportation Project, Account No. TC-392 will be reimbursed for 100 percent of the costs through Transportation Capital Account C-TR-023.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) authority be granted to initiate the expropriation process for the property interests detailed herein;

(2) authority be granted to serve and publish Notices of Applications for Approval to Expropriate property interests herein detailed, to forward to the Chief Inquiry Officer any requests for hearings that are received and to report the Inquiry Officer's recommendations to Council for its consideration;

(3) authority be granted to lay out as a public highway the lands designated in the schedule to this report for right-of-way widening, and thereafter to dedicate such lands for public highway purposes; and

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

Council Reference/Background/History:

By approval of Clause No. 2 of Report No. 9 of The Management Committee (as amended) on March 8 and 9, 1994, and subject to a further report regarding funding, Metropolitan Council approved construction of the Sheppard Subway from Yonge Street to Don Mills Road. By approval of Clause No. 2 of Report No. 14 of The Management Committee (as amended) on April 20, 1994, Metropolitan Council authorized the debenture funding to commence the project. Finally, Metropolitan Council, by its adoption of Clause No. 2 of Report No. 21 of The Financial Priorities Committee on September 25 and 26, 1996 (as amended), approved the completion of the Sheppard Subway Project.

By approval of Clause No. 5 of Report No. 18 of The Financial Priorities Committee on November 5, 1995, Metropolitan Council approved modifications at the intersections of Sheppard Avenue and Yonge Street, Bayview Avenue and Leslie Street as the first phase of the widening of Sheppard Avenue between Beecroft Road and Leslie Street, which includes the works which are the subject of this report.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

In order to eliminate a separate construction impact, construction associated with the widening of Sheppard Avenue East in the vicinity of Bayview Avenue is scheduled to coincide with completion of the Bayview Station Contract. The road widening, intersection improvements and associated utility relocations including hydro pole and wire relocations onto privately-owned property will take place at the same time as the above grade restoration work on the Bayview Station. This will reduce the duration of the construction impacts on residents and traffic.

The impacted properties and requirements have been identified and owners are being contacted and negotiation for the requirements will commence shortly.

The properties and requirements are shown on five draft reference plans (series 94-21-413-52 - A to E) prepared by J.D. Barnes Limited, copies of which are on file with the City Clerk. The dimensions and areas are based on available records and may be subject to minor adjustments upon completion of surveys.

While it is recommended that the City commence expropriation proceedings, it is recognized that it would be preferable to have expropriation of the Hydro requirements in the name of Toronto Hydro. The Ontario Energy Board Act 1998, has not yet been fully proclaimed in force, consequently Toronto Hydro Electric System Limited ("Hydro") does not presently have the authority to expropriate the Hydro requirements. As things presently stand we have to rely on expropriation by the City and subsequent transfer of the appropriate interests to Hydro in order to assure acquisition in time for the scheduled commencement date. In any event since the Hydro requirements arose from a City of Toronto/TTC project the acquisition costs flow to the City.

The property interests, all of which are required by January 1, 2001, are listed on the schedule appended hereto and include the following categories.

(a) Temporary Grading Easements: are required to change the grade of properties abutting the street to match the new grade of the street and sidewalk. The requirement is for a period of approximately two to three days, barring unforeseen difficulties, within a 10 month period between January 1, 2001 through to October 31, 2001. However expropriation of the temporary interests must be for the full 10-month term to allow for scheduling flexibility. During construction, alternate access/parking arrangements will be provided to property owners or occupants as required. Owners or occupants will be notified well in advance of the two to three day construction activities.

(b) Permanent Hydro Easements (wires): are required to relocate transmission lines and /or guy wires away from the widened roadway limits. These are interests that have been defined by Hydro as per applicable codes and/or standards.

(c) Permanent Hydro Easements (wires, poles and anchors): are required to locate hydro poles and their anchor(s) away from the widened roadway limits.

(d) Right of Way (ROW) widenings: are partial fee acquisitions that are required to widen the street and relocate public sidewalks.

Conclusions:

The commencement of expropriation procedures for the acquisition of the property interests herein described is necessary to ensure that possession of the interests are obtained in a timely manner in the event negotiated acquisitions are unsuccessful.

Contact Name:

Daniel O'Donohue, Valuator/Negotiator (Facilities and Real Estate)

(416) 392-8161 Fax No.: (416) 392-1880

--------

APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL TO EXPROPRIATE PROPERTY INTERESTS - SHEPPARD SUBWAY
	*Prop. Address*	*Owner*	*Property Interests Required*	*Term of Temporary* *Interest (Months)*	*Description*
*SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF INTERSECTION OF SHEPPARD AVENUE EAST AND BAYVIEW AVENUE*
1	321 Sheppard Ave E	Thakkar, Rasesh B. Thakkar, Menaka B.	Temporary grading easement (36.00 sq. m. pts 1 and 14) Permanent hydro easement (wires) (37.12 sq. m. pt 14)	10	Part lot 22, Plan 3896, part PIN 10104-0019(R) shown as parts 1 and 14 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-a (dated August 23, 1999)
2	323 Sheppard Ave E	How, Jocelyne	Temporary grading easement (71.43 sq. m. pts 2,15,16 and 32) Permanent hydro easement (wires) (27.99 sq. m. pts 15 and 16) Permanent hydro easement (wires, poles and anchors) (7.00 sq. m. pt 32)	10	Part lot 21, Plan 3896, part PIN 10104-0018(R) shown as parts 2,15,16 and 32 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-a (dated August 23, 1999)
3	325 Sheppard Ave E	Halsey, Farideh	Temporary grading easement (73.83 sq. m. pts 3 and 17) Permanent hydro easement (wires) (30.48 sq. m. pt 17)	10	Part lot 20, Plan 3896, part PIN 10104-0017(R) shown as parts 3 and 17 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-a (dated August 23, 1999)
4	333 Sheppard Ave E	333 Sheppard Ave. East Limited	Temporary grading easement (216.01 sq. m. pts 4, 18 and 40) Permanent hydro easement (wires) (117.91 sq. m. pts 18 and 40) Permanent hydro easement (wires, poles and anchors) (4.00 sq. m. pt 39)	10	Part lots 16,17,18 and 19, Plan 3896, part PINS 10104-0016(R),10104-0015(R),10104-0014(R), 10104-0013(R), shown as parts 4, 18, 39, 40 and 41 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-a (dated August 23, 1999)
5	335 Sheppard Ave E	Tesic, Mary	Temporary grading easement (66.65 sq. m. pts 5,6,19 and 33) Permanent hydro easement (wires) (27.45 sq. m. pt 19) Permanent hydro easement (wires, poles and anchors) (5.44 sq. m. pt 33 )	10	Part lot 15, Plan 3896, part PIN 10104-0012(R) shown as parts 5,6,19 and 33 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-a (dated August 23, 1999)
6	337 Sheppard Ave E	Schmid, Adole Schmid, Alice	Temporary grading easement (60.46 sq. m. pts 7,20,26 and 34) Permanent hydro easement (wires) (29.61 sq. m. pt 20) Permanent hydro easement (wires, poles and anchors) (1.57 sq. m. pt 34) ROW widening (0.91 sq. m. pt 26)	10	Part lot 14, Plan 3896, part PIN 10104-0011(R) shown as parts 7,20,26 and 34 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-a (dated August 23, 1999)
7	339 Sheppard Ave E	Tarsitano, Ferdinando Tarsitano, Dora	Temporary grading easement (136.77 sq. m. pts 8 and 21) Permanent hydro easement (wires) (24.32 sq. m. pt 21) ROW widening (9.41 sq. m. pt 27)	10	Part lot 13, Plan 3896, part PIN 10104-0010(R) shown as parts 8, 21 and 27 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-a (dated August 23, 1999)
8	341 Sheppard Ave E	Stebelko, Wiktoria	Temporary grading easement ( 163.42 sq. m. pts 9,22,23 and 35) Permanent hydro easement (wires) ( 25.07 sq. m. pts 22 and 23) Permanent hydro easement (wires, poles and anchors) ( 6.98 sq. m. pt 35) ROW widening ( 24.57 sq. m. pt 28)	10	Part lot 12 and 13, Plan 3896, part PIN 10104-0009(R) shown as parts 9,22,23,28 and 35 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-a (dated August 23, 1999)
9	343 Sheppard Ave E	Pokhoy, Sherry Pokhoy, Neil	Temporary grading easement (160.02 sq. m. pts 10 and 24) Permanent hydro easement (wires) (29.01 sq. m. pt 24) ROW widening ( 30.45 sq. m. pt 29)	10	Part lot 11 and 12, Plan 3896, part PIN 10104-0008(R) shown as parts 10, 24 and 29 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-a (dated August 23, 1999)
10	345 Sheppard Ave E	Stanco Properties Ltd.	Temporary grading easement (131.67 sq. m. pts 11,25 and 36) Permanent hydro easement (wires) ( 18.96 sq. m. pt 25) Permanent hydro easement (wires, poles and anchors) ( 10.56 sq. m. pt 36) ROW widening ( 25.89 sq. m. pt 30)	10	Part lots 10 and 11, Plan 3896, part PIN 10104-0007(R) shown as parts 11,25,30 and 36 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-a (dated August 23, 1999)
11	461 Sheppard Ave E	Imperial Oil Limited	Temporary grading easement (706.44 sq. m. pts 12,37 and 38) Permanent hydro easement (wires, poles and anchors) (12.96 sq. m. pts 37 and 38) ROW widening ( 339.43 sq. m. pt 31)	10	Part lots 8,9 and 10 and part Block A, Plan 3896, part PIN 10104-0006(R) shown as 12,31,37 and 38 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-a (dated August 23, 1999)
12	2818 Bayview Ave	IBC Ventures Inc.	Temporary grading easement (196.87 sq. m. pts 13)	10	Part lots 5,6,7 and 8, Plan 3896, part PIN 10104-0005(R) shown as 1,2,3 and 4 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-a (dated August 23, 1999)
*NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF INTERSECTION OF SHEPPARD AVENUE EAST AND BAYVIEW AVENUE*
13	432 Sheppard Ave E	Roman Catholic Episcopal Corp. For the Diocese of Toronto on Canada	Temporary grading easement (253.59 sq. m. pts 11,12, 13, 19 and 20) ROW widening ( 201.06 sq. m. pts 8,9 and 10) Permanent hydro easement (wires, poles and anchors) (8.00 sq. m. pts 19 and 20)	10	Part lot 16, Con 1 E.Y.S., Part lot 1, Plan 3572 part PIN 10066-0141 shown as 8,9,10,11,12,13 19 and 20 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-B (dated August 23, 1999)
14	436 and 438 Sheppard Ave. E	438 Sheppard Avenue East Ltd.	Temporary grading easement (287.18 sq. m. pts 14 and 15) ROW widening ( 156.95 sq. m. pts 6 and 7) Permanent hydro easement (wires, poles and anchors) (1.11 sq. m. pt 21)	10	Part lots 1 and 2, Plan 3572, part PINs 10066-0142 and 10066-0143 shown as 6,7,14 and 15 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-B (dated August 23, 1999)
15	442 and 446 Sheppard Ave E	Berkim Holdings Ltd.	Temporary grading easement ( 243.67 sq. m. pts 17 & 18) ROW widening ( 174.24 sq. m. pts 4,5 & 16)	10	Part lots 3 and 4, Plan 3572, part PINs 10066-0145 and 10066-0146 shown as parts 4,5,16,17 and 18 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-B (dated August 23, 1999)
16	500 Sheppard Ave E	Mallpaks Developments Ltd.	Permanent hydro easement (wires) (300.06 sq. m. pts 1,2 & 3)	N/A	Part lots 5,6 & 7, Plan 3572, part PIN 10066-0193 shown as 1,2 & 3 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-B (dated August 23, 1999)
17	2880 Bayview Avenue	Incumbent and Church Wardens of All Souls Church	Temporary grading easement (245.68 sq. m. pts 7,9 & 10) ROW widening (56.56 sq. m. pts 6, 8 &11)	10	Part lot 16, Con 2, part PIN 10066-0150 shown as 6,7,8,9,10 & 11 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-C (dated July 16, 1999)
*NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF INTERSECTION OF SHEPPARD AVENUE EAST AND BAYVIEW AVENUE*
18	2901 Bayview Avenue	Verdiroc Holdings Ltd.(50%) Daniels Financial Corporation (25%) John Henry Daniels (25%)	Temporary grading easement (798.33 sq. m. pts 1,2,3,4 &5)	10	Part lot 16, Con 2, part PIN 10061-0152 shown as 1,2,3,4 and 5 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-C (dated July 16, 1999)
19	640 Sheppard Avenue E	Westdale Construction Co. Ltd.	Temporary grading easement (187.85 sq. m. pt 3)	10	Part lot 16, Con 2 EYS, part PIN 10066-0194(R) shown as part 3 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-E (July 16,1999)

*SOUTHEAST QUADRANT OF INTERSECTION OF SHEPPARD AVENUE EAST AND BAYVIEW AVENUE*
20	593 Sheppard Avenue E	The Trustees of the Ellis Street Free Church	Temporary grading easement (208.66 sq. m. pt 1)	10	Part lot 3, Plan 3583, part PIN 10090-0151(R) shown as part 1 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-E (dated July 16,1999 )
21	26 Rean Avenue	Constance Fox	Temporary grading easement (90.73 sq. m. pt 2)	10	Part lot 4, Plan 3583, part PIN 10090-0152(R) shown as E (dated July 16,1999)
22	567 Sheppard Avenue E.	YMCA of Metropolitan Toronto	Temporary grading easement (662.44 sq. m. pts 5,6 and 7) Permanent hydro easement (wires, poles and anchors) (4.03 sq. m. pt 7) ROW widening ( 58.38 sq. m. pt 8)	10	Part lots 3,4 and 5 Plan 3439, part of PINs 10090-0352(R) shown as parts 5,6,7 & 8 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-D (dated August 19, 1999)
23	2831 Bayview Avenue	Shell Canada Ltd.	Permanent hydro easement (wires, poles and anchors) ( 18.54 sq. m. pts 3,4 and 9) ROW widening ( 207.68 sq. m. as pt 2)	N/A	Part lots 1 and 2, Plan 3439, part of PIN 10090-0002(R) shown as parts 2,3,4 and 9 on draft reference plan 94-21-413-52-D (dated August 19,1999)

23 Fraser Avenue - Sale of City-Owned Property

(Ward 20 - Trinity Niagara)

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Administration Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (August 20, 1999) from the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services:

Purpose:

To advise of the outcome of re-marketing this property and to recommend that the Offer to Purchase from Alliance Rockliffe Limited in Trust for 1294539 Ontario Inc. in the amount of $750,000.00 be accepted.

Funding of Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The sale of this property for $750,000.00 will result in net proceeds of approximately $725,925.00 after payment of broker's commission.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services or the Executive Director of Facilities and Real Estate be authorized to accept the Offer to Purchase in the amount of $750,000.00 as submitted by Alliance Rockliffe Limited in Trust for 1294539 Ontario Inc.;

(2) the City Solicitor be authorized and directed to take the appropriate action to complete this transaction on behalf of the City of Toronto and be further authorized to amend the closing date to such earlier or later date as considered reasonable; and

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

Background:

23 Fraser Avenue is improved with a tenanted two-storey commercial building with fully operational film studios and associated office space. The site has a frontage of 141.73 ft. and contains an area of 47,911 sq. ft. It is zoned IC D3 N1.5. The building contains a rentable area of 35,467 sq. ft. and a total gross floor area of 44,559 sq. ft. Title to the property was vested in the City in 1996 as a result of tax default by the previous owner.

The property was previously marketed in 1998 by the City, through its real estate broker, Torode Realty Ltd. The selected Purchaser had an environmental investigation of the property done during the due diligence period. The investigation indicated contamination of the soil and other concerns including the possibility of a buried railcar tanker. On this basis, the Purchaser requested a reduction of the purchase price to reflect the cost of remediation as estimated by its consultant as well as the right to complete further environmental investigation. The estimated remediation cost was considered excessive by staff.

City Council at its meeting on December 16 and 17, 1998, considered and adopted Councillor Pantalone's Notice of Motion and the accompanying report from the Commissioner of Corporate Services (December 16, 1998) on the sale of the property. In so doing, Council adopted the report from the Commissioner of Corporate Services, rejecting the request for the price reduction. Further, Council directed the Commissioner of Corporate Services to have an environmental assessment of the property completed at the City's own cost, and to have the existing broker, Torode Realty Ltd, re-market the property on an "as is" basis, if the Purchaser terminated the Agreement of Purchase and Sale.

The Purchaser did terminate the Agreement of Purchase and Sale, hence the property was re-marketed.

Comments:

Following the Council decision of December 16 and 17, 1998, Torode Realty Ltd was retained to re-market the property. The re-marketing commenced on June 29, 1999, after an environmental assessment of the property was completed by the city's consultant, Burnside Environmental. Copies of the environmental report were given to those prospective purchasers who entered into a Confidentiality Agreement with the City, to enable them to come up with a firm offer based on the existing environmental condition of the property. The intention was that no request for any negotiation on the purchase price after an offer was made would be entertained.

Two Offers to Purchase were received at the office of Torode Realty Ltd. on August 9, 1999, one before the 4:00 p.m. deadline and the other after the 4:00 p.m. deadline. The late submission was rejected on the same day.

The Offer to Purchase received by the submission deadline was from Alliance Rockliffe Limited in Trust for 1294539 Ontario Inc. Details of this Offer are as follows:

Purchaser: Alliance Rockliffe Limited in Trust for 1294539 Ontario Inc.

1 St. Clair Avenue East, Suite 600

Toronto, Ontario M4T 2V7.

Purchase Price: $750,000.00.

Deposit: $75,000.00.

Intended Use: Offices and film studios.

Solicitor: Kaplan Freeman Halpern

69 Bloor Street East, Suite 210

Toronto, Ontario M4W 1A9.

GST No.: 10014 8485.

Conditions: None.

As part of the standard terms of the Offer to Purchase, the Irrevocable Date shall be October 12, 1999 and the Closing Date December 13, 1999. Vacant possession shall be delivered on closing.

The current offer contains no conditions imposed by the Purchaser. As the property has been exposed to the market over the past two years, it is staff's opinion that adequate exposure of the property has been achieved and that the offer represents the market price of the property on an "as is" basis. It is therefore recommended that the Offer to Purchase from Alliance Rockliffe Limited in Trust for 1294539 Ontario Inc. be accepted by the City. The City's broker, Torode Realty Ltd., shares the same view.

Conclusion:

I am of the opinion that the Offer to Purchase from Alliance Rockliffe Limited in Trust for 1294539 Ontario Inc. in the amount of $750,000.00 represents the market price of 23 Fraser Avenue on an "as is" basis and, therefore, should be accepted.

Contact Name:

Ting Ng, Telephone - 392-1857, Fax - 392-1880, E-mail - tng@toronto.ca.

(A copy of the maps attached to the foregoing report was forwarded to all Members of Council with the September 7, 1999, agenda of the Administration Committee and a copy thereof is also on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

Sale of 80 Turnberry Avenue

(Ward 21 - Davenport)

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Administration Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (August 20, 1999) from the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services:

Purpose:

To authorize the sale of the property known municipally as 80 Turnberry Avenue.

Financial Implications:

Revenue of $2,607,000.00 less real estate commission (3 percent), and the usual adjustments on closing is anticipated.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services or the Executive Director of Facilities and Real Estate be authorized to accept the Offer to Purchase in the amount of $2,607,000.00 as submitted by 1298396 Ontario Limited;

(2) the Chief Financial Officer in consultation with the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services be authorized to direct a portion of the sale proceeds on closing to fund the expropriation of 11 Hounslow Heath Road;

(3) the City Solicitor be authorized and directed to take appropriate action to complete the transaction and be further authorized to amend the closing date to such earlier or late date considered reasonable; and

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

Background:

80 Turnberry Avenue is a vacant site of approximately 3.78 acres in the St. Clair West/Weston Road area. The site was acquired by the former City of Toronto in April 1994 for non-payment of taxes.

Details of the property are set out below:

Property Address: 80 Turnberry Avenue.

Legal Description: Part of Township Lot 35, Concession 3 from the Bay, City of Toronto, being Parts 1-4 inclusive, Plan 64R-16034.

Lot Size: 83.82 metres (257 feet) frontage on the north side of Turnberry Avenue, 224.33 metres (736 feet) depth.

Zoning: I3D5.

Improvements: None.

The property was offered for sale through JDF Realty Ltd. in November 1998. Eight (8) offers were received. Two of those offers were substantially higher than the remaining proposals. A series of amendments to the two highest offers led to the Corporate Services Committee directing staff to provide each of the eight prospective purchasers one final opportunity to submit a final offer. Of the eight original offerors, three responded to the City's invitation to resubmit an offer. All contained the same condition that the purchasers be permitted to conduct a site investigation during a 45 day due diligence period.

At the meeting held on March 2, 3 and 4, 1999, Council accepted the highest offer to purchase from 1298396 Ontario Limited in the amount of $2,707,000.00. After having undertaken additional soil testing and during the due diligence period the purchaser exercised its right to terminate the agreement advising that the results of their site investigation revealed the cost of site clean-up exceeded their expectations. They did agree to provide staff with a copy of their consultants environmental report and the estimated costs of site remediation.

It was determined by staff that, in order to expedite the process, the original eight offerors should once again be permitted to bid on the property. However, as full environmental information was now available, the Agreement of Purchase and Sale was amended to reflect a fully unconditional sale. With the permission of the consultants and the owner of the environmental report staff advised the original eight offerors of the availability of the property and of the further environmental report which was made available for review prior to the submission of offers. An information package including an "offer to purchase" form was sent to each with a further invitation to bid on the property. Three offers were received by the deadline date August 19, 1999 and are summarized on the following page.

The highest offer from 1298396 Ontario Limited is recommended for acceptance. The offer is summarized as follows:

Purchaser: 1298396 Ontario Limited.

Amount of Offer: $2,607,000.00.

Deposit: $500,000.00.

Intended Use: Residential redevelopment.

Acceptance Date Deadline: October 28, 1999.

Closing Date: 45 days from acceptance date.

Conditions: None.

Commission: Three (3) percent plus G.S.T. payable on closing of the transaction.

Conclusions:

Completion of this transaction as detailed herein is considered fair and reflective of market value.

Contact Name:

Roland Mayr, Facilities and Real Estate (416)392-1166, Fax No.: (416)392-1880. (ac99132)

--------

80 Turnberry Avenue

Summary of Offers Received February 23, 1999

Offer	Purchaser	Offering Price	Deposit	Closing	Conditions
(1)	1298396 Ontario Limited	$2,607,000.00	$500,000.00	45 days after acceptance	None
(2)	Green Banner Developments Ltd.	$2,050,000.00	$205,000.00	30 days after acceptance	None
(3)	John Paul Cruz In Trust	$1,200,000.00	$120,000.00	Oct. 29, 1999	Agreement subject to approval by Purchasers Solicitor 10 business days after acceptance by City

Declaration as Surplus

795 Middlefield Road - Central Laundry Facility

(Ward 18 - Scarborough Malvern)

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Administration Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (August 18, 1999) from the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services:

Purpose:

To secure authority to declare the property surplus to municipal requirements.

Financial Implications:

Revenue will be generated from the eventual sale.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the property known municipally as 795 Middlefield Road be declared surplus to the City's requirements and all steps necessary to comply with the requirements of By-law No. 551-1998 be taken; and

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

Background:

On May 25, 1984, Metropolitan Toronto Council approved a laundry agreement between Stork Diaper Services Alberta Ltd. (now K-Bro Linen Systems Inc.) and Metro to provide laundry services to the Homes for the Aged. Pursuant to the joint venture agreement, Central Laundry was designed and built as a single purpose facility at 795 Middlefield Road.

On July 29, 1998, in response to the notice of termination served by K-Bro and by adoption of Clause No. 16 of Report No. 7 of The Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee, City Council directed the Homes for the Aged to develop and issue a Request for Proposal with respect to the future ownership of the Central Laundry and the future provision of laundry services to the Homes for the Aged and other City of Toronto operations served by the Central Laundry. The RFP was issued on January 29, 1999. The submissions were evaluated and reported to City Council.

City Council, at its meeting held on July 6, 7 and 8, 1999, adopted as amended Clause No. 4 of Report No. 1 of The Policy and Finance Committee. Among other recommendations, Council directed staff to enter into negotiations for the sale of the Central Laundry facility to Lakeshore Laundry and Linen Concept Ltd. and to report back to City Council on the outcome of the negotiations, and, if negotiations for the sale are not successful, staff continue discussions with respect to a continued joint venture or profit-sharing arrangement.

Comments:

City staff are continuing negotiations with Lakeshore Laundry and Linen Concept Ltd., the recommended proponent and the Homes' interim launderer currently operating out of the Middlefield Road location. It is anticipated that an Agreement of Purchase and Sale will culminate as a result of these negotiations and the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services will be in a position to report back to Council at its meeting scheduled for October 26, 27 and 28, 1999. Due to the urgency of this matter, a formal review and circulation process to ascertain whether or not the property is required for other municipal purposes was not undertaken. However, the Property Management Committee has reviewed this matter and concurs with the recommendations of this report.

In order to proceed with the sale of the Central Laundry facility at 795 Middlefield Road, the City must comply with the procedures governing disposal of property. Section 193(4) of the Municipal Act requires that, before the selling of any property, Council must declare the property to be surplus by by-law or resolution passed at a meeting open to the public, give notice to the public of the proposed sale and obtain at least one appraisal of the market value of the property, unless exempted by regulations passed under the legislation.

Conclusion:

The Central Laundry facility at 795 Middlefield Road should be declared surplus to the City's requirements in order to proceed with the proposed sale of the property.

Contact Name:

Luba Tymkewycz; 392-7207; Fax No.: 392-1880; ltymkewy@toronto.ca.

Declaration as Surplus

111-117 Richmond Street East -

Municipal Car Park No. 63

(Ward 24 - Downtown)

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Administration Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (August 12, 1999) from the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services:

Purpose:

To secure authority to declare the property surplus to municipal requirements.

Financial Implications:

Revenue will be generated from the eventual sale.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the properties known municipally as 111 and 117 Richmond Street East be declared surplus to the City's requirements and all steps necessary to comply with By-law No. 551-1998 be taken;

(2) City Council approve, as the approving authority under the provisions of the Expropriations Act, the disposal of 111 and 117 Richmond Street East without giving the original owners from whom the lands were taken, the first chance to repurchase; and

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

Background:

On November 10, 1958, City Council adopted By-law No. 20509 thereby approving the expropriation of certain lands in connection with the elimination of the jog at Richmond Street East and Jarvis Street. Numbers 111 and 117 Richmond Street East are the residual portions of the lands expropriated, and are separated by a public lane. Toronto Parking Authority operates a 17-space surface carpark (Municipal Carpark No. 63).

The Toronto Parking Authority Board of Directors have authorized staff to enter into negotiations with Intracorp Developments (French Quarter II) Ltd. for the sale of the development rights at 111 and 117 Richmond Street East. The City's lands are located immediately adjacent to Intracorp's Phase I and II French Quarter high rise development projects and it is being contemplated to redevelop the City's lands as part of Phase II. The residential redevelopment proposes to incorporate 12 public parking spaces at grade with the City retaining ownership of strata title to the 12 parking spaces.

Prior to entering into a formal agreement, the Parking Authority has requested that a disposal circulation to the City's Agencies, Boards, Commissions and Departments be undertaken to ascertain whether or not the properties can be declared surplus to the City's requirements.

Comments:

As a result of the disposal circulation, Planning staff have advised that they strongly object to any condition of sale that incorporates at grade surface parking. The incorporation of surface commercial parking into a redevelopment is undesirable and does not represent sound site planning. As such, Planning staff have requested that any condition of sale incorporating at grade surface parking on the development site be removed or the lands not be sold at this time.

Works and Emergency Services staff have advised that 1.48 metre strips on each side of the public lane would be required for future lane widening.

The Property Management Committee has reviewed this matter and concurs with the recommendations of this report.

In order to proceed with the sale of 111 and 117 Richmond Street East, the City must comply with the procedures governing disposal of property. Section 193(4) of the Municipal Act requires that, before the selling of any property, Council must declare the property to be surplus by by-law or resolution passed at a meeting open to the public, give notice to the public of the proposed sale and obtain at least one appraisal of the market value of the property, unless exempted by regulations passed under the legislation.

In addition, as these are residual parcels of expropriated lands, the Expropriations Act requires that where lands that have been expropriated and are in the possession of the expropriating authority, are found to be no longer required for its purpose, the expropriating authority shall not without the approval of the approving authority dispose of the lands without giving the owners from whom the land was taken the first chance to repurchase the lands on the terms of the best offer received by the expropriating authority. In the acquisition of these lands, City Council was both the expropriating and approving authority. City Council, as the approving authority should waive the requirement to offer the original owners the first chance to repurchase.

Conclusion:

In order to proceed with the disposal of these lands, City Council should declare 111 and 117 Richmond Street East surplus to the City's requirements and approve the disposal of these lands without giving the owners from whom the lands were taken the first chance to repurchase.

Contact Name:

Carla Inglis; 392-7212; Fax No.: 392-1880; cinglis@toronto.ca.

Declaration as Surplus

Westerly Portion of 110 Wildwood Crescent

(Ward 26 - East Toronto)

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Administration Committee recommends the adoption of the report (August 19, 1999) from the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services; and further that prospective purchasers be requested to submit with their offer, for information only and for no other purpose, their proposed intended use of the property.

The Administration Committee reports, for the information of Council, having:

(1) requested the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism to submit a report to the meeting of Council scheduled to be held on September 28, 1999, on what upgrades are intended for the park at this site and the cost therefor; and

(2) requested the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism and the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services to consult with the community as to the improvements required at that particular area.

The Administration Committee submits the following report (August 19, 1999) from the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services:

Purpose:

To secure authority to declare a part of the property surplus to municipal requirements.

Financial Implications:

Revenue will be generated from the eventual sale.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the westerly portion of 110 Wildwood Crescent (approximately 175 feet) be declared surplus to the City's requirements and offered for sale on the open market and all steps necessary to comply with By-law No. 551-1998 be taken; and

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

Background:

The former Metropolitan Council, by its adoption on July 30, 1963 of Executive Committee Report No. 40, Clause 10, authorized the acquisition of a major portion of the subject property for or in connection with the easterly extension of the Frederick G. Gardiner Expressway. The remainder of the site was acquired from the C.N.R. under Instrument No. 107892 ET, dated April 28, 1964. The subject property is located on the north side of Wildwood Crescent just west of Woodbine Avenue. The entire site has a frontage of 490 feet and an area of approximately 50,600 square feet.

Comments:

A disposal circulation to the City's Agencies, Boards, Commissions and Departments was undertaken to ascertain whether or not there is any municipal interest in retaining 110 Wildwood Crescent. The disposal circulation has been completed and the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism has expressed an interest and presented a sound rationale for retaining the easterly 315 feet, more or less, of the site, together with 140 Wildwood Crescent, for parks purposes. No municipal interest was expressed in the westerly 175 feet of the site and accordingly this report recommends declaring this portion of the site surplus to municipal requirements. For disposal purposes, a survey is being undertaken to confirm dimensions and area. The Property Management Committee has reviewed this matter and concurs with the recommendations of this report. Details of the lands to be declared surplus are as follows:

Subject Property: Lots 200 and 201, Part of Lots 199 and 202, Plan 459E.

Location: North side of Wildwood Crescent, west of Woodbine Avenue.

Approximate Dimensions: 175 feet (54 metres) frontage, more or less.

105 feet (32 metres) depth, more or less.

Approximate Lot Area: 18,375 square feet (1,728 square metres), more or less.

Zoning: R2Z1.0 Residential.

Official Plan: Low density residential.

In order to proceed with the disposal of the westerly portion of 110 Wildwood Crescent, the City must comply with the procedures governing disposal of property. Section 193(4) of the Municipal Act requires that, before the selling of any property, Council must declare the property to be surplus by by-law or resolution passed at a meeting open to the public, give notice to the public of the proposed sale and obtain at least one appraisal of the market value of the property, unless exempted by regulations passed under the legislation.

Conclusion:

As no municipal interest has been expressed in retaining the westerly portion of 110 Wildwood Crescent, City Council should declare this parcel surplus to the City's requirements and offer it for sale on the open market.

Contact Name:

Melanie Hale-Carter, Valuator-Negotiator, Facilities and Real Estate Division, Tel. No.: 397-0585, Fax No.: 392-1880, e-mail address:melanie_halecarter@metrodesk.metrotor.on.ca

_________

Councillor Tom Jakobek, East Toronto appeared before the Administration Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (September 22, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism:

Purpose:

To report on the addition of the easterly portion of 110 Wildwood Crescent and 140 Wildwood Crescent to the existing park known as Wildwood Playground, proposed improvements and costs thereof.

Financial Implication:

Funds in the amount of $130,000.00 would be required in the 5-year Capital Budget of the Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Department to fund the proposed improvements.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that this report be received for information.

Council Reference:

The Administration Committee, at its meeting of September 7, 1999, adopted the report of the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services respecting the disposition of the lands in question and requested a report to Council on the proposed improvements to the parkland and costs thereof.

The Committee also requested that the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism consult with the community as to the improvements required at this site.

Comments:

This site was acquired by the municipality for the easterly extension of the Gardiner Expressway/Scarborough Transportation Corridor. The site is divided into three portions, as illustrated in Figure 1. The westerly portion is a paved area, in the centre is the present Wildwood Playground, developed in 1969, and the easterly lands are vacant and used as informal parkland.

The integration of the easterly lands with the existing Wildwood Playground would make a better neighbourhood park. Staff have supported this position at the Property Management Committee. A preliminary landscape concept for an expanded park would provide for the improvement/upgrading of the playground, parks services and lighting, as well as the development of community green space and sitting out areas with enhanced landscaping. It is estimated that these improvements would be in the order of $130,000.00. Other development concepts could, of course, be considered. Any improvements would be confirmed by staff in consultation with the Ward Councillors and members of the community prior to finalization.

The addition of the adjacent lands will increase the park area to a total of approximately 4,600 square metres. Corporate Services staff in the Facilities and Real Estate Division have been consulted and they are in concurrence with this proposal.

Conclusions:

The use of the lands for parks purposes is appropriate. A preliminary landscape concept integrating the existing Wildwood Park with the lands to the east is estimated to cost $130,000.00.

Contacts:

Frank Kershaw 392-8199

Brian Rutherford 392-8179)

Insert Table/Map No. 1

Wildwood Neighbourhood Park - Figure 1

Declaration as Surplus

118A-120 Pearl Street - Toronto District Heating

Corporation (TDHC) - (Ward 24 - Downtown)

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Administration Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (August 20, 1999) from the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services:

Purpose:

To secure authority to declare the property surplus to municipal requirements.

Financial Implications:

The proposed conveyance of 118A-120 Pearl Street to TDHC, at a value of $2,000,000.00, is part of the City's contribution to TDHC and is to be matched by OMERS with a cash contribution to TDHC in the same amount.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the property known municipally as 118A-120 Pearl Street be declared surplus to the City's requirements for the proposed conveyance of the property to TDHC and all steps necessary to comply with the requirements of By-law No. 551-1998 be taken; and

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

Background:

By virtue of Section 5 of the City of Toronto Act, 1977, the City was authorized to construct an integrated steam system on the Pearl Street property in which title was held by Toronto Hydro. It was then leased to TDHC.

The Pearl Street steam plant, known municipally as 120 Pearl Street, is located on the east side of Simcoe Street and extends from the north side of Pearl Street to Adelaide Street West. Through an exchange of lands, respecting the closing, conveyancing and re-alignment of the lane east of 120 Pearl Street, Toronto Hydro received title to a strip of land known municipally as 118A Pearl Street.

Pursuant to the City of Toronto Act, 1997, Section 9(4), 118A-120 Pearl Street along with other lands relating to the distribution and supply of electrical power were vested in the City under the management and control of Toronto Hydro.

Following the adoption by City Council at its meeting held on June 9, 10 & 11, 1999 of By-law No. 374-1999, authorized by Section 145(1) of the Electricity Act, 1998, all of the assets of Toronto Hydro and the City held or used by either of them for the purpose of generating, transmitting, distributing or retailing electricity were transferred to Toronto Hydro-Electric Systems Limited or Toronto Hydro Energy Services Inc., as applicable, with the subject property and thirteen other properties being specifically excluded from such transfer. With the adoption of Clause No. 1 of Report No. 10 of The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee by City Council, at its meeting held on June 9, 10 and 11, 1999, the City retained and took over control and management of these fourteen excluded properties.

City Council, at its meeting held on July 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1999, adopted Clause No. 10 of Report No. 4 of The Policy and Finance Committee respecting the incorporation of the TDHC under the Ontario Business Corporations Act. Among other recommendations, Council recommended that the City contribute to TDHC the Pearl Street property, formerly owned by Toronto Hydro and retained by the City, for continued use as a steam production plant for TDHC at a value of $2,000,000.00 and to be matched by OMERS with a cash contribution to TDHC in the same amount.

Comments:

In order to comply with the time-lines of the business arrangements respecting TDHC, no formal disposal circulation to the City's Agencies, Boards, Commissions or Departments was undertaken. However, the Property Management Committee, at its meeting held on August 16, 1999, recommended that a report declaring the property surplus to municipal requirements be prepared.

In order to proceed with the proposed conveyance of the Pearl Street property to TDHC, the City must comply with the procedures governing disposal of property. Section 193(4) of the Municipal Act requires that, before the selling of any property, Council must declare the property to be surplus by by-law or resolution passed at a meeting open to the public, give notice to the public of the proposed sale and obtain at least one appraisal of the market value of the property, unless exempted by regulations passed under the legislation.

Conclusion:

118A-120 Pearl Street should be declared surplus to the City's requirements in order to proceed with the proposed conveyance of the property to TDHC.

Contact Name:

Luba Tymkewycz; 392-7207; Fax No.: 392-1880; ltymkewy@toronto.ca

Potential Redevelopment of 1631 Queen Street East

(Ward 26 - East Toronto)

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Administration Committee recommends:

(1) the adoption of the report (August 31, 1999) from the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services, subject to amending Recommendation No. (1) by adding thereto the following words "seeking a developer to either provide space in an acceptable building or provide space in a newly constructed building on the site; and in the interim that there be alternative accommodation for the Welfare Office and Childcare Centre"; so that Recommendation No. (1) now reads as follows:

"(1) the potential redevelopment of 1631 Queen Street East be processed through the normal disposal process for review and recommendation by the Property Management Committee respecting the future disposition of this site, and if appropriate, staff from Facilities and Real Estate Division, in consultation with staff from Community and Neighbourhoods Services, investigate the feasibility of any redevelopment proposals for the property including the preparation of a proposal call to achieve a higher and better use of the site; seeking a developer to either provide space in an acceptable building or provide space in a newly constructed building on the site; and in the interim that there be alternative accommodation for the Welfare Office and Childcare Centre"; and

(2) that the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services be instructed to take a proactive approach to urban renewal on the site and those surrounding sites which the City already owns which would guarantee the provisions of the foregoing Recommendation No. (1).

The Administration Committee submits the following report (August 31, 1999) from the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services:

Purpose:

To respond to Councillor Jakobek's communication dated July 29, 1999 respecting the potential sale/redevelopment of 1631 Queen Street East.

Financial Implications:

No financial implications at this time.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the potential redevelopment of 1631 Queen Street East be processed through the normal disposal process for review and recommendation by the Property Management Committee respecting the future disposition of this site, and if appropriate, staff from Facilities and Real Estate Division, in consultation with staff from Community and Neighbourhoods Services, investigate the feasibility of any redevelopment proposals for the property including the preparation of a proposal call to achieve a higher and better use of the site; and

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

Background:

In 1964, the former City of Toronto constructed the building at 1631 Queen Street East for the East District Welfare Centre, Day Nursery and Health Centre. As a result of the former Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto assuming welfare services effective January 1, 1967, ownership of 1631 Queen Street East was transferred from the City to Metro.

The site is located on the south side of Queen Street East just east of Coxwell Avenue extending to Eastern Avenue. It is irregular in shape, having a frontage of 291.64 feet (89 m) and containing an approximate site area of 30,500 square feet (2,833.5 m2). Erected on the site is a two-storey brick building containing a total floor area of 23,100 square feet (2,146 m2) and occupied by the Coxwell Welfare Office and Childcare Centre. This site is zoned MCR T2.0 R2.0 and located in an area identified under the provision of the official plan of the former City of Toronto Cityplan as a low density mixed commercial-residential area.

In recent years, approximately $750,000.00 was expended with provincial funding assistance to upgrade the building including HVAC, electrical and mechanical systems. Two years ago, as part of the renovation project, an additional $500,000.00 was spent to install an elevator making the second floor and rooftop accessible by elevator.

By letter dated July 29, 1999, Councillor Jakobek has requested the Administration Committee to give consideration to the possible sale/redevelopment of 1631 Queen Street East. Given the current improvements and developments underway in this area, this may be the opportune time to bring this institutional type of structure in keeping with the new streetscape.

Comments:

In response to Councillor Jakobek's proposal to redevelop 1631 Queen Street East, the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services has advised that the services provided at this facility must remain in the area and that the same amount of space as currently occupied by staff is required. Should consideration be given to redeveloping the site, the following conditions would need to be considered:

(1) Given the importance of having a welfare service and a childcare centre in this part of the City, and given that it has been very difficult to find a site acceptable to the community and easily accessible by T.T.C. for the clients, any relocation must be within two or three blocks of the existing use;

(2) No further costs should be incurred related to relocation, otherwise Provincial cost-sharing could be jeopardized;

(3) No additional operating costs should be incurred by the City; and

(4) Operational staff represented by Social Services and Children's Services participate in the consideration of any redevelopment proposals in order to ensure that the conditions noted above are met.

In view of the concerns raised, there are two possible options to satisfy the proposal. A proposal call could be issued seeking a developer to either provide space in an acceptable building in close proximity or provide space in a newly constructed building on the site. In either case, it would be necessary for the developer to provide alternative accommodation while the new building was being constructed.

Another matter that must be addressed is that City Council approved a process for the disposal of properties. This process includes the canvassing of potentially surplus properties through agencies, boards, commissions and departments to ascertain if there is municipal interest in the property. The results of the circulation are forwarded to the Property Management Committee for recommendation respecting the future disposition of a potentially surplus property. Although this situation is somewhat unique, in that the subject property is not surplus to the requirements of Community and Neighbourhood Services and the Ward Councillor's desire to achieve a higher and better use of the property while providing space for Community and Neighbourhood Services requirements, it would seem appropriate to process this request though the regular channels in order that full input can be received from all ABCDs with a subsequent report to Council for approval concerning the disposition of this property.

Conclusion:

The logical process would be to recommend that this request be processed through the normal disposal process for review and recommendation by the Property Management Committee and, if appropriate, issue a proposal call to achieve higher and better use of the property while continuing to retain in the area, either through conveyance or long term lease, the office space required by Community and Neighbourhood Services.

Contact Name:

Luba Tymkewycz, 392-7207, Fax No. 392-1880, ltymkewy@toronto.ca.

_________

The Administration Committee reports, for the information of Council, having also had before it a communication, addressed to Councillor Lorenzo Berardinetti from the Executive Director, Facilities and Real Estate, responding to a communication (July 29, 1999) from Councillor Tom Jakobek respecting the potential disposal of 1631 Queen Street East; and advising that a report thereon will be submitted to the September 7, 1999, meeting of the Administration Committee.

________

Councillor Tom Jakobek, East Toronto, appeared before the Administration Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

Purchase of 1531 Eglinton Avenue West

(Ward 28 - York Eglinton)

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Administration Committee recommends the adoption of the confidential report (August 23, 1999) from the President, Toronto Parking Authority, respecting the purchase of 1531 Eglinton Avenue West, which was forwarded to Members of Council under confidential cover, such report to remain confidential in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act.

Request from the York Community Alliance for Office Space

at 2696 or 2700 Eglinton Avenue West

(Ward 28 - York Eglinton)

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Administration Committee recommends:

(1) the adoption of the recommendation of the York Community Council embodied in the communication (August 16, 1999) from the City Clerk, York Community Council, viz:

"that the current City plans for space utilization and office consolidation with respect to future use of the York Civic Centre and 2696 Eglinton Avenue West, ensure that adequate provision is made for the immediate community space requirements of the members of the York Community Alliance.";

(2) that, in developing plans for the use of 2696 and 2700 Eglinton Avenue West, the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services be requested to undertake community consultation as an integral part of the process, especially with respect to York Community agencies; and

(3) that the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services be requested to submit the forthcoming report respecting office space consolidation to the Community Councils for comment.

The Administration Committee submits the following communication (August 16, 1999) from the City Clerk, York Community:

Recommendation:

The York Community Council on July 15, 1999, recommended to the Administration Committee that:

"the current City plans for space utilization and office consolidation with respect to future use of the York Civic Centre and 2696 Eglinton Avenue West, ensure that adequate provision is made for the immediate community space requirements of the members of the York Community Alliance."

The York Community Council reports, for the information of the Administration Committee, having:

(1) requested the Executive Director, Facilities and Real Estate Division, to:

(a) work with the York Community Alliance, in the event that the Alliance's space needs cannot be accommodated at 2700 Eglinton Avenue West and/or 2696 Eglinton Avenue West, to determine their precise requirements and ability to assume rental costs;

(b) assist the York Community Alliance, in securing an appropriate location in the York District on a rental basis, in the private sector or in public facilities, including the former York Hydro building at 1652 Keele Street;

(2) advised the York Community Alliance to follow the application process for requesting funds to cover the cost of rental accommodation, when identified, from the Community Services Grants Program for the year 2000; and

(3) requested the Municipal Grants Review Committee to support the above application, when submitted.

Background:

The York Community Council had before it the following communications:

(i) (July 15, 1999) from the York Community Alliance requesting that the York Community Council adopt the following motion:

"That the current City plans for space utilization and office consolidation with respect to the future use of the York Civic Centre and 2696 Eglinton Avenue West ensure that adequate provision is made for the immediate community space requirements of the members of the York Community Alliance; and

That officials of the Facilities and Real Estate Division of Corporate Services responsible for civic space utilization and office consolidation plans and officials of the Planning Department work with the York Community Alliance to formulate a concept plan for the development of a Community and Cultural Civic Centre in the facilities and on the grounds of the York Civic Centre and environs."

The York Community Alliance consists of the following groups:

- Arts York **;

- Community Information Centre for York *;

- Community Social Planning Council - York Office *;

- Cross Edge Community Network;

- Eritrean Canadian Community Centre;

- Eritrean Canadian Society for Youth Advancement;

- Eritrean Women's Committee;

- Filipino Action Committee for Toronto and Suburbs;

- For Youth Project *;

- Oromo Canadian Community Centre;

- Portuguese Outreach Committee;

- Somali Canadian Community Advancement Centre *;

- Somali Immigrant Aid Organization *;

- Somali Immigrant Women Association; and

- York Hispanic Centre *;

* groups presently located at 2696 Eglinton Avenue West

** group presently located at 2700 Eglinton Avenue West

(ii) (July 14, 1999) from Ms. Ella Jackson, Chair, Black Creek Business Association, expressing support for the request from the York Community Alliance for office space in the York community.

--------

The following persons appeared before the York Community Council in connection with the foregoing matter:

- Ms. Rosa Maria Andino, York Hispanic Centre;

- Mr. Peter Mutchler, York Community Information Centre;

- Mr. Peter Clutterbuck, Social Planning Council; and

- Representative from the York Community Alliance.

The Administration Committee reports, for the information of Council, having also had before it a communication (September 3, 1999) from Mr. Peter Clutterbuck, Co-Director, Community Social Planning Council of Toronto, requesting that the Administration Committee set up a process that allows community input into the recommendations of the Office Consolidation Master Plan; and that the current City plans for space utilization and office consolidation with respect to future use of the York Civic Centre and 2696 Eglinton Avenue West ensure that adequate provision be made for the immediate community space requirements of the members of the York Community Alliance.

--------

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

- Ms. Marion Newrick, Community Information Centre for the City of York; and filed a written submission in regard thereto;

- Ms. Hawa Jilao, Somali Immigrant Women Association;

- Ms. Yasmin Khan, Community Social Planning Council of Toronto;

- Councillor Joe Mihevc, York Eglinton; and

- Councillor Frances Nunziata, York Humber.

Tax Adjustment - Municipal Act Sections 442 and 443

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Administration Committee recommends the adoption of the report (August 30, 1999) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer.

The Administration Committee reports, for the information of Council, having referred Appeal No. 98880 embodied in the document entitled "City of Toronto Detail Hearing Report - 442 and 443, Hearing No. 99200" back to the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer for further consideration.

The Administration Committee submits the following report (August 30, 1999) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:

Purpose:

To recommend the approval of the cancellation, reduction or refund of taxes pursuant to the provisions of sections 442 and 443 of the Municipal Act.

Financial Implications:

This report recommends cancellation of taxes in the amount of $2,134,941.15 as summarized in Schedules "A" and "B" attached. The City's share of this total tax reduction is $860,000.00. Funding of this deficiency is provided for in the 1999 operating budget. The balance of the tax cancellation is to be recovered from the school boards."BR1">

Recommendation:

It is recommended that:

(1) the individual appeal applications made pursuant to Section 442 of the Municipal Act totalling $1,883,371.69 as summarized in Schedule "A", be approved; and

(2) the individual appeal applications made pursuant to Section 443 of the Municipal Act totalling $251,569.46 as summarized in Schedule "B", be approved.

Discussion:

Council of the City of Toronto on December 16^th, and 17^th, 1998 adopted a report authorizing the Administration Committee to hear and make recommendations on tax appeals, other than poverty appeals, pursuant to sections 442 and 443 of the Municipal Act for cancellation, reduction or refund of taxes due to vacancy, out of business, demolition etc.

Sections 442 of the Municipal Act allows Council to cancel, reduce or refund taxes levied for the following reasons:

(a) property that has ceased to be liable to be taxed at the rate it was taxed on the returned roll;

(b) property become exempt from taxation;

(d) mobile until that has been removed from the municipality during the year;

(e) taxpayer unable to pay taxes due to sickness or extreme poverty;

(f) overcharged by gross or manifest clerical error; or

(g) property could not be used for at least three months due to repairs or renovations.

Section 443 of the Municipal Act allows Council to make decisions relating to errors of fact on supplementary and omitted assessments. This section permits correction of these types of errors for the current and previous two years.

As applications for cancellation of taxes are received, Finance staff forward the applications to the Ontario Property Assessment Corporation (OPAC) for review. Upon receiving comments from OPAC, the Finance Department prepares its recommendation, calculates the tax cancellation, advises the applicant of the tax amount to be cancelled, and schedules hearings before the Administration Committee, if required. Within twenty-one days after a decision is rendered by the Administration Committee, the City issues notices of decision to the applicants and process the tax adjustments accordingly. The twenty-one day period allows the applicant the right to appeal the decision to the Assessment Review Board.

The total cancellation or refund of taxes under Section 442 of the Municipal Act as recommended in this report is $1,883,371.59. The total cancellation or refund of taxes under Section 443 of the Municipal Act as recommended in this report is $251,569.46. Approximately $1,280,000 will be recovered from the school board.

Schedules "A" and "B" summarize by category the number of applications and tax dollars recommended for adjustment. A confidential detailed report will be distributed to Members at the time of the committee hearing.

Contact Name:

Margo L. Brunning

Manager, Collections/Receivables, Payments

and Regional Customer Services

(416) 395-6789

Fax Number (416) 395-6703

Internet Email Address:mbrunnin@toronto.on.ca

--------

Adjustment of Taxes

Pursuant to Section 442 of the Municipal Act

S c h e d u l e "A"

Reason for Appeal No. of Applications Adjustment

Gross or Manifest Clerical Error 35 $ 229,227.22

Damaged by fire or demolished 38 $ 244,680.09

Reduced Space 3 $ 4,932.00

Commercial to Residential Conversion 18 $ 107,221.74

Exempt 379 $1,044,716.86

No longer doing business 10 $ 24,873.24

Duplication 6 $ 227,702.54

Total Adjustments this Period 489 $1,883,371.69

Breakdown By Year

1994 1 $ 73,084.41

1995 2 $ 12,194.56

1996 169 $ 316,546.39

1997 250 $ 438,588.50

1998 52 $ 608,842.45

1999 15 $ 434,115.38

489 $1,883,371.69

Breakdown By Former Municipality

Scarborough 29 $ 59,945.30

Toronto 400 $1,327,897.52

North York 26 $ 150,740.80

East York 23 $ 157,772.66

York 1 $ 84.96

Etobicoke 10 $ 186,930.45

489 $1,883,371.6

--------

Adjustment of Taxes

Pursuant to Section 443 of the Municipal Act

Schedule "B"

Reason for Appeal No. of Applications Adjustment

Damaged by fire or demolished 5 $ 65,482.04

Exempt 3 $ 54,109.45

Gross or manifest clerical error 17 $ 131,977.97

Total Adjustments this Period 25 $ 251,569.46

Breakdown By Year

1992 1 $ 13,254.90

1993 1 $ 30,462.01

1994 2 $ 24,832.19

1995 3 $ 18,970.49

1996 5 $ 45,816.46

1997 8 $ 48,154.34

1998 3 $ 36,669.67

1999 2 $ 33,409.40

25 $251,569.46

Breakdown By Former Municipality

Scarborough 5 $ 18,261.36

Toronto 18 $212,902.52

North York 2 $ 20,569.46

25 $251,569.46

(A copy of the document entitled "City of Toronto Detail Hearing Report - 442 and 443 Hearing Number: 99200" was distributed to Members of the Committee at the meeting of the Administration Committee on September 7, 1999, and a copy thereof is also on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

Other Items Considered by the Committee

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, received this Clause, as information, subject to striking out and referring Item (e), entitled "Relocation of Lottery Licensing Staff (Scarborough) to York Civic Centre", embodied therein, back to the Administration Committee for further consideration.)

(a) Property Houses Transfer.

The Administration Committee reports having:

(1) deferred consideration of this matter until its meeting scheduled to be held on November 2, 1999;

(2) requested the Chief Executive Officer, Toronto Housing Company Inc., to submit a further report to the aforementioned meeting of the Administration Committee:

(a) as to why these properties were not included in the City's regular portfolio; and

(b) providing an update respecting any attempt made by tenants to form a co-operative; and assurances that every attempt had been made to make information available to the tenants as well as any financial plans that had been offered;

(3) directed that this matter be considered as a deputation item at the meeting of the Administration Committee scheduled to be scheduled on November 2, 1999, as late in the day as possible; and

(4) requested the City Solicitor to submit a report to the meeting of the Administration Committee scheduled to be held on October 5, 1999, on the appropriate means to ensure evidence of past residential tenancy up to the current time, and to impose restrictions on flipping the properties by way of Option or First-Refusal Agreement or otherwise, to be in effect for a five year period from the date of transfer:

(i) (June 24, 1999) from the Chief Executive Officer, Toronto Housing Company Inc., advising that the Board of the Toronto Housing Company Inc., at its meeting on June 24, 1999, during its consideration of a report (June 21, 1999) from the Chief Executive Officer, entitled "Property Houses Transfer", adopted the following resolutions with respect to the aforementioned report:

"(1) That the Board of Directors forward this report to the Administration Committee and City Council with the recommendation that Council grant approval of the changes to the transaction outlined in this report, that Council declare all of the property houses surplus in accordance with such changes and that the appropriate city officials carry out whatever actions are necessary to give effect to Bylaw No. 551-1998;

(2) that the Toronto Housing Company accept a conveyance of the Property Houses upon the terms set out in Clause No. 3 of the Corporate Services Committee Report No. 4 as amended, of the Property House portfolio, except for the 15 properties required to be sold as described in the said clause ("the Sale Properties");

(3) that, subject to City Council's concurrence, the Toronto Housing Company through the Chief Executive Officer, offer for sale and accept offers to purchase respecting the Sale Properties, on the City's behalf;

(4) that the Toronto Housing Company accept from the City the proceeds from the sale of the Sale Properties;

(5) that the Toronto Housing Company continue to manage the Sale Properties under the Property House Leases until each Sale Property is sold, respectively; and

(6) that the appropriate Toronto Housing Company Officials be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto;";

(ii) (September 1, 1999) from the Chief Executive Officer, Toronto Housing Company Inc., recommending that:

(1) Recommendations Nos. (2), (4), (5), and (6) of the report (June 21, 1999) from the Chief Executive Officer of Toronto Housing Company Inc., entitled "Property House Transfer" as adopted by the Board of Directors of the Toronto Housing Company Inc., on June 24, 1999, be adopted;

(2) Recommendations Nos. (1) and (3) therein be deleted and the following substituted there for:

"(1) that City Council grant approval to the changes to the transaction outlined in the report (June 21, 1999) of the Chief Executive Officer of the Toronto Housing Company Inc., and declare the Property Houses surplus, and that all steps necessary to comply with By-law No. 551-1998 be taken;

(3) that the sale of the four single unit properties located at 125 Roxborough Street, 213 Crawford Street, 217 Crawford Street and 13 Hubbard Boulevard be administered by the Toronto Housing Company Inc., on the City's behalf, and that the Chief Executive Officer of the Toronto Housing Company Inc., report to the October 5, 1999 meeting of the Administration Committee on a disposal strategy respecting the remaining eleven properties to be sold;"; and

(3) the appropriate City and Toronto Housing Company officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary actions to give effect to the foregoing;

(iii) (August 26, 1999) from Councillor Sandra Bussin, East Toronto, advising that since the July meeting of the Administration Committee, she has met with the tenants of the Wineva and Hubbard property houses and housing company officials on several occasions; that the result of these meetings and discussions has led her to conclude that more time is required to work out a framework to address tenant concerns; and requesting that this item be deferred again by the Committee as more time is required to work out an honest and equitable approach to the tenants' concerns; and

(iv) (August 18, 1999) from Councillor Tom Jakobek, East Toronto, advising that after meeting with representatives of the Housing Department and the tenants involved, a number of concerns have been raised and errors need to be investigated; and requesting that this matter be deferred.

--------

Councillor Tom Jakobek, East Toronto, appeared before the Administration Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

(b) Claim By Vardin Et Al.

The Administration Committee reports having deferred consideration of this matter until its meeting scheduled to be held on November 2, 1999:

(August 6, 1999 ), from the City Clerk, advising that City Council on July 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1999, struck out and referred Clause No. 17 of Report No. 2 of The Administration Committee, headed "Claim by Vardin et al", back to the Administration Committee for further consideration and the hearing of deputations.

--------

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

- Mr. Nick Vardin;

- Mr. Jacob Rabinowitz;

- Mr. David Bailey; and

- Councillor Tom Jakobek, East Toronto.

(c) Review of Fluoride in the Toronto Water Supply, November, 2000 Municipal Election Ballot Question.

The Administration Committee reports having referred the following communication to the Board of Health for consideration and report thereon to the Works Committee:

(June 10, 1999) from Mr. Tony O'Donohue, requesting an opportunity to appear before the Committee respecting the placing of a question on the ballot of the November, 2000, Municipal Election respecting the issue of adding fluoride to the Toronto water supply.

--------

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

- Mr. Tony O'Donohue, P. Eng., President, Environmental Probe Ltd.;

- Ms. Janet Budgell; and showed a video and slide presentation respecting the issue of the fluoridation of the Toronto Water Supply; and

- Dr. Hardy Limeback, and filed a pamphlet entitled "Lifesavers Guide to Fluoridation" and more detailed information in regard thereto.

(d) Temporary Employees with Length of Service from two to ten plus years.

The Administration Committee reports having referred the following communications to the Personnel Sub-Committee for consideration:

(i) (August 6, 1999), from the City Clerk, advising that City Council on July 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1999, directed that Clause No. 26 of Report No. 2 of The Administration Committee, headed "Other Items Considered by the Committee" be received as information, subject to striking out and referring the Item (i) entitled "Temporary Employees with Length of Service from Two to Ten Plus Years", embodied therein, back to the Administration Committee for further consideration; and

(ii) (July 29, 1999) from Mr. William Crangle, registering his concerns respecting the way in which the issue regarding long term temporary employees of the former City of Toronto, that he has been trying to bring to the attention of the Committee, has been handled; and requesting an opportunity to appear before the Administration Committee in regard thereto.

--------

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

- Mr. Bill Crangle; and

- Ms. Anne Dubas, President, CUPE Local 79.

(e) Relocation of Lottery Licensing Staff (Scarborough) to York Civic Centre.

The Administration Committee reports having referred the following report (July 7, 1999) from the City Clerk, to the Scarborough Community Council for consideration and report thereon to Council for its meeting scheduled to be held on September 28, 1999:

(i) (June 29, 1999) from the City Clerk, advising that the Scarborough Community Council on June 22, 1999, approved, a request by Councillor Bas Balkissoon that the City Clerk report to the Administration Committee, as soon as possible, respecting the reorganization of the Clerk's Department, specifically the intention to relocate the Scarborough Lottery Licensing function and staff to the York Civic Centre; and that, in the interim, no action be taken on this relocation until this report is provided; and

(ii) (July 7, 1999) from the City Clerk, responding to the request of the Scarborough Community Council on proposed changes to the organizational structure of the Legislative Services Unit; advising that centralization of the lottery licensing and birth registration processes will not only eliminate current workload demands on the customer service staff, but would ensure consistency and standardization of service delivery across the City, and better utilize human resources; that centralizing the gaming function at the York Civic Centre and birth registration at the East York Civic Centre will alleviate the issue of providing full Legislative Services' functions with only two staff; that in order to provide efficient and effective customer services at Toronto City Hall and the five Civic Centres it is necessary to reallocate staff and functions, specifically the centralization of lottery licence processing in York and the processing of birth registrations in East York; that the reorganization will improve the current level of service and maximize the use of available resources; and recommending that this report be received for information.

--------

Councillor Frances Nunziata, York Humber, appeared before the Administration Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

(f) Design for the Official Flag of Toronto.

The Administration Committee reports having:

(1) referred the following report back to the City Clerk; and

(2) directed that the issue of the design for the official flag of Toronto be referred to the Creative Services Unit, Corporate Communications Division, Corporate Services Department, with a request that consultations be held with interested Members of Council and that a report be submitted to the Administration Committee in regard thereto, such report to include more than four designs for consideration by the Administration Committee:

(August 16, 1999), from the City Clerk, recommending that:

(1) the Administration Committee recommend to Council a design for the official flag of Toronto from the four designs submitted;

(2) City Purchasing and Materials Management Division be instructed to source a supplier for the official flag in order that all City Departments, Agencies, Boards and Commissions receive the benefits of consistent quality and best possible price through the bulk purchasing of the flag; and

(3) the appropriate City of Toronto officials be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect thereto; and

advising that the cost of organizing the design submissions have been absorbed within the existing Protocol budget; and the cost of implementation of the new flag, once approved by Council, will be borne by individual Departments as part of the Operating Budget process.

--------

Ms. Daphne Gaby Donaldson, Chief of Protocol, City Clerk's Division, provided the Committee with an overview of the design of the four flags presented.

(g) Response to Council Pitfield's Motion Respecting Fleet and Garage Operations.

The Administration Committee reports having received the following report:

(August 25, 1999) from the Chief Administrative Officer, responding to a number of fleet related questions raised by Councillor Pitfield when the Administration Committee considered the report on the Review of Corporate Fleet and Garage Operations; advising that the Chief Administrative Officer will be providing specific fleet progress reports in December, 1999, March, 2000, June, 2000 and September, 2000; and recommending that this report be received for information.

(h) Late Agenda Items for Committee and Council Meetings - Follow-up Report.

The Administration Committee reports having endorsed the recommendation embodied in the following report, viz:

"that this report be received for information and that the City Clerk submit a full report on the matter of late agenda items to the October or November meeting of the Administration Committee.":

(i) (August 24, 1999) from the City Clerk, responding to the Administration Committee's request for additional consultation with Members of Council and further consideration of the issue of late agenda items for Committee and Council meetings; and recommending that this report be received for information and that the City Clerk submit a full report on the matter of late agenda items to the October or November meeting of the Administration Committee.

(ii) (September 2, 1999) from Ms. Anne Dubas, President, CUPE Local 79, forwarding her previous communication dated May 17, 1999, respecting the issue of Late Agenda Items for Committee and Council, and requesting that, in the interest of an open and accessible civic government, there be no deadline and no restrictions on the distribution of the public's letters to Committees or Council.

(i) Request for Permission to Use the Name "East York".

The Administration Committee reports having referred the following communication to the City Solicitor for report thereon to the Administration Committee:

(July 19, 1999), from the East York Community Council, advising that the East York Community Council on July 15, 1999, recommended to the Administration Committee that permission be granted to the East York General Radio Emergency Service and "The East York Voice" for continued use of the name "East York" and the East York Leaf logo as outlined in the attached communication (July 12, 1999) from Mr. Christopher J. K. Salmond.

(j) Staff Car Allowance.

The Administration Committee reports having received the following communication; and having requested the Chief Administrative Officer to expedite the harmonization of the car allowances and mileage provisions for excluded staff, i.e., Management employees:

(July 20, 1999) from the City Clerk, Audit Committee, advising that the Audit Committee on July 19, 1999, received the report (June 22, 1999) from the City Auditor, entitled "Staff Car Allowance", and directed the aforementioned report be forwarded to the Administration Committee for information.

(k) Third Party Outdoor Advertising on City Property and Assets - All Wards.

The Administration Committee reports having recommended to the Economic Development Committee and Council, the adoption of the following joint report (August 23, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism and the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services:

(August 23, 199) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism

Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services and recommending that:

(1) City Council endorse the draft objective and principles for third party outdoor advertising contained in this report, and authorize the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, and the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services, to commence a public consultation process regarding third party outdoor advertising, utilizing the draft objective and principles set out in this report as a basis for discussion;

(2) the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, and the Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services, report back to the Economic Development and Parks Committee, and the Administration Committee, respecting Recommendation No. 1, including in the report a draft third party outdoor advertising program which takes into consideration the input gained from the public consultation process;

(3) Council's consideration of unsolicited proposals for third party outdoor advertising on City-owned property and facilities be deferred until Council has adopted a formal process for receiving, evaluating and making decisions on such proposals as part of a third party outdoor advertising program, subject to the deferral not including the proposed litter bin program which is currently under consideration, or any signage associated with City partnership or promotional initiatives; and

(4) this report be forwarded to each Community Council for information purposes.

--------

Mr. Jeff Lyons appeared before the Administration Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

(l) Cost of Custodial and Maintenance Staff Absenteeism to the Toronto Police Service.

The Administration Committee reports having received the following communication:

(August 6, 1999) from the Chairman, Toronto Police Services Board, advising that the Toronto Police Services Board on July 22, 1999, during its consideration of a report (June 18, 1999) from the Chief of Police, entitled "Cost of Custodial and Maintenance Staff Absenteeism to the Toronto Police Service", recommended that the aforementioned report be received for information.

(m) Toronto Police Service Metropolis Software - Use by Other Emergency Services.

The Administration Committee reports having referred the following communication to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services with a request that he consult with the Fire Chief and the General Manager, Toronto Ambulance, and submit a report thereon to the Administration Committee:

(August 9, 1999) from the Chairman, Toronto Police Services Board, advising that the Toronto Police Services Board on July 22, 1999, during its consideration of a report (June 15, 1999) from the Chief of Police, entitled "Business Plan - Marketing of Metropolis Software", recommended that the Corporate Services Committee consider whether the Toronto Police Service METROPOLIS software could be used by other emergency services in the City of Toronto.

(n) Ingles V. City of Toronto.

The Administration Committee reports having received the following confidential report:

(August 5, 1999), from the City Solicitor, confidential report respecting a litigation claim.

(o) Update on Labour Relations.

The Administration Committee reports having received the following communications:

(i) (September 2, 1999), from the Registrar of the Ontario Labour Relations Board providing a copy of the Board's Decision of the same date respecting "City of Toronto, v. The Toronto Civic Employees' Union Local 416, Canadian Union of Public Employees";

(ii) (September 3, 1999), from the Registrar of the Ontario Labour Relations Board providing a copy of the Board's Decision of the same date respecting "City of Toronto, v. The Toronto Civic Employees' Union Local 416, Canadian Union of Public Employees";

(iii) (September 3, 1999), from Howard Goldblatt, Goldblatt Mitchell Barristers & Solicitors, respecting "City of Toronto, v. Toronto Civic Employees' Union, Local 416 - Board File No. 1599-99-PS" acknowledging receipt of the Board decision dated September 2, 1999 and the direction contained therein at paragraph 11; challenging the arguments for interim relief and proposing that the hearing on the "interim order" not proceed prior to September 13, 1999 and further, that any hearings on the merits of the City's application commence immediately following the conclusion of the interim relief proceedings; and concluding that they feel it is most appropriate to proceed in accordance with the timetable set out in the Board Rules and in accordance with the usual Board practice; and

(iv) (September 7, 1999) from the Registrar, Ontario Labour Relations Board, enclosing a copy of the Board's decision dated September 7, 1999, respecting the City of Toronto, v. The Toronto Civic Employees' Union Local 416, Canadian Union of Public Employees.

--------

The following persons gave a presentation to the Administration Committee respecting the City of Toronto union negotiations with the Toronto Civic Employees Union CUPE Local 416:

- The Acting Commissioner of Corporate Services;

- Mr. Harold Ball, Director of Employee and Labour Relations; and

- Mr. Ron Kelusky, General Manager, Toronto Ambulance.

(p) Revenue Billing Systems Update.

The Administration Committee reports having been advised by the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer that the report respecting the Revenue Billing Systems Update will be submitted to the October 5, 1999, meeting of the Administration Committee.

(q) John Street Roundhouse - Heritage Issues.

The Administration Committee reports having concurred with the request embodied in the following communication; and having requested the Chief Administrative Officer to submit a report thereon to the meeting of the Administration Committee scheduled to be held on October 5, 1999:

(September 7, 1999), from Councillor David Miller, High Park - Parkdale, requesting that staff report to the next meeting of the Administration Committee, in consultation with the heritage stakeholders on the outstanding review of the list of heritage items; and, in addition, on various governance options for this museum including the possibility of an interim Board of Management.

(r) Municipal Tax Sale Proceeding - 39 McGlashan Road and the Former City of North York. John Street Roundhouse - Heritage Issues.

The Administration Committee reports having concurred with the request embodied in the following communication respecting 39 McGlashan Road; and having requested the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer to submit a confidential report thereon to the meeting of the Administration Committee scheduled to be held on October 5, 1999:

(September 1, 1999) from Councillor Douglas C. Holyday, Markland-Centennial, requesting that staff report to the Administration Committee, in camera, on the above-noted matter at the September 7, 1999, meeting of the Administration Committee, if possible, or at a future meeting of the Committee.

Respectfully submitted,

LORENZO BERARDINETTI

Chair

Toronto, September 7, 1999

(Report No. 5 of The Administration Committee, including additions thereto, was adopted, as amended, by City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999.)

Agency	Appeal Reserve Recommended	1999 Total Grant
(1) Artists Against Racism	$1,500.00	$5,000.00
(2) Deejinta Beesha	$3,500.00	$6,000.00
Total Recommendations	$5,000.00