CITY CLERK

POLICY AND FINANCE COMMITTEE

REPORT No. 7

For Consideration by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on September 28 and 29, 1999

1 Retirement and Lodging Homes

2 Recreation Needs Assessment and Feasibility Study Findings and Recommendations Respecting
Five Study Areas - (Wards 2, 6, 19, 24, 25, 27 and 28)

3 Update on Workers' Information and Action Centre of Toronto

4 Toronto Integrated Solid Waste Resource Management Process Retention of MacViro Consultants Inc. and Tory Tory DesLauriers and Binnington for RFP for Proven Solid Waste Resource Diversion Services

5 IHL Proposal for Coliseum Building, National Trade Centre Complex

6 Source of Funding for Outside Consultants Required for Ontario Municipal Board Hearings

7 Emergency Repair of Exterior Brickwork at Kipling Acres Home for the Aged

8 1999 Levy on Institutions Under Subsection 157 of the Municipal Act

9 Proposed Use of Funds from OMB Settlement Concerning 1661 Queen Street East
(Cinema Development Community Improvement Donation) (Ward 26 - East Toronto)

10 Terms of Reference for the Grants Sub-Committee

11 John Street Roundhouse (222 Bremner Boulevard) (Ward 24 - Downtown)

12 Proposed Alternative Financing Feasibility Study TTC Subway Cars

13 Dundas Street West Community, Assistance to Local Residents
(Ward 21 - Davenport)

14 Appointment to Board of Toronto Hydro Corporation

15 Relocation of the Lancaster Bomber

16 Jury Recommendations from the Coroner's Inquest into the Death of Edmond Wai-Kong Yu

17 Reporting on Time-Critical Telecommunications Matters

18 Procurement Authorization - Supply and Installation of Permanent Inspection Platforms
on the Prince Edward Viaduct

19 Toronto District Heating Corporation (TDHC) Proposed Shareholder Agreement

20 Other Items Considered by the Committee

City of Toronto

REPORT No. 7

OF THE POLICY AND FINANCE COMMITTEE

(from its meeting on September 16, 1999,

submitted by Mayor Mel Lastman, Chair)

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on September 28 and 29, 1999

Retirement and Lodging Homes

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

(1) in accordance with the following recommendations of the Board of Health embodied in the communication dated September 21, 1999, from the City Clerk:

"The Board of Health recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Policy and Finance Committee, embodied in the communication (September 17, 1999) from the City Clerk, subject to:

(1) amending Recommendation No. (4) to provide that the Interdepartmental Working Group report to Council in December 1999 through the Board of Health, Community Services and Planning and Transportation Committees; and

(2) striking out Recommendation No. (6) and inserting in lieu thereof the following:

'(6) the amount of $527,500.00 be allocated for the short-term solution, with $250,000.00 to be reallocated from 1999 under expenditures and the remainder of the funds to be considered for pre-approval in the year 2000 Operating Budget, subject to a further report from the Interdepartmental Working Group;'."; and

(2) by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that the Interdepartmental Working Group be requested to add to its agenda a determination of how the housing issues faced by senior citizens fit with the Retirement Homes issue.")

The Policy and Finance Committee recommends:

(1) the adoption of the Recommendations of the Community Services Committee embodied in the communication (September 9, 1999) from the City Clerk, subject to amending Recommendation No. (6) by deleting the amount of $527,500.00 and substituting therefor the amount of $250,000.00; and

(2) the adoption of the Recommendation of the Planning and Transportation Committee embodied in the communication (September 14, 1999) from the City Clerk, wherein it is recommended that Recommendation No. (1) (a) (8) of the Community Services Committee be amended to read as follows:

"(1) (a) (8) the funding implications of a longer-term solution be subject to a report to the Policy and Finance Committee, through the Budget Advisory Committee, for consideration with the year 2000 Operating Budget process;";

so that the Recommendations now read as follows:

"It is recommended that:

(1) a Retirement and Lodging Homes Advisory Committee be established, comprised of Councillors Ootes (Deputy Mayor), Johnston (Seniors Advocate), Filion (Chair, Board of Health), Duguid (Chair, Community Services Committee), Jones (Vice-Chair, Community Services Committee), and Flint (Chair, Planning and Transportation Committee);

(2) a Retirement and Lodging Homes Action Team, led by Public Health, be established with membership from Homes for the Aged, Municipal Standards and Licensing, Fire, Ambulance, Buildings, Legal Services, Shelter Housing and Support, Toronto Police, and Social Development. This team will immediately implement a short-term action plan to address complaints and concerns from the public regarding retirement homes;

(3) the City of Toronto fully apply its existing legal powers to investigate complaints related to the health and safety of residents in retirement homes across the City;

(4) the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services and the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, in consultation with the Medical Officer of Health and City Solicitor, establish an interdepartmental working group comprised of staff from Police, Fire, Ambulance and Legal as well as other appropriate stakeholders. This working group will report back to the Retirement and Lodging Homes Advisory Committee by November 1999, and by December 1999 to the Community Services Committee and the Planning and Transportation Committee on the scope of the problem, issues related to the development and monitoring of mechanisms for ensuring quality and standards of care, and possible roles for the City, the Province and other stakeholders in this regard;

(5) this report be forwarded to the Planning and Transportation Committee and the Policy and Finance Committee;

(6) the estimated funding of $250,000.00 required for the short-term solution be absorbed in the Community and Neighbourhood Services 1999 approved Operating Budget, and that a report be submitted to the Policy and Finance Committee on the details of this expenditure, and the underexpenditures in 1999 that may be reallocated for this purpose, as part of the 1999 Operating Budget Variance reporting process;

(7) the 1999 expenditures required to immediately implement the initiatives proposed by the Retirement and Lodging Homes Action Team be approved and further that the City seek 50/50 cost-sharing from the Province of Ontario to cover these expenditures;

(8) the funding implications of a longer-term solution be subject to a report to the Policy and Finance Committee, through the Budget Advisory Committee, for consideration with the year 2000 Operating Budget process;

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

(10) that all references to the Retirement Homes Advisory Committee and the Retirement Homes Action Team, referred to in the joint report, be amended to read Retirement and Lodging Homes Advisory Committee and the Retirement and Lodging Homes Action Team respectively; and

(11) that the focus of both the Retirement and Lodging Homes Advisory Committee and the Retirement and Lodging Homes Action Team include retirement and lodging homes where personal support is being provided on site."

The Policy and Finance Committee submits the following communication (September 9, 1999) from the City Clerk:

Recommendations:

The Community Services Committee on September 9, 1999:

(i) recommended to the Policy and Finance Committee, and Council:

(a) the adoption of the attached joint report dated September 8, 1999, from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services and the Medical Officer of Health, subject to the recommendations being amended to read as follows:

"It is recommended that:

(3) the City of Toronto fully apply its existing legal powers to investigate complaints related to the health and safety of residents in retirement homes across the City;

(5) this report be forwarded to the Planning and Transportation Committee and the Policy and Finance Committee;

(6) the estimated funding of $527,500.00 required for the short-term solution be absorbed in the Community and Neighbourhood Services 1999 approved Operating Budget, and that a report be submitted to the Policy and Finance Committee on the details of this expenditure, and the underexpenditures in 1999 that may be reallocated for this purpose, as part of the 1999 Operating Budget Variance reporting process;

(8) the funding implications of a longer-term solution be subject to a report to the Policy and Finance Committee for consideration with the year 2000 Operating Budget process; and

(9) the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect hereto.";

(b) that all references to the Retirement Homes Advisory Committee and the Retirement Homes Action Team, referred to in the joint report, be amended to read Retirement and Lodging Homes Advisory Committee and the Retirement and Lodging Homes Action Team respectively; and

(c) that the focus of both the Retirement and Lodging Homes Advisory Committee and the Retirement and Lodging Homes Action Team include retirement and lodging homes where personal support is being provided on site;

(ii) directed that the Policy and Finance Committee be requested to expedite discussion of the aforementioned joint report from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services and Medical Officer of Health to ensure consideration by Council at its meeting on September 28, 1999; and

(iii) directed that the aforementioned joint report be forwarded to the September 13, 1999, meeting of the Planning and Transportation Committee for information, insofar as it pertains to municipal property standards, zoning and related issues, with a request that any comments thereon be submitted directly to the Policy and Finance Committee for its meeting on September 16, 1999.

The Medical Officer of Health gave an overhead slide presentation to the Community Services Committee on the issues with respect to retirement homes.

The Policy and Finance Committee also submits the following communication (September 14, 1999) from the City Clerk:

Recommendations:

The Planning and Transportation Committee at its meeting on September 13, 1999 endorsed the recommendations of the Community Services Committee as outlined in the attached communication (September 9, 1999) from the City Clerk, subject to amending Recommendation 1(a)(8) by adding the words "through the Budget Advisory Committee" after the words "Policy and Finance Committee", so as to read:

"1(a)(8) the funding implications of a longer-term solution be subject to a report to the Policy and Finance Committee, through the Budget Advisory Committee, for consideration with the year 2000 Operating Budget process; and"

and requested that notice of its endorsement be forwarded to the Policy and Finance Committee for consideration at its September 16, 1999 meeting.

The Planning and Transportation Committee reports, for the information of the Policy and Finance Committee, having requested the City Solicitor to report to the Planning and Transportation Committee for consideration at its next meeting on October 4, 1999 on:

(1) appropriate draft by-laws which would extend, to the newly amalgamated City of Toronto, the enforcement powers that presently exist in the former Cities of Toronto and Etobicoke with respect to the Personal Care Rooming House By-law and the Lodging Houses By-law; and

(2) the ability of the City of Toronto to extend, to the newly amalgamated City of Toronto, powers that were granted to a former municipality by way of Special Legislation, and the process for enacting such extensions.

The Planning and Transportation Committee further reports that Bob Rose, Parkdale Activity Recreation Centre, appeared before the Planning and Transportation Committee in connection with this matter.

--------

(Joint report dated September 8, 1999, addressed to the

Community Services Committee from the

Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services and

the Medical Officer of Health)

Purpose:

To outline short-term and longer-term steps that can be taken to investigate, report back on and help to address the health, social and legal issues arising from unregulated retirement homes.

Source of Funds:

Resource implications in 1999 pertain to establishment of a telephone hotline for concerned members of the public, along with the possible need to reallocate staff within a number of City divisions to handle an increased volume of complaints investigations. In the short-term, in order to take immediate action, Toronto Public Health will require $527,500.00 for 6 months (October 1, 1999 - March 31, 2000) to hire staff to cover the increased volume of site visits and to cover the expansion of a hotline for concerns regarding retirement homes. This will be absorbed in the Community and Neighbourhood Services 1999 approved Operating Budget, subject to a report to the Budget Advisory Committee on underexpenditures in 1999 that may be reallocated for this purpose, as part of the 1999 Operating Budget Variance Reporting process.

The funding implications of a longer-term solution will be subject to a report to the Budget Advisory Committee for consideration with the year 2000 Operating Budget process.

Finance staff have been consulted and concur with this approach.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) a Retirement Homes Advisory Committee be established, comprised of Councillors Ootes (Deputy Mayor), Johnston (Seniors Advocate), Filion (Chair, Board of Health), Duguid (Chair, Community Services Committee) and Flint (Chair, Planning and Transportation Committee);

(2) a Retirement Homes Action Team led by Public Health, be established with membership from Homes for the Aged, Municipal Standards and Licensing, Fire, Ambulance, Buildings, Legal Services, Shelter Housing and Support, Toronto Police, and Social Development. This team will immediately implement a short-term action plan to address complaints and concerns from the public regarding retirement homes;

(3) the City of Toronto fully apply its existing legal powers to investigate complaints related to the health and safety of residents in retirement homes across the City;

(4) the Commissioner of Community Services and the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development, in consultation with the Medical Officer of Health and City Solicitor, establish an interdepartmental working group comprised of staff from Police, Fire, Ambulance and Legal as well as other appropriate stakeholders. This working group will report back to the Retirement Homes Advisory Committee by November 1999 and by December 1999 to the Board of Health, the Community Services Committee and the Planning and Transportation Committee on the scope of the problem, issues related to the development and monitoring of mechanisms for ensuring quality and standards of care, and possible roles for the City, the Province and other stakeholders in this regard;

(5) this report be forwarded to the Planning and Transportation Committee and the Policy and Finance Committee;

(6) the estimated funding of $527,500.00 required for the short-term solution be absorbed in the Community and Neighbourhood Services 1999 approved Operating Budget, and that a report be submitted to the Budget Advisory Committee on the details of this expenditure, and the underexpenditures in 1999 that may be reallocated for this purpose, as part of the 1999 Operating Budget Variance reporting process.

(7) the funding implications of a longer-term solution be subject to a report to the Budget Advisory Committee, for consideration with the year 2000 Operating Budget process.

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

Background:

Following media attention on the welfare of residents in a particular retirement home, the Mayor requested that a Retirement Homes Action Team be established and that action be taken by city staff to ensure such problems are properly addressed. This report outlines an initial plan of action in response to that request.

Comments:

What are Retirement Homes?

Retirement homes are privately owned and operated. There are both for profit and not-for-profit facilities operating in Toronto with services ranging from minimal assistance to comprehensive health and personal services. However, residents entering such facilities are usually able to look after most of their personal care needs. Retirement homes usually have health care aides and/or nursing staff who can provide supervision with medication administration. Meals, housekeeping and recreational programs are generally included in the monthly cost. Accommodation ranges from wards to semi-private and private rooms. Most retirement homes enable extra personal care to be purchased on an hourly basis, often from an external agency. While most facilities that are termed retirement homes house seniors, there are no age restrictions for entry; persons of any age who require support may live in such a facility.

For people needing more care, a nursing home or long-term care facility is required and placement into these facilities can be done through one of the six Community Care Access Centres (CCACs) in Toronto. CCACs can allocate Home Care hours to residents living in retirement homes. Nursing homes and homes for the aged are subject to provincial regulations enacted under the 1993 Long Term Care Act.

How Many Are There?

Since the definition of a retirement home is so unclear and there is no mandatory licensing or accreditation system in place, it is not known how many retirement homes there are in the City of Toronto. Existing resource directories indicate about 73 as follows: 54 in the former City of Toronto, 6 in Etobicoke, 8 in Scarborough and 5 in North York. There are no registered retirement homes that we know of in the former Borough of East York and the former City of York.

Actual numbers may be much higher. Public Health staff estimate that the number of facilities that could fit a definition of retirement home/boarding home/lodging house (including those in the former Cities of Toronto and Etobicoke which are currently licensed) might be approximately 250 (24 in North York, 35 in East York and Scarborough, 28 in Etobicoke and York and 165 in the former City of Toronto).

Continuum of Care:

Retirement homes represent one element in the continuum of care and services which range from independent living at one end to long-term care in a Nursing Home or Home for the Aged facility at the other. They serve a population varied in both income and care needs. However, there is an acute shortage of long-term care and supportive housing beds in Toronto, combined with chronic under-supply of low-income housing. Therefore, retirement homes and related facilities (e.g., boarding homes, lodging houses) play an important role in Toronto's housing supply for low-income, vulnerable and disabled persons, including seniors.

Lack of Standards or Regulations:

There are no Provincial standards or regulations regarding retirement homes in Ontario, although they are subject to basic public health standards, fire and building regulations and local zoning restrictions. No municipal business licence is required to operate a retirement home in Toronto although some former municipalities had local by-laws covering these establishments (see below).

The Ontario Residential Care Association (ORCA) is an industry organization in which retirement homes can voluntarily become members after paying a fee and meeting certain standards. Assessment is done through a peer review accreditation system.

The issue of regulation and standards of care in retirement and rest homes is not new. The Province of Ontario, municipalities and a range of community organizations and seniors advocates have been grappling with the issue for decades. For example, in September 1987, Anne Johnston Associates presented a report to the provincial Minister of Senior Citizens Affairs outlining municipal views and concerns regarding this issue. In April 1989, the Advisory Committee on Rest Homes was established to advise the Minister of Senior Citizens Affairs on the most effective means to ensure adequate standards of care and that rest homes be subject to appropriate legislation. In May 1992, Ernie Lightman presented the report of a Commission of Inquiry into unregulated residential accommodation to the Lieutenant-Governor of the Province of Ontario. All these reports identified problems arising from the lack of regulation and standards enforcement and unclear definitions of the different care facilities.

Existing By-Laws in the City of Toronto:

There are currently two by-laws in place in the City of Toronto that could pertain to retirement homes; the Personal Care Rooming House By-Law (only in the former City of Toronto) and the Lodging Houses By-Law (only in the former City of Etobicoke). The Personal Care Rooming House By-Law outlines a set of standards pertaining to rooming houses or other buildings where people reside and where the owner provides meals and services related to health and/or personal needs. The Lodging Houses By-law requires that a licence be obtained from the Board of Health to operate a lodging house, defined as a dwelling where the proprietor supplies accommodation (with or without food and/or personal care) for more than two persons. Both by-laws were enacted as a result of human tragedy (in the former City of Toronto in the aftermath of the Rupert Hotel fire and in Etobicoke after the death of a resident of an unlicensed lodging house).

Currently City staff inspect 102 Personal Care Rooming Houses three times per year, in the former City of Toronto under the Personal Care Rooming House By-law. (It is important to note that only 11 of the 54 retirement homes that are members in ORCA are inspected within these 102 rooming houses.) In Etobicoke, staff inspect 20 lodging homes under the Lodging Homes By-Law. In addition, when a complaint is received, Public Health enters the premises (under the Health Protection and Promotion Act) to determine if a health hazard exists, as well as to determine if the premises meet the definition of the Personal Care Rooming House as outlined in the by-law. In addition, requirements under the Food Premises Regulations can be applied to premises with 10 or more residents. While on the premises, inspectors look out for other concerns including abuse, neglect and fire hazards, and potential problems are referred to other appropriate agencies such as fire, buildings, licensing, buildings, police and social services.

The chart in Appendix A describes the current regulatory and enforcement powers within the City of Toronto, broken down by former municipality. The City's levers to enforce standards in retirement homes are limited and inconsistent. With the exception of special provisions for rooming houses in the former City of Toronto, the Municipal Act currently does not permit municipal licensing of rental accommodation.

Current Retirement Home Information and Complaints Systems:

Undoubtedly many retirement homes are excellent, well-managed facilities. However some operators will need assistance in addressing the needs of their clients and in understanding and meeting their legal obligations.

There is currently no single number to call to obtain information about the full range of retirement home and nursing home options. Community Care Access Centres (CCAC's) provide comprehensive information and placement co-ordination services for Ministry of Health funded facilities and some information on other options. The Ontario Residential Care Association produces a consumer directory of retirement residences across Ontario and Esther Goldstein Associates produces a guide to retirement living in the Greater Toronto and surrounding area.

For complaints about potential elder abuse, the public can anonymously call the police-operated Crime Stoppers Line which has a service dedicated to seniors and people can also call the elder abuse hot-line operated by the police. Public Health has a hotline for complaints pertaining to smoking issues which sometimes result in actions by inspections staff. The Division also manages an AIDS hotline that has been successfully used in the past for other communicable disease issues (e.g., meningitis). Hence the technology is in place for Public Health to establish an additional hotline for complaints and concerns related to retirement homes and other unregulated facilities.

Membership and Role of the Retirement Home Advisory Committee, the Retirement Homes Action Team and the Inter-Departmental Working Group:

The Retirement Homes Advisory Committee, comprised of Councillors Ootes (Deputy Mayor), Johnston (Seniors Advocate), Filion (Chair, Board of Health), Duguid (Chair, Community Services Committee) and Flint (Chair, Planning and Transportation Committee) will provide advice and direction to the Retirement Homes Action Team and to the Inter-Departmental Working Group, to ensure that the City takes action on issues pertaining to retirement homes.

Immediate Strategy:

The Retirement Homes Action Team, led by the Medical Officer of Health, will include staff representatives of Public Health, Social Development, Homes for the Aged, Ambulance, Planning, Legal, Police, Fire and Buildings. The team will immediately establish an interim expanded system for complaints investigations and enforcement of the limited City powers that exist at this time.

A key first step will be a hot-line for people to call with their concerns pertaining to suspected abuse in facilities. The capacity of an existing Public Health hotline will be expanded to accomplish this task. Experience in the former Cities of Etobicoke and Toronto indicate that the initial volume of calls will be high. The interim hotline service will need to be promoted through local media and agencies working with seniors and other people requiring support in daily living as well as referral agencies. The expected additional costs for this will be a one-time cost of $40,000.00 to promote the line and three staff counsellors for a period of six months at a cost of $97,500.00. It is expected that after six months this service could be covered by 1 FTE at a total annualized cost of $65,000.00 once the initial volume of calls is reduced.

Additional public health inspectors will also be hired to undertake the increased demand stemming from the hotline calls and act on the City's ability to utilize existing mechanisms to enhance inspection. Should the City choose to immediately expand the former Toronto by-law City-wide using Section 104 of the Municipal Act, it is estimated that about 250 establishments will need to be inspected. At an estimated 1 FTE for 20 facilities (including inspection, public health nurses and administration), this would require 12 additional Public Health FTE's for six months at a cost of $390,000.00.

Municipal Standards inspectors will be assigned to the team to address property standards and related by-law issues. This will be done from within existing resources. Property standards by-laws are different in each of the former municipalities. A draft harmonized property standards by-law has been developed and will be sent to the Planning and Transportation Committee and City of Toronto Council for review this fall.

The Retirement Homes Action Team will report to the Advisory Committee on their progress on an ongoing basis and as part of the staff working group final report in November of 1999.

Long-Term:

The Inter-Departmental Working Group co-ordinated by the Commissioners of Community and Neighbourhood Services and Urban Planning and Development Services, in consultation with the Medical Officer of Health, police, fire, ambulance and legal services will co-ordinate the necessary research and planning for the longer-term, and consult with key stakeholders to accomplish their task. The City's longer-term direction regarding retirement homes will complement the immediate strategies such as the complaints hotline developed by the Retirement Homes Action Team. The Inter-Departmental Working Group will work with the Retirement Homes Advisory Committee to develop a balanced approach that protects residents while ensuring that this type of housing can continue to exist.

Specifically the working group will:

(1) assess the scope of the problem and clarify definitions;

(2) determine how retirement home issues fit with other long-term care issues faced by seniors and other people requiring supports for daily living;

(3) clarify appropriate roles for the different levels of government and the private sector;

(4) develop options for establishing appropriate mechanisms for supporting quality and standards of care and propose strategies for action;

(5) propose an effective public information system (to field complaints and to obtain information about accommodation options for people requiring personal care support);

(6) assess the impact of proposed strategies on the service and support system as a whole; and

(7) define and implement an effective consultation process with key community stakeholders and the Province of Ontario.

After developing their recommendations, the Inter-Departmental Working Group should negotiate transfer of lead roles to appropriate agencies for implementation.

The Inter-Departmental Working Group will present their final report to the Advisory Committee in November, 1999 and thereafter to the Board of Health and Community Services Committee.

To be effective, it is essential that the advisory committee, the action team and the working group collaborate with key community service providers and seniors advocates who have considerable experience in this issue. In addition, it is essential that the city give close consideration to the appropriate municipal and provincial roles in any proposals for future direction. The City of Toronto is pleased that the Province of Ontario is in the process of looking into the problem of lack of standards and accreditation for retirement homes.

Conclusion:

This report outlines short-term and longer-term actions to resolve the issue of how to ensure adequate standards in retirement homes. It must be stressed that there are many complex policy issues underlying the chronic lack of mandatory standards and regulations in this sector, and that the Province, the private sector and key community stakeholders are essential players in their development. As a first step, City staff will support concerned members of the public by investigating complaints arising from these establishments and by outlining a plan of action for consideration by the Board of Health and City Council.

Contact:

Dr. Sheela Basrur, Medical Officer of Health, Toronto Public Health, Tel: 392-7402;

Fax: 392-0713.

--------

Appendix A

Retirement Homes: Tools for Enforcement

Tools for Enforcement:

Municipal

East York

Etobicoke

North York

Scarborough

Toronto

York

Municipal Code

Retirement

Homes not

covered

Retirement

Home Standards

Covered in

Lodging

Houses

by-law

(chapt.168)

Public health enforces

Retirement

Homes not

covered

Retirement

Homes not

covered

Retirement

Home Standards

Covered in

Personal Care-Rooming

Houses

by-law

(chapt. 285)

Public health enforces

Retirement

Homes not

covered

Property Standards

By-law

Yes

Not

harmonized

Yes

Not harmonized

Yes

Not

harmonized

Yes

Not

harmonized

Yes

Not

Harmonized

Yes

Not

harmonized

Zoning

Yes

Not

harmonized

Yes

Not harmonized

Yes

Not

harmonized

Yes

Not

harmonized

Yes

Not

Harmonized

Yes

Not

harmonized

Licensing

Retirement

Homes

Not licensed

Retirement

Homes

Licensed by Board of Health

Retirement

Homes

Not licensed

Retirement

Homes

Not licensed

Retirement

Homes

Not licensed

Retirement

Homes

Not licensed

Tools for enforcement: Provincial
Ontario Building Code	Applies City-wide. Buildings Department can inspect retirement homes and enforce code.
Ontario Fire Code	Applies City-wide. Fire Department can inspect retirement homes and enforce maintenance sections of code. Retrofit sections may be enforced with caution.
Health Protection and Promotion Act	Applies City-wide. Toronto Public Health can inspect boarding homes and lodging houses to prevent, eliminate or decrease health hazards.
Food Premises Regulation	Applies City-wide. Toronto Public Health can inspect and enforce food safety standards in facilities with 10 or more residents

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (September 21, 1999) from the Secretary, Board of Health:

Recommendations:

The Board of Health recommends the adoption of the recommendations of the Policy and Finance Committee, embodied in the communication (September 17, 1999) from the City Clerk, subject to:

(2) striking out Recommendation No. (6) and inserting in lieu thereof the following:

"(6) the amount of $527,500.00 be allocated for the short-term solution, with $250,000.00 to be reallocated from 1999 under expenditures and the remainder of the funds to be considered for pre-approval in the year 2000 Operating Budget, subject to a further report from the Interdepartmental Working Group".

The Board of Health reports, for the information of Council, having referred the report dated September 1987, entitled "The Regulation of Standards of Care in Rest Homes and Retirement Homes - A Study of Municipal Views and Concerns", by Anne Johnston Associates, to the Retirement and Lodging Homes Advisory Committee and Action Team.

Background:

The Board of Health on September 21, 1999, had before it a joint report (September 8, 1999) from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services and the Medical Officer of Health respecting short-term and longer-term steps that can be taken to investigate, report back on and help to address the health, social and legal issues arising from unregulated retirement homes; and recommending that:

(1) a Retirement Homes Advisory Committee be established, comprised of Councillors Ootes (Deputy Mayor), Johnston (Seniors Advocate), Filion (Chair, Board of Health), Duguid (Chair Community Services Committee) and Flint (Chair Planning and Transportation Committee);

(2) a Retirement Homes Action Team led by Public Health, be established with membership from Homes for the Aged, Municipal Standards and Licensing, Fire, Ambulance, Buildings, Legal Services, Shelter Housing and Support and Toronto Police and Social Development. This team will immediately implement a short-term action plan to address complaints and concerns from the public regarding retirement homes;

(3) the City of Toronto fully apply its existing legal powers to investigate complaints related to the health and safety of residents in retirement homes across the City;

(4) the Commissioner of Community Services and the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development, in consultation with the Medical Officer of Health and City Solicitor, establish an interdepartmental working group comprised of staff from Police, Fire, Ambulance and Legal as well as other appropriate stakeholders. This working group will report back to the Retirement Homes Advisory Committee by November 1999, and by December 1999 to the Board of Health, the Community Services Committee and the Planning and Transportation Committee, on the scope of the problem, issues related to the development and monitoring of mechanisms for ensuring quality and standards of care, and possible roles for the City, the Province and other stakeholders in this regard;

(5) this report be forwarded to the Planning and Transportation Committee and the Policy and Finance Committee;

(6) the estimated funding of $527,500.00 required for the short-term solution be absorbed in the Community and Neighbourhood Services 1999 approved Operating Budget, and that a report be submitted to the Budget Committee on the details of this expenditure, and the under expenditures in 1999 that may be reallocated for this purpose, as part of the 1999 Operating Budget Variance Reporting process;

(7) the funding implications of a longer-term solution be subject to a report to the Budget Committee, for consideration with the year 2000 Operating Budget process; and

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

The Board of Health also had before it a communication (September 9, 1999) from the City Clerk advising that the Community Services Committee on September 9, 1999, recommended to the Policy and Finance Committee, and Council, adoption of the joint report dated September 8, 1999, from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services and Medical Officer of Health respecting retirement and lodging homes, subject to amending the recommendations as outlined therein.

The Board of Health also had before it a communication September 17, 1999) from the City Clerk advising that the Policy and Finance Committee on September 16, 1999, recommended to City Council:

(2) the adoption of the Recommendation of the Planning and Transportation Committee embodied in the communication (September 14, 1999) from the City Clerk, wherein it is recommended that the following Recommendation No. (1) (a) (8) of the Community Services Committee be amended to read as follows:

so that the Recommendations now read as follows:

"It is recommended that:

(3) the City of Toronto fully apply its existing legal powers to investigate complaints related to the health and safety of residents in retirement homes across the City;

(5) this report be forwarded to the Planning and Transportation Committee and the Policy and Finance Committee;

(8) the funding implications of a longer-term solution be subject to a report to the Policy and Finance Committee , through the Budget Advisory Committee, for consideration with the year 2000 Operating Budget process;

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

The Board of Health also had before it report dated September 1987, entitled "The Regulation of Standards of Care in Rest Homes and Retirement Homes - A Study of Municipal Views and Concerns", by Anne Johnston Associates.

Dr. Sheela V. Basrur, Medical Officer of Health, gave a presentation to the Board of Health in connection with the foregoing matter, and submitted a copy of her presentation.)

Recreation Needs Assessment and Feasibility

Study Findings and Recommendations Respecting

Five Study Areas - (Wards 2, 6, 19, 24, 25, 27 and 28)

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

(1) inserting in Recommendation No. (1) of the Policy and Finance Committee, after the words "in principle", the words "save and except the estimated cost outlined therein", so that such recommendation shall now read as follows:

"(1) the adoption, in principle, save and except the estimated cost outlined therein, of the report (August 23, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism;";

(2) striking out Recommendation No. (2) of the Policy and Finance Committee and inserting in lieu thereof the following:

"(2) that Capital financing for these recreation facilities be reported as part of the 1999/2000 budget process and include a Capital plan for 1999 to 2004.";

(3) adding to Recommendation No. (3) of the Policy and Finance Committee the words "such report to be submitted to Council for its meeting to be held in December 1999", so that such recommendation shall now read as follows:

"(3) that the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism be requested to submit a report thereon to the Economic Development and Parks Committee at the same time that he is reporting on a fund-raising policy for the City of Toronto, such report to be submitted to Council for its meeting to be held in December 1999;"; and

(4) adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that:

(a) the first stage of the interim plan, i.e. the provision assessment study, be given consideration by Council no later than January 1, 2000, through the appropriate Standing Committees;

(b) this review highlight not only the disparity of services City-wide, but also include a review of the differences in policies among the recreation centres and programs City-wide, with a view to developing an overall City recreation philosophy;

(c) the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism be requested to submit a report to the Budget Advisory Committee, for consideration with this matter during the budget process, outlining details of community centres that have been built in the last ten years, the size of such centres, the amenities contained in each centre and the actual cost to build each centre; and

(d) the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism be requested to submit a report to the Economic Development and Parks Committee on the needs assessment process to be followed for new facilities.")

The Policy and Finance Committee recommends:

(1) the adoption, in principle, of the report (August 23, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism;

(2) that this matter be forwarded to the Budget Advisory Committee for consideration during the budget process; and

(3) that the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism be requested to submit a report thereon to the Economic Development and Parks Committee at the same time that he is reporting on a fund raising policy for the City of Toronto.

The Policy and Finance Committee reports, for the information of Council, having received the communication (September 14, 1999) from the City Clerk, forwarding the recommendation of the Economic Development and Parks Committee respecting this matter.

The Policy and Finance Committee submits the following report (August 23, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism:

Purpose:

To report on the objectives, approach and findings of a needs assessment and feasibility study (draft final stage) for proposed indoor recreation facilities in five areas of the city (South Etobicoke, Western North York, York, Parkdale and St. James Town).

Financial Implications:

There are financial implications associated with the Parks and Recreation Capital Program and associated ongoing operational costs resulting from the implementation of any of the proposed facilities.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the findings of the needs assessment and recreation study, as contained in the draft final study report and as outlined in this report, for the areas of South Etobicoke, Western North York, York, Parkdale, and St. James Town be received;

(2) staff be directed to report back to the Economic Development and Parks Committee following the public meetings anticipated to be held in each of the study areas in October; and

(3) the guidelines outlined in this report for structuring the inclusion of the proposed facilities in the Parks and Recreation Capital Program be considered by Council.

Council Reference:

At its meeting of April 29, 1998, Council approved the 1998 Parks and Recreation Capital Program which, among other things, included funding for a needs study for recreation centres in the South Etobicoke, Western North York, and York.

Early in 1999, Council adopted recommendations from the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee requesting a report on:

(1) how the St. James Town project will be accommodated in the Parks and Recreation Five-year Capital Works Plan, in time for inclusion in the 2000-2004 capital program; and

(2) the priority ranking of the proposed St. James Town project as part of the forthcoming needs assessment study.

Discussion:

The purpose of the study was to conduct a needs assessment and feasibility study for recreation facilities for each of South Etobicoke, Western North York, and York. Work on these three areas commenced in late 1998. As work was underway by the consulting team for these three areas, it was decided that two other proposed recreation centres (St. James Town and Parkdale) should be studied in a comparable manner. Consequently, the work program for the initial three study areas was expanded to include St. James Town and Parkdale.

Each of the five study areas-South Etobicoke, Western North York, York, Parkdale, and St. James Town - has been the subject of earlier studies and/or proposals for recreation facilities prior to amalgamation. The previous studies for these different areas varied in content, scope and currency. Attachment No. 1 shows the study areas.

Study Approach:

The study was conducted in two phases: a Phase One recreation needs assessment and a Phase Two feasibility component. The objective of Phase One was to assess, in a consistent manner, the need for major indoor recreation facilities in each study area. The objective of Phase Two was to establish a preliminary design program, site selection (where necessary), the recommendation of relative priorities amongst the various proposed facilities, cost projections and implementation considerations.

Phase One data gathering focused on three principal areas: demographics, facility inventory information and community input. While the primary approach centered on quantitative methods of data collection, it was enhanced by qualitative data. In particular, community input provided through key informant interviews and focus groups helped establish the unique characteristics of each study area. Community input was also obtained through a community survey and user group questionnaires. Social and leisure trends affecting the participation in and delivery of leisure services and facilities were also examined.

The Phase One needs assessment investigated the need for new or improved major indoor recreation facilities in each of the study areas based on the following considerations:

(i) the current and future socio-demographic profile of the communities;

(ii) the current supply and use of recreation facilities serving the study area;

(iii) the public's perception of the need for facilities as expressed in random sample surveys of community residents, focus groups with individual and community agencies, questionnaires returned by cultural and recreational user groups, key informant interviews and public meetings;

(iv) leisure trends; and

(v) the results of previous studies dealing with leisure needs in each study area.

As indicated earlier, Phase Two of the study involved the establishment of a preliminary design program, site selection (where necessary), prioritization of facilities, and capital and operating cost projections.

The preliminary design program and cost projections for the recommended facilities are set out below in the section on study findings.

Where necessary, site selection activities were undertaken in Phase Two. St. James Town and Parkdale had previously identified sites, so they were not the subjects of site selection. In South Etobicoke, the former City of Etobicoke and the separate school board purchased adjacent properties on the former Lakeshore Psychiatric Hospital grounds in anticipation of a potential joint development and facility partnership. This site was, therefore, identified prior to the study.

Site selection was pursued in a two-step approach. The initial step was a site screening process where sites that did not meet a number of minimum criteria (size available for development, planning constraints, services, zoning) were rejected. The second step involved a comparative evaluation of the remaining sites based on more detailed criteria (e.g., size, access, ownership, compatibility with other uses in area, etc.). The objective of the site selection process was to identify and recommend preferred sites for the proposed facilities. Final site selection will require additional site specific investigations and consideration of the need to purchase preferred sites not owned by the City.

The other major component of Phase Two was to identify the relative priority of the recommended recreation facilities. The identification of priorities was based on study areas, not identified facility requirements. The priority setting exercise was based on several main criteria areas: supply and availability of facilities, perceived need for facilities and interest in additional participation, "high needs" residents, and population and housing density. Each of the criteria areas had specific measures that were used as a basis for scoring points in the priority exercise.

In summary, the study approach was to focus on the supply and need for facilities in each of the study areas. Given the need to provide an indication of relative priority amongst the study areas, a consistent methodology and approach was used.

While the study approach provides a very good understanding of recreation facility needs in each area, the study did not have the benefit of a citywide framework and policies on the delivery of leisure services and facilities. The different municipalities that now make up the City of Toronto had different approaches, practices and resources that affected service and facility provision; a consistent approach to service and facility provision for the entire city needs to be developed and that work will provide important context for the findings of this study.

Furthermore, the role of school board facilities in meeting community recreation needs is subject to change as a result of revisions to school funding formulas. This may result in school closures and/or significant increases in the cost of using these facilities. At this time the impact of these changes is not entirely known.

Study Findings:

Needs Assessment:

At this point, the needs assessment (Phase One) has been completed and the feasibility component (Phase Two) has been completed to the draft final stage. The methods and findings of the needs assessment were presented in a series of public meetings in June, 1999. The work program for the study includes public meetings in each of the study areas to present and discuss the findings of the overall study.

In four of the study areas, the need for a major community centre with a 25-metre indoor pool, gymnasium and multi-purpose space was identified. In South Etobicoke, the remaining study area, the development of a gymnasium and multipurpose space in partnership with the separate school board was supported as an immediate need with the redevelopment of existing aquatic facilities elsewhere in the study area recommended as a future project. The key findings of the needs assessment for each study area are summarized in Attachment No. 2.

Facility Components and Estimated Costs:

The recommended facility mix for four of the areas includes a 25-metre indoor pool, regulation-size gymnasium and multi-purpose space. This is anticipated to require a recreation centre of approximately 62,265 square feet. Based on this facility mix and space requirements, the preliminary capital cost estimate identified in the study is $13,530,000.00, which includes building construction, an allowance for site development, contingencies, equipment and furnishings and other related construction costs.

The base capital cost estimate does not include allowance for an elevator or for underground parking. Given the size of the St. James Town and Parkdale sites, it is conceivable that two storey construction and/or underground parking would be required. Detailed estimates of these potential costs require additional site specific information.

Based on the capital cost estimates identified in the study and the potential for additional development costs, it would be reasonable to assume a project cost in the range of $15,000,000.00 for each of the proposed major centres. This does not include land costs or the cost of dealing with any exceptional site conditions.

The annual operating cost for the type of facility recommended for four of the study areas is approximately $850,000.00, based on a blend of full and part-time staff, materials, utilities, etc., observed at comparable facilities. Revenues are not included, as this is expected to vary depending on the City's pricing policy.

In some cases, particularly St. James Town, other community services (e.g., library) have been identified as part of the proposed centre. These components would add to the space requirements, however, it is assumed that other services would contribute to the development and operation of the proposed facility on a proportionate basis.

For South Etobicoke, where the immediate need is considered to be the gymnasium and multi-purpose space to be developed in conjunction with the separate board, the capital cost is estimated to be $3,000,000.00, excluding site development and contingencies.

Site Selection:

Both St. James Town and Parkdale had sites for new community centres identified previous to the study, and these sites were accepted as generally suitable for the type of facility that resulted from the needs assessment.

The needs assessment finding for South Etobicoke was a gymnasium and multi-purpose space, which could be developed in conjunction with a new secondary school proposed for the former Lakeshore Psychiatric Hospital grounds. The former City of Etobicoke had acquired property adjacent to the school site in anticipation of a possible partnership; hence site selection activity was more limited for this study area.

Sites considered for Western North York were Pelmo Park, Downsview Arena, St. Basil's North Campus (3100 Weston Road) and St. Basil's South Campus (24 Strathburn Boulevard). The preferred site is St. Basil's North Campus, despite the fact that this site is not owned by the city.

Sites considered for York were Fairbank Park, Cedarvale Park, Black Creek Drive and Eglinton Avenue, Rockcliffe and the Civic Centre. The preferred site is a property owned by the province on the southeast corner of Black Creek Drive and Eglinton Avenue.

Priority Setting:

One of the study requirements was to recommend the relative priority of the projects recommended for the study areas. The distinction between the needs assessment findings and the identification of priorities should be noted. The needs assessment phase of the study identified facilities that would, if provided, be well used by residents. Identifying priorities helps with capital planning, although other factors (such as the need to acquire land for preferred sites or particular opportunities to partner with other services and agencies) also need to be considered.

Based on the priority setting method developed as part of the study, the relative priority of the study areas is as follows:

(a) St. James Town;

(b) York;

(d) Parkdale; and

(e) South Etobicoke.

In terms of scoring, St. James Town was the highest priority by a considerable margin. York, Western North York and Parkdale were more closely ranked. South Etobicoke was somewhat below the middle three study areas.

The relative priorities were developed in the study to assist with capital planning. Each of the study areas has a set of particular circumstances and opportunities that must also be considered in any capital planning and decisions. The main ones for each study area are set out in point form as follows:

(a) St. James Town

(i) the loss of the Rose Avenue facility as the school board requires the use of this space in its facility;

(ii) the Library Board's plans to develop a community branch component within the proposed centre; and

(iii) the opportunity for the Toronto Parking Authority and other infrastructure and utility providers to participate in the project.

(b) York

(i) the need to assess timing and cost of acquiring preferred site (Black Creek and Eglinton);

(ii) the opportunity to consider facility opportunities at alternate sites (e.g., use and constraints of the York Civic Center location, including the possibility of cooperating with school board on its adjacent property and facility); and

(iii) the need to assess other open space and outdoor recreation facility needs in the York area.

(i) the need to assess timing and cost of acquiring preferred site (St. Basil's North Campus); and

(ii) the opportunity to consider use of vacant former secondary school facilities on the preferred site.

(d) Parkdale

(i) the existing city-owned site for the proposed facility is leased until the end of 2000 to the previous owner; and

(ii) the site requires demolition of building and clean up.

(e) South Etobicoke

(i) the opportunity to develop a facility with the Separate School Board on the site at the same time provides economies on facility development and greater use potential for both parties;

(ii) the implications of not proceeding on this site in conjunction with the School Board (the School Board would have the opportunity to purchase property from City on which to construct its new high school if the City declares that it would not be constructing some form of recreation centre in conjunction with the high school, as per OMB decision); and

(iii) the opportunities in the long and short term to improve or replace existing facilities in South Etobicoke .

Service and Planning Context:

Given that all of the study areas were historically considered, to some degree, as under serviced areas within their former municipalities, it is not surprising that significant facility needs were identified in each of the study areas. Development of any of the proposed facilities would constitute improvements to existing service levels. The degree of service level improvement to existing residents in each area would be offset by anticipated population growth in and around each study area.

The recommended facilities for four of the study areas can be considered as "major recreation centres" in that they are composed of several facility components and would be, in terms of gross floor area, at the upper end of the range of community and recreation centres provided elsewhere in the city.

As mentioned in the section on study approach, the focus of the study was principally on the individual study areas. For certain aspects (such as the supply of recreation facilities) the area surrounding each study area was also included in the analysis. Although not expressly studied, it is likely that the proposed facilities would draw at least some patrons from beyond a given study area.

While the study is conclusive about service needs, recommended facility types, and the relative priorities of each of the study areas, it is important to note that these findings do not have the benefit of a city-wide context or long-term plan for major recreation centres and facilities.

At present, staff are working on a citywide provision assessment of major recreation facilities. This work will analyze the provision and distribution of facilities, develop and apply analytical frameworks for identifying gaps and overlaps in facility provision, and identify directions for future facility planning and provision. At the initial stage, the emphasis is on understanding provision patterns, including differences in facility type, level and distribution on a citywide basis. More specifically, the provision assessment study will identify service gaps and priority areas for major indoor facilities and centres based on a review of existing and committed facility provision. Growth areas in the city, e.g., as indicated by population projections and designations in the new Official Plan, will also have to be included in the analysis of where the City should be considering its level of service for recreation facilities.

Once there is a better indication of provision types, patterns and gaps for this category of facility, a more detailed planning process involving needs research and consultation will be developed to produce a long-term plan for major indoor recreation facilities. It is anticipated the first stage of this work, the provision assessment study, will be completed at the end of this year.

It is also important to consider the proposed facilities within the context of maintaining the existing recreation facilities and services, of which the city has a significant inventory. The concern here is the "state of good repair" and conservation of existing infrastructure. Variation in practices and standards of "good repair" between the different municipalities require that this aspect of the city's facility expenditures be studied and quantified before additional significant facilities are undertaken. Again, this is the subject of research and the development of a long term plan to ensure appropriate capital resources are budgeted to keep existing facilities in good repair and maximize their service potential.

A stringent approach would suggest not proceeding on any projects until the full facility service context and long-term plans are established, including capital conservation and "good repair". At that point, the City would be able to determine citywide service requirements and its financial capacity to provide additional facilities where most needed. While that would not be an unreasonable approach, it imposes the hardship of delay, particularly on those communities with the highest relative priorities.

A more flexible, but still cautious, approach would be to proceed with facility planning and development for the highest priority areas and/or those with a specific opportunity for a favourable partnership. This would allow for the study areas with a lower priority to be reviewed in a broader context. The capital program could reflect these proposed facilities, however, additions and adjustments would be made as long term planning indicates citywide priorities for other new service facilities and other capital requirements (such as capital conservation).

Implications for Parks and Recreation Capital Program:

The assumed project costs ($15,000,000.00 for each of the four major centres and $3,000,000.00 for the South Etobicoke facility) would require a phased, multi-year approach in the Capital Budget Program.

Based on the foregoing comments, and keeping in mind that the study is in draft final form and subject to revision based on the anticipated public meetings in each study area, the following guidelines are proposed for using the study findings to assist in structuring the Parks and Recreation Capital Program:

(a) the highest priority area (St. James Town) be indicated as early as possible in the five year program;

(b) the facilities recommended to be developed in conjunction with the separate school board in South Etobicoke be indicated in the program in conjunction with the projected development of the school facility (anticipated to open in 2001);

(c) the proposed facilities for the York, Western North York and Parkdale study areas be included as projects in the program in order of relative priority and subject to revision based on longer term planning for other recreation facilities or capital requirements;

(d) sites required for facility development in York and Western North York be identified and included in the relevant capital program; and

(e) in anticipation of the existing tenant vacating the city-owned site proposed for the Parkdale facility, funding should be provided to plan and implement building demolition and site clean up in a manner that is compatible with the adjacent parklands and the potential for a recreation facility.

The facility types, cost and priorities identified in the draft final report will be used as input to our department's capital program submission. The guidelines outlined above will be used to structure the department's program submission in the interim, however, Committee and Council will be asked to consider the general approach.

Conclusion:

One public meeting in each of the five study areas is anticipated to be held in October 1999, to present the findings in the draft final study report to the public and interested groups and to solicit comments. Comments received will be considered in preparing the final report.

Staff will report back to Council at that time, taking into consideration any comments from the public and from Council. Council will then be in a better position to assess more fully the recommended relative priorities of the five study areas and options for providing the facilities identified in the study in the next capital program.

Contact Names:

Mr. Frank Kershaw, Tel: 392-8199; Mr. Brian Rutherford, Tel: 392-8179, Mr. Mark Edelman,

Tel: 392-0094.

Insert Table/Map No. 1

attachment # 1

Insert Table/Map No. 2

attachment # 2

The Policy and Finance Committee submits the following communication (September 14, 1999) from the City Clerk:

Recommendation:

The Economic Development and Parks Committee recommends to the Policy and Finance Committee, and Council, the adoption of the report (August 23, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, subject to deleting the word "considered" in Recommendation No. (3) and inserting in lieu thereof the word "approved", so that such Recommendation now reads:

"(3) the guidelines outlined in this report for structuring the inclusion of the proposed facilities in the Parks and Recreation Capital Program be approved by Council."

The Economic Development and Parks Committee reports, for the information of the Policy and Finance Committee, and Council, having requested the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism:

(1) to report directly to City Council for its meeting of September 28, 1999, on the cost of securing, for public use, the St. Basil's North Campus site (3100 Weston Road) through a long-term lease and/or other arrangement; and

(2) to include in the final needs assessment and feasibility study the following as it relates to South Etobicoke:

(a) funding required for the potential replacement of the pool and health club at the Gus Ryder facility;

(b) the inclusion of the Toronto School Board and the Lakeshore Lion's club in the process;

(c) that the gymnasium be a joint venture with the Separate School Board, noting that the said School Board is submitting a site plan in the Year 2000 for a new facility, and that this project be considered for inclusion in the Year 2000 and 2001 Capital Budget process; and

(d) review a possible merger of the programs and activities of the Horner Avenue Seniors Centre and the Franklin Horner Community Centre and identify the City's ability to secure a long term lease with the Toronto District School Board for the continuation of the programs at the Franklin Horner Community Centre.

Background:

The Economic Development and Parks Committee on September 13, 1999, had before it a report (August 23, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, reporting on the objectives, approach and findings of a needs assessment and feasibility study (draft final stage) for proposed indoor recreation facilities in five areas of the city (South Etobicoke, Western North York, York, Parkdale and St. James Town); and recommending that:

(1) the findings of the needs assessment and recreation study, as contained in the draft final study report and outlined in this report, for the areas of South Etobicoke, Western North York, York, Parkdale, and St. James Town be received;

(2) staff be directed to report back to the Economic Development and Parks Committee following the public meetings anticipated to be held in each of the study areas in October; and

(3) the guidelines outlined in this report for structuring the inclusion of the proposed facilities in the Parks and Recreation Capital Program be considered by Council.

The following Members of Council appeared before the Economic Development and Parks Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

- Councillor Irene Jones, Lakeshore-Queensway;

- Councillor Chris Korwin-Kuczynski, High Park;

- Councillor Pam McConnell, Don River;

- Councillor Joe Mihevc, York Eglinton; and

- Councillor Kyle Rae, Downtown.

--------

The following Members of Council appeared before the Policy and Finance Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

- Councillor Irene Jones, Lakeshore Queensway;

- Councillor Pam McConnell, Don River; and

- Councillor Chris Korwin-Kuczynski, High Park.

Update on Workers' Information and

Action Centre of Toronto

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

The Policy and Finance Committee recommends the adoption of the report (August 31, 1999) from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services.

The Policy and Finance Committee reports, for the information of Council, having referred the following motion to the Workers' Information and Action Centre of Toronto Advisory Committee, Councillor Brian Ashton, Councillor Elizabeth Brown, Councillor Chris Korwin-Kuczynski and Councillor David Miller, for a report thereon to the Budget Advisory Committee in time for the Year 2000 Operating Budget:

Moved by Councillor Jakobek:

"That the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services be requested to take the necessary actions to ensure that the Workers' Information and Action Centre of Toronto is no longer considered a City agency to enable the organization eligibility for Federal/Provincial funding."

The Policy and Finance Committee submits the following report (August 31, 1999) from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services:

Purpose:

This report is requesting authorization for continued funding of the Workers' Information and Action Centre of Toronto(WIACT) to December 31, 1999, in order to complete a review of WIACT requested by City Council.

Financial Implications:

Should the recommendation contained in this report be adopted by Council, there will be no increase to the City's 1999 budget. There are sufficient funds in the Social Services Division's 1999 budget to provide for the additional $91,666.00 required to continue WIACT's operations until December 31, 1999.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the Workers' Information and Action Centre of Toronto continue until December 31, 1999, and that the required $91,666.00 be allocated from the approved 1999 budget of the Social Services Division; and

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

Background:

The former City of Toronto approved the establishment of the Workers' Information and Action Centre of Toronto (WIACT) in 1990. The Centre offers a variety of direct services to low income individuals experiencing workplace problems and issues. The Centre also performs a public education, advocacy and community outreach function related to employment issues facing this target group, as well as undertaking research and policy work focussing on labour market adjustment issues.

As part of the 1999 budget process, underpinned by an emphasis on maintaining core City functions in a fiscally constrained environment, the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) recommended that WIACT be discontinued. At the April, 1999 Community and Neighbourhood Services Committee meeting, there were a large number of deputations in response to this budget recommendation. It was agreed that before any final decision on WIACT was made, the Commissioner would undertake an investigation of WIACT's functions and responsibilities. During the review, staff were directed to consult with WIACT's advisory committee and a group of four Councillors selected to participate in the process.

Ultimately, City Council (Strategic Planning and Priorities Committee, Report No. 8, Clause No.18) recommended that "The City funding of Workers' Information and Action Centre of Toronto (WIACT) continue until September, 1999, and that the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services make all efforts with the Federation of Labour and WIACT to attempt to obtain Provincial/Federal funding and that a report be submitted to City Council in September; and the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services be requested to review this unit (WIACT) as to where it should be located."

Discussion:

Consistent with Council's direction, Community and Neighbourhood Services, with support from the CAO's office, initiated a review of WIACT in May 1999 and subsequently completed a "draft"Council report.

In preparing this report, Community and Neighbourhood Services examined the role and mandate of WIACT. In its review a number of options were considered, including:

(1) establishing WIACT, with its existing functions and services, in the community as a not for profit agency funded by the three levels of government;

(2) locating WIACT, with reduced functions, appropriately within the City's structure; and

(3) eliminating City funding for WIACT, as a result of determining that there are existing similar services already provided in the community.

The review itself encompassed three distinct activities. First, based on an inventory of the Centre's specific functions and services, organizations and agencies providing similar services or performing similar functions were identified. Second, meetings were held with potential funders from senior levels of government to seek alternative funding sources. Wherever possible, WIACT Advisory Committee members and senior staff participated in the discussions. Finally, discussions were held between the Commissioners of Community and Neighbourhood Services and Economic Development and Culture regarding the location of certain functions of WIACT within the latter Department.

The report's findings and recommendations were reviewed at a joint meeting of Councillors Miller and Ashton, staff from Community and Neighbourhood Services (C&NS), Economic Development and Culture (ED&C), and WIACT's Advisory Committee, held on July 29, 1999. The report, in general, recommended that the Unit as a whole, with its current functions, did not meet the City's core responsibilities. However, the report suggested that the Unit's research and policy capacity would complement Economic Development and Culture Department's mandate and should be added to the Department's existing research capacity. WIACT's other functions-information, referral and education-should be considered, with equal funding from other senior level governments, as a service to be provided by eligible community agencies or organizations.

At this meeting, the report was received by WIACT's Advisory Committee and Councillors Ashton and Miller who recommended that additional time was necessary for all stakeholders to fully analyse the "draft" Council report's contents and provide recommendations to the report.

As a result, further discussions have been scheduled with staff from C&NS and ED&C, members of the Advisory Committee, and other interested community representatives to review the "draft" Council report. A final report is scheduled for November, 1999 Community Services Committee meeting and subsequently for Council's consideration. This process will allow for any final community stakeholders input.

Conclusion:

In accordance with Council direction, a "draft" Council report has been discussed with Councillors Miller and Ashton, members of WIACT's Advisory Committee and staff from C&NS and ED&C. At the meeting with the above noted individuals, it was agreed that additional time was necessary to review contents of the "draft" Council report with community stakeholders and to allow for their input to a final report.

Based on these developments, and the extended time frame for the completion of the review, continued funding beyond the initial scheduled date of September, 1999, to the end of December, 1999, is necessary. The additional funding of $91,666.00 for this period will come from existing Social Services Division's 1999 budget.

Contact Names:

Heather MacVicar, General Manager, 392-8952.

The Policy and Finance Committee also submits the following communication (September 15, 1999) from Ms. Anne Dubas, President, Local 79, Canadian Union of Public Employees:

This report recommends additional funding in order to continue the operations of the Workers' Information and Action Centre of Toronto (WIACT) until December 31, 1999.

A draft report about the future of WIACT is currently the subject of a community consultation. Local 79 strongly believes that the Centre must be retained. It is a unique resource and voice for working people at City Hall.

Local 79 urges this Committee to support the extension of the WIACT's funding.

________

The following Members of Council appeared before the Policy and Finance Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

- Councillor Brian Ashton, Scarborough Bluffs;

- Councillor Chris Korwin-Kuczynski, High Park; and

- Councillor David Miller, High Park.

Toronto Integrated Solid Waste Resource Management Process

Retention of MacViro Consultants Inc. and Tory Tory

DesLauriers and Binnington for RFP for Proven Solid Waste

Resource Diversion Services

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

"It is further recommended that the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be requested to submit reports to the Works Committee, on a quarterly basis, on:

(1) the activities of the consultants to date;

(2) the projected activities of the consultants for the next quarter; and

(3) the actual and projected costs for the services of all consultants in connection with the Toronto Integrated Solid Waste Resource Management Process.")

The Policy and Finance Committee recommends the adoption of the Recommendations of the Works Committee embodied in the following communication (September 8, 1999) from the City Clerk:

Recommendation:

The Works Committee recommends the adoption of the report dated August 30, 1999, from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services respecting the Toronto Integrated Solid Waste Resource Management Process - retention of MacViro Consultants Inc. and Tory Tory DesLauriers and Binnington for the Request for Proposals for proven solid waste resource diversion services.

The Works Committee reports, for the information of the Policy and Finance Committee, having also taken the following action with respect to related reports in connection with the Toronto Integrated Solid Waste Resource Management Process (TIRM):

(1) deferred consideration of the report dated August 30, 1999, from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, headed "TIRM - Request for Proposals for Disposal Services", until a special meeting of the Committee to be held at the call of the Chair prior to the Council meeting scheduled for September 28, 29 and 30, 1999, to receive comments and deputations on the proposed Terms of Reference for the Request for Proposals; and having tabled a motion by Councillor Fotinos with respect to the weighting factors under Table 5.2, Comparative Evaluation Criteria, for consideration at such special meeting;

(2) received the report dated August 30, 1999, from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, headed "TIRM - Results of Stakeholder Review of Draft Evaluation Criteria for Proven Disposal Services RFP";

(3) recommended to Council the adoption of the report dated August 30, 1999, from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, headed "TIRM - Development of Secondary Planning Process for Category 3, New and Emerging Technologies"; and

(4) referred the communication dated July 28, 1999, from the Toronto Civic Employees' Union, CUPE Local 416, to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services.

Background:

The Works Committee at its meeting on September 8, 1999, had before it a report (August 30, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services respecting the Toronto Integrated Solid Waste Resource Management Process - retention of MacViro Consultants Inc. and Tory Tory DesLauriers and Binnington for the Request for Proposals for proven solid waste resource diversion services.

The Works Committee also had before it the following reports and communications:

(i) (August 30, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services recommending that the Toronto Integrated Solid Waste Resource Management Process Request for Proposals for Disposal Services be approved for issuance on or about October 4, 1999, substantially in accordance with the Request for Proposals document attached to this report as Appendix "A".

(ii) (August 30, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services providing an account of the stakeholder consultation activities regarding the Toronto Integrated Solid Waste Resource Management ("TIRM") Process draft evaluation criteria for the Proven Disposal Services request for proposals, conducted between July 14, 1999 and August 27, 1999, following the submission of a report from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services identifying the qualified Respondents which made submissions under the TIRM Request for Expressions of Interest; advising that while most of the feedback received was of a general nature and did not focus on the actual draft evaluation criteria, staff have proceeded to broaden the list of priority pollutants; and recommending that this report be received for information.

(iii) (August 30, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, recommending that:

(1) City Council authorize the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services not to proceed with the design and issuance of an RFP for New and Emerging Technologies, under Category 3 of the Toronto Integrated Solid Waste Resource Management Process; and

subject to the approval of Recommendation No. (1), that:

(2) the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be authorized to develop a secondary planning process for the potential engagement of the type of proposals submitted under Category 3, New and Emerging Technologies, of the Toronto Integrated Solid Waste Resource Management Process.

(iv) a communication from the Toronto Civic Employees' Union, Local 416, stating the Union's position in support of a publicly owned and operate waste diversion/disposal system, and advising that Local 416 believes it is crucial for the City to maintain control over all aspects of the waste management system; further stating that the selection criteria to date has been totally in absence of any legitimate public consultation; and urging the City to implement a full broad-based consultation process on a proper waste diversion system and ultimate disposal;

(v) (September 8, 1999) from Councillor Jack Layton, Don River, recommending that the Request for Proposals be amended as follows:

"The City will only enter into a contract with a proponent of waste disposal capacity option if the host community has endorsed the proponent's plans. Endorsement would be demonstrated by a municipally-organized referendum where residents of the affected municipalities indicated over 50 percent support for the proponent's plans.";

(vi) (September 8, 1999) from Mr. Kevin Heise, Thornton, Ontario, respecting the AGRA Birwelco sponsored incinerator proposal for Simcoe County;

(vii) (September 8, 1999) from Mr. John Jackson, Citizens' Network on Waste, respecting the communication process for the Toronto Integrated Solid Waste Resource Management Process and the disposal RFP comparative evaluation criteria; and

(viii) communications from the following in opposition to the Rail Cycle North proposal for Toronto garbage:

- (August 16, 1999) from Ms. Elizabeth Dexter, Tarzwell, Ontario;

- (August 16, 1999) from Susie and Paul Gatz, Tarzwell, Ontario;

- (August 16, 1999) from Ms. Beatrice Grant, Tarzwell, Ontario;

- (August 16, 1999) from Mrs. Jean Simms, Tarzwell, Ontario;

- (August 16, 1999) from Ms. Kylli Swanson, Tarzwell, Ontario;

- (August 18, 1999) from Fern and Pauline Bruneau, Swastika, Ontario;

- (August 18, 1999) from Ms. Marlene Pitcaithley, Swastika, Ontario;

- (August 19, 1999) from Mr. Norman Macdonald, Swastika, Ontario;

- (August 20, 1999) from Ms. Anne Parkman, Tarzwell, Ontario;

- (August 20, 1999) from Ms. Frances Swanson, Tarzwell, Ontario;

- (September 6, 1999) from Mr. John Patterson, North Bay, Ontario;

- (September 7, 1999) from Mr. Dennis Hakola, Cobalt, Ontario;

- (September 7, 1999) from Ms. Kathy Hakola, Cobalt, Ontario; and

- (September 7, 1999) from Mr. Bob Meister, Trout Creek, Ontario.

Mr. Lawson Oates, Manager, Strategic Planning, Solid Waste Management, Works and Emergency Services, and Mr. Michael Pratt, Earth Tech (Canada) Inc., gave a presentation to the Works Committee in connection with the foregoing matter, and submitted a copy of the presentation.

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

- Mr. Gregory Vogt, Eastern Power Ltd. and Super Blue Box Recycling;

- Mr. Nigel Guilford, representing Rail Cycle North;

- Mr. Peter Leiss, Executive Vice-President, Toronto Civic Employees' Union, Local 416, and submitted a copy of his presentation;

- Mr. Bob Webb, Director of Business Development, Republic Services of Canada, and Mr. Marvin L. Banotai, Supervisor, Sumpter Township, Michigan, and submitted material with respect thereto;

- Ms. Greta Thompson, Blenheim, Ontario;

- Mr. Jim Hamilton, Thornton, Ontario, and submitted a copy of his deputation;

- Ms. Shelley Petrie, Toronto Environmental Alliance;

- Ms. Karen Buck, Toronto, Ontario; and

- Mr. Richard Gilbert, representing AGRA Resource Management.

--------

(Report dated August 30, 1999, addressed to the

Works Committee from the

Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services)

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to recommend the retention of a consulting firm and external legal counsel to assist staff in the Toronto Integrated Solid Waste Resource Management ("TIRM") Process proposal call for proven solid waste resource diversion services.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The identified cost of the undertaking is $520,000.00 ($499,200.00 net after GST rebate). The estimated expenditure in 1999 is $152,000.00, which can be accommodated within the current approved program under C-SW168 Waste Management Planning. These funds will not be expended as initially intended due to a re-adjustment of the project schedule into 2000. The balance of the funds ($368,000.00) will be needed, however, in 2000 for the TIRM RFP for Disposal Services planning process. Cash flows for this project will be incorporated in our preliminary 2000 Capital Works submission. As this undertaking is not in the current approved capital program, approval of additional funding for this undertaking is requested

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) additional funding of $520,000.00 ($499,200.00 net after GST rebate) under Solid Waste Management Capital Account C-SW168 Waste Management Planning be approved for the purposes of engaging a planning consultant and an external legal counsel to assist staff in the proposal call process for Proven Diversion Services; and

(2) subject to the approval of Recommendation No. (1),

(i) the firm of MacViro Consultants Inc. as the overall highest scoring proposal be retained at a cost not to exceed $267,000.00 including GST, in order to assist staff in the proposal call process, including the preparation and issuance of an RFP for Proven Diversion Services, analysis of responses, due diligence, contract preparation and negotiation support;

(ii) the legal firm of Tory Tory DesLauriers and Binnington be retained to provide external legal expertise, at a cost not to exceed $203,000.00, including GST, in order to assist staff in the proposal call process, including the preparation and issuance of an RFP for Diversion Services, analysis of responses, due diligence, contract preparation and negotiation support; and

(iii) an expenditure in the amount of $50,000.00, including GST, be authorized for site visits, disbursements, advertising, communications, technical studies and public consultation activities.

Council Reference/Background/History:

On October 2, 1998, City Council provided direction to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to engage the marketplace to secure solid waste management options including waste diversion and disposal capacity to meet the City's long-term requirements through a Request for Expressions of Interest ("REOI") and a Request for Proposals process. (Clause No. 2 of Report No. 8 of The Works and Utilities Committee.)

At that time a planning processing and corresponding budget were designed to provide for the City's solid waste disposal needs only. Funds were not approved to proceed with a proposal call process for Diversion Services. Subsequently, funds were approved by Council at its meeting of November 25, 26, and 27, 1998, to facilitate an amendment to the workplan of Proctor and Redfern Ltd., to modify the Request for Expressions of Interest to include requests for diversion approaches/technologies as well as new and emerging technologies, and to undertake an assessment of Request for Expressions of Interest responses on diversion and new and emerging technologies.

Funding approval was not sought at that time to engage Proctor and Redfern Ltd. to proceed to prepare a Request for Proposals for Diversion Services. This had not been part of the initial Terms of Reference for the consulting contract and a re-engagement of consulting firms in a competitive process was the determined course of action for the RFP process for Diversion Services.

On April 26, 1999, the TIRM REOI was issued as per the Council approved schedule. The TIRM REOI closed on May 31, 1999. A subsequent report dated July 5, 1999, from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services provided members of the Works Committee and Toronto City Council with the results of the TIRM REOI.

At its meeting of April 13, 14, and 15, 1999, Council authorized the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to prepare a planning process regarding the establishment of an RFP for "proven diversion" and "new and emerging technologies", to be submitted for approval and subsequent issuance following the reporting out of the results of the TIRM REOI for "proven diversion", "proven disposal capacity" and "new and emerging technologies".

Following the reporting out of the results of the TIRM REOI process through the Commissioner's report dated July 5, 1999, planning began for the engagement of a consultant to assist staff in the preparation of a proposal call process for diversion services, including the preparation and issuance of an RFP, analysis of responses, due diligence, and contract preparation.

Thirteen firms from a supplier's list were invited to respond to a proposal call issued by the Purchasing and Materials Management Division of the Finance Department. The proposal call was also advertised. Of the two submissions received, one (MacViro's) was a consortium consisting of three of the originally invited firms. The submission consisted of the technical components and a separate sealed cost proposal.

Both proposals were reviewed by a staff Consultant Selection Committee based on a pre-selection process of evaluating the proposals against specified technical criteria.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The consortium led by MacViro is an experienced group of knowledgeable consultants who understand the challenges of instituting the necessary infrastructure to achieve Council's policy goal of 50 percent diversion by 2006 or sooner. MacViro was the consultant on the RFP for the Mixed Waste Recycling and Organics Processing Facility, approved last year.

MacViro's submission includes the engagement of Earth Tech (Canada) Inc. (formerly Proctor and Redfern Ltd.) and Enviros-RIS Ltd. as sub-consultants. Earth Tech (Canada) Inc. is the principle consultant for the TIRM Process for the engagement of disposal services, and Enviros-RIS Ltd. was the firm that prepared the Preliminary Metro 3Rs Strategy- Draft Report, dated November 26, 1996.

In order to proceed with the aggressive schedule for the RFP for Diversion Services, MacViro has recommended that the stakeholder consultation regarding the establishment of evaluation criteria and planning methodology begin in September 1999, rather than October 1999, as previously cited in project schedules. We believe this is a friendly amendment to Council's approved project schedule and as such is designed to better facilitate Council's objectives. Accordingly, we are proceeding with this recommendation from MacViro.

The total budget for the consortium led by MacViro is $267,000.00, including GST.

On the advice of the City Solicitor, we are recommending retaining the legal firm of Tory Tory DesLauriers and Binnington ("Tory"), to assist staff in the proposal call process, including the preparation of the RFP, analysis of responses, due diligence, and contract preparation and negotiation. Tory was the firm providing external legal expertise in the process leading to the current disposal contract with Browning-Ferris Industries. The estimated budget for Tory is $203,000.00, including GST.

We have also identified an internal project budget to accommodate site visits, disbursements, advertising, technical studies, communications, and public consultation activities. The estimated budget for these activities is $50,000.000.00, including GST.

The total project budget for (i) the consortium led by MacViro, (ii) Tory, and (iii) the internal project budget, is $520,000.00 ($499,200.00 net after GST rebate).

The expenditure for this project is not in the current approved capital budget as the approved program was designed to provide for the City's solid waste disposal need only. Hence, approval of additional funding of $520,000.00 ($499,200.00 net after GST rebate) is requested to proceed with the project. The expenditure of $152,000.00 in 1999 can be accommodated within the current approved program under C-SW168 Waste Management Planning. These funds will not be expended as initially intended due to a re-adjustment of the project schedule into 2000. The balance of the funds ($368,000.00) will be needed, however, in 2000 for the TIRM RFP for Disposal Services planning process. Cash flows for this project will be incorporated in our preliminary 2000 capital works submission.

As discussed in the "Council Reference/Background/History" section of this report, we are requesting this funding in order to meet Council's policy decision to pursue the engagement of the marketplace for Proven Diversion Services to meet its stated objective of 50 percent diversion by 2006 or sooner. This policy was established by Council on October 2, 1998, when direction was provided to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to engage the marketplace to secure solid waste management options including waste diversion and disposal capacity to meet the City's long-term requirements through a Request for Expressions of Interest and Request for Proposals. (Clause No. 2 of Report No. 8 of The Works and Utilities Committee.)

Council reiterated this policy at its meeting of July 27, 28 and 29, 1999, through its adoption of a recommendation to amend the TIRM Process schedule in order to facilitate a closer linkage between decision-making on engagement of diversion and disposal services. Earlier, at its meeting of April 12, 13, and 14, 1999, Council authorized the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to prepare a planning process regarding the establishment of a Request for Proposals for "proven diversion" and "new and emerging technologies", to be submitted following the reporting out of the results of the Request for Expressions of Interest for "proven diversion", "disposal capacity", and "new and emerging technologies". This process was concluded at the Council meeting of July 27, 28, and 29, 1999.

Approval of funding in the amount of $520,000.00 ($499,200.00 net after GST rebate) is required at this time in order to comply with Council's stated direction and approved schedule.

Conclusion:

In order to proceed with the Council direction to engage the marketplace to provide diversion options, in addition to disposal options for long-term solid waste resource management, we are recommending the retention of MacViro as the highest scoring proponent and Tory as external legal counsel, to assist staff in the Request for Proposals for Diversion Services planning process.

Contact Names:

Lawson Oates, B.A., M.E.S., Policy and Planning, Solid Waste Management Services, Works and Emergency Services, Metro Hall, 19th Floor, Phone: (416) 392-9744; Fax: (416) 392-4754;

E-mail: lawson_oates@toronto.ca

IHL Proposal for Coliseum Building,

National Trade Centre Complex

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

"It is further recommended that the Interim General Manager, Exhibition Place, be requested to submit an annual report to Council, through the Policy and Finance Committee, on the actual revenues derived from the rental of the Coliseum Building for the six categories of revenues identified by the Interim General Manager, Exhibition Place.")

The Policy and Finance Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (September 9, 1999) from the Interim General Manager, Exhibition Place:

Recommendations:

It is recommended that Council accept the Offer to Lease and approve of a grant of a leasehold interest for 49 years to Coliseum Renovation Corporation ("CRC") for the Coliseum Arena in The National Trade Centre Complex ("NTC") on the terms and conditions as set out in Clause No. 7 of Report No. 4 of the Policy and Finance Committee adopted by Council on July 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1999, as amended and such other terms and conditions satisfactory to the City Solicitor, Interim General Manager of Exhibition Place and Board of Governors of Exhibition Place.

Background:

At its meeting of July 27, 28, 29 and 30, 1999, Council adopted Clause No. 7 of Report No. 4 of the Policy and Finance Committee entitled "IHL (International Hockey League) Proposal for the Coliseum Building - National Trade Centre Complex" which report requested that staff take all necessary steps to comply with By-law No. 551-1998 and report back to Council at its meeting of September 28, 1999.

Discussion:

The IHL proposal is for the development of the Coliseum Arena in the NTC by CRC to transform this venue into the new home of the IHL franchise formerly known as the "Phoenix Roadrunners". The proposal would see a capital investment by CRC in the Coliseum Arena of approximately $32 million that would upgrade the facility to a modern 11,000 seat hockey arena. Over the term of the lease, the Board of Governors would receive approximately $86 million of incremental revenues from rent, guaranteed parking revenues, management fees, and increase food and beverage revenues. In addition, the present users of the Coliseum will benefit from the upgraded seating, acoustics and climate control; the project will generate 107 person years of direct construction employment and approximately 130 person years of indirect employment; and the City will be in receipt of realty taxes paid by CRC on space that has been tax exempt.

The conditional Offer to Lease presented to Council provided for a lease term of 49 years and Council in approving this Report declared the Coliseum Arena surplus. In accordance with By-law No. 551-1998, a "Notice of Sale - Long Term Lease" was published in a daily newspaper on August 26, 1999, stating the pertinent details of the land disposition and lease terms. The deadline for enquiries as published in the Notice was September 8, 1999. No enquiries have been received and as requested by Council, I am now reporting back to the Policy and Finance Committee on this matter and requesting Council to accept the Offer to Lease on the terms and conditions set out in the Clause No. 7 of Report No. 4 noted above, as amended.

For the information of Council, a Sub-committee of The Board of Governors of Exhibition Place has been established chaired by Councillor Pantalone, Chair of the Board to finalize the details of the lease terms between the Board and CRC including the negotiation of a participation rent. As requested by Council, a staff person appointed by the Ms. Liczyk, C.F.O. and Treasurer is participating in this Sub-committee.

Conclusion:

This report outlines the actions that have been taken with respect to By-law No. 551-1998 as directed by Council.

Contact Name:

Dianne Young - 263-3611

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a copy of Clause No. 7 of Report No. 4 of the Policy and Finance Committee, headed "IHL (International Hockey League) Proposal for the Coliseum Building - National Trade Centre Complex", submitted by Councillor Pantalone, Trinity-Niagara, for information.)

Source of Funding for Outside Consultants

Required for Ontario Municipal Board Hearings

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

"It is further recommended that the City Solicitor be requested to submit, to the Policy and Finance Committee, a supplementary list of all of the firms retained from Appendix 'A' to the report dated August 5, 1999, from the City Solicitor, and all outside lawyers retained for other purposes, including the names of the firms retained and the fees paid.")

The Policy and Finance Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (August 5, 1999) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

To advise Council that the Legal Services Division budget allocation for outside consultants for Ontario Municipal Board hearings has been almost fully committed, that there are insufficient funds available to ensure that outside consultants can be retained for the balance of 1999 and to obtain Council authority that expenditures beyond the current budget allocation be charged to the Corporate Contingency Account.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The amount expended on outside consultants is a matter beyond the control of the City Solicitor. It is difficult to estimate the amount which will be required for the retention of outside consultants to year end. The final amount is dependant on future decisions made by Council on planning applications, appeals of Committee of Adjustment decisions, the complexity of the files under appeal, the length of the hearing and the scheduling of the hearings by the Ontario Municipal Board. In view of the fact that the budget allocation of $500,000.00 has been almost fully spent or committed to date, authority is required to charge expenditures beyond the budget allocation to the Corporate Contingency Account. It is estimated that up to $300,000.00 may be required to year end.

The Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer has reviewed and concurs with this financial impact statement.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) expenditures beyond the $500,000.00 budgeted in the Legal Services budget for outside consultants for Ontario Municipal Board hearings be charged to the Corporate Contingency Account;

(2) the City Solicitor be directed to report to the Policy and Finance Committee in January 2000 on 1999 actual expenditures for outside consultants; and

(3) Council confirm that the City Solicitor is authorized to retain outside consultants for all Ontario Municipal Board hearings where the Chief Planner and his staff are unable to provide evidence under oath in support of Council's position unless Council expressly directs the City Solicitor not to retain outside consultants on a specific matter.

Council Reference/Background/History:

When Council makes a decision on a planning matter which is not supported by the Chief Planner and his staff and the matter is appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board, the City Solicitor must retain outside consultants to present evidence under oath in support of Council's position at the Ontario Municipal Board hearing. Where the City does not present evidence under oath, there is an appearance that the decision may have been frivolous or made without rational basis with the result that there is an increased likelihood that the Ontario Municipal Board will overrule Council's decision and the increased possibility of costs being awarded against the City.

The practices in the former municipalities varied somewhat and in some recent instances, Council has specifically directed the City Solicitor to retain outside consultants. This might lead to the conclusion that unless Council directs that the City Solicitor retain outside consultants, he is not authorized to do so. In view of the consequences of not providing evidence at an Ontario Municipal Board hearing, this is not recommended and it would be appropriate to confirm that the City Solicitor is authorized to retain outside consultants for all Ontario Municipal Board hearings where the Chief Planner and his staff are unable to provide evidence under oath in support of Council's position unless Council expressly directs the City Solicitor not to retain outside consultants on a specific matter.

At amalgamation, the 1998 budgets of the former municipalities provided for a total of $209,200.00 for the retention of outside consultants for Ontario Municipal Board hearing. During the 1999 budget process, Council increased this amount by $290,800.00 for a total of $500,000.00 which was allocated to the Legal Division's Operating Budget for this purpose. To date, these monies have been almost fully committed. Appendix "A" indicates the amounts approved and spent on outside consultants since August 1, 1998. The amount of $302,851.35 has been spent in 1999 to date. A further $187,000.00 has been committed for hearings which have been scheduled for 1999. The funds spent and the amount committed to date totals $489,851.35. Furthermore, there are currently three hearings which may be scheduled in 1999 for which outside consultants will be required but for which estimates are not yet available. In addition, it appears that the amount spent on some hearings may exceed the original amount estimated. The Legal Division can no longer confirm that sufficient funds are or will be available in the Division's Operating Budget to retain outside consultants for hearings which may arise later in 1999.

It is difficult to estimate the amount which may be required to year end. The amount depends on future decisions of Council on planning applications including appeals of Committee of Adjustment appeals and whether Council adopts the Planning Division's recommendations. The amount required varies depending on the length and complexity of the case. The amount required will also depend on the scheduling of the hearing dates by the Ontario Municipal Board. If, for example, a decision made by Council in September results in a December hearing, funds will be required this year. On the other hand, a Council decision in December will likely mean a hearing date in 2000. Notwithstanding these uncertainties, in view that almost $490,000.00 has been spent or committed to date, it is reasonable to assume that a similar additional amount will be required to year end.

The Finance Department has advised that it would be appropriate that Council authorize that all expenditures for outside consultants for Ontario Municipal Board hearings beyond the $500,000.00 budget allocation be charged to the Corporate Contingency Account.

Conclusions:

In order to properly present Council's position at the Ontario Municipal Board, it is necessary to provide for additional expenditures for outside consultants to year end. It is recommended that expenditures for outside consultants for Ontario Municipal Board hearings beyond the Legal Services Division budget allocation be charged to the Corporate Contingency Account. It would also be appropriate for the City Solicitor to report to Committee early in 2000 on 1999 actual expenditures in order to determine an appropriate budget allocation for this purpose.

Contact Name:

Anna Kinastowski, Director Planning and Development Law, Legal Services Division,

Tel: 392-0080, Fax: 397-4420.

--------

Appendix 'A'

Costs of Outside Evidence for

Ontario Municipal Board Hearings Since August 1, 1998

OMB Hearing	Status	1998 Approved	1998 Spent	1999 Approved Or Estimated	1999 Spent	Committed But Not Yet Spent
2223 Bloor Street West (Runnymede Theatre)	C	$ 6,479.79	$ 6,479.79
255 Blantyre Avenue	C	10,000.00			$ 6,660.75
5739 - 5745 Finch Avenue	D	15,000.00			13,825.77**
675 Roselawn Avenue (withdrawn)	C	10,000.00	0
1586 Bathurst Street (Shell)	C	10,000.00			9,997.01
129 Willowdale Avenue	C	10,000.00	9,994.56
2230 - 2336 Gerrard Street East (east of Main)	C	158,000.00			129,844.08
128 Scarboro Avenue	C	10,000.00			9,335.00
2055 - 2069 Lawrence Avenue East	C	15,000.00			5,800.00
50 Prince Arthur Avenue	C	26,000.00			33,187.22***
1465 Lawrence Avenue East	C	10,000.00			9,879.31
5 Queenslea Avenue (settled)	C	10,000.00	0
123 - 125 Steeles Avenue East	D			15,000.00	15,000.00
88 - 102 Ellerslie Avenue	H			25,000.00		25,000.00
Yorkville Triangle I.C.B.	C			25,000.00	11,182.50
294 Lawrence Avenue East (Toronto French School)	C			5,000.00	4,993.00
Finch Avenue East at McCowan Road (Monarch Construction)	C			15,000.00	23,085.28*
2650 Brimley Road (Shell)	C			15,000.00	0
373 Clinton Street	C			13,000.00	12,501.88
2426 - 2436 Weston Road	C			20,000.00	17,559.57
325 Morrish Road	P			10,000.00		10,000.00
14 - 16 Anglesey Boulevard	H			10,000.00		10,000.00
2 Triburnham Place	H			15,000.00		15,000.00
20 Bond Avenue	H			20,000.00		20,000.00
Home Depot (East Bayfront)	H			50,000.00		50,000.00
Ajax Precision, Penn Drive	H			25,000.00		25,000.00
207 - 217 Roslin Avenue	H			15,000.00 estimate		15,000.00
27 Marshlynn Drive	C			7,000.00		7,000.00
181 Finch Avenue	H			10,000.00		10,000.00
Burnhamthorpe Crescent (Whittington Properties)	P			N/A		N/A
906 Sheppard Avenue	P			N/A		N/A
3725 Lakeshore Boulevard West	H			N/A		N/A
4800 Sheppard Avenue East	P			N/A		N/A
Total		$290,479.79	$16,474.35	$295,000.00	$302,851.35	$187,000.00

1999 Amount Spent $302,851.35

1999 Amount Committed but not yet spent $187,000.00

__________

1999 Total Spent and Committed $489,851.35

Status

C - completed, settled, withdrawn

H - hearing date scheduled

P - hearing date pending

D - hearing completed, decision pending

* Amount invoiced but not yet paid, overexpenditure to be reported to Council for approval

** To date

*** Overexpenditure approved by Council

Emergency Repair of Exterior Brickwork at

Kipling Acres Home for the Aged

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

The Policy and Finance Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (August 26, 1999) from the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to obtain Council approval for the Homes for the Aged Division to draw on funds available in the Homes for the Aged (HFA) Capital Reserve, so that emergency repairs to the exterior brickwork at Kipling Acres may be immediately completed.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Engineering consultants have determined that damaged and loose exterior brickwork at the Kipling Acres Home for the Aged presents a risk to the safety of individuals walking in the immediate area. There is particular concern, on staff's part, regarding the safety of residents and children from the on-site Child Care Centre. The consultants have estimated that it will cost between $250,000.00 to $300,000.00 to restore the brickwork. In addition to the safety implications, the consultants' report indicates that the cost to the City of Toronto is expected to increase substantially if the construction work does not proceed prior to the onset of winter.

The uncommitted balance in the HFA Capital Reserve Account at present is $6,424,600.00. The Finance Department has been consulted with respect to this request and agrees that funding for this project is available within the reserve.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) staff be directed to proceed immediately with the brickwork repairs at Kipling Acres using the HFA Capital Reserve. The cost of the project is not to exceed $300,000.00; and

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

Council Reference/Background/History:

City Council, by adoption of Clause No. 13 of Report No. 18 of The Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee on October 1, 1998, authorized the establishment of the HFA Capital Reserve. The Reserve is to be used by the Homes for the Aged Division to help fund health and safety related projects and/or minor capital upgrades that are no longer co-funded by the Province. The Ministry of Health introduced a new capital funding policy for long-term care facilities in May, 1998, at the same time they published the new long-term care facility design standards.

Comments:

The Division has, for the past number of years, been repairing/replacing the brickwork at Kipling Acres and had planned on undertaking major repairs in 2000. To assist staff in determining the extent of the damaged/loose brickwork, the Division hired a consulting engineering company. Their mandate was to identify the extent of the damage, and prepare tender specifications and drawings. It was expected that this would allow the Division to plan to undertake the necessary capital repairs in the spring of 2000.

The engineering consultants have determined that the damaged and loose brickwork presents an immediate safety risk. Staff are particularly concerned about the risk, given the vulnerability of residents living at the Home and the children who play in the area, from the Child Care Centre. In addition, if the work is not completed prior to the onset of winter, the consultants believe that the problem will only exacerbate and result in a significant increase in cost to the City. The engineers have estimated that the total cost of the repair is between $250,000.00 to $300,000.00.

In order to proceed with these emergency repairs, the Homes for the Aged Division is requesting Council approval be given to use the HFA Capital Reserve. The Reserve was established by Council to provide a fund for the retrofitting required in a number of the Homes deemed ineligible by the Ministry of Health to receive construction funding. The Ministry of Health released a new capital funding policy for long-term care facilities in May, 1998, at the same time they published the new long-term care facility design standards. The Division is presently working on a multi-year capital plan and staff have identified the need for a number of capital upgrades. The most critical project identified within this plan is the repair/replacement of the exterior brickwork at Kipling Acres.

Conclusion:

On reviewing the engineering consultants' report, the Division agrees that it is important to proceed with the exterior repairs and brick replacements as quickly as possible. The Division therefore recommends to Committee that the Kipling Acres brick repair/replacement project to proceed immediately, and that the cost of this capital project be funded from the HFA Capital Reserve.

Contact Name:

Sandra Pitters, General Manager, Homes for the Aged Division, Tel: 392-8907; Fax: 392-4180;

E-mail: sandra_pitters@toronto.ca

Carl Hunter, Director, Support Services, Homes for the Aged Division, Tel: 392-8912;

Fax: 392-4180; E-mail: carl_hunter@toronto.ca

1999 Levy on Institutions Under Subsection 157

of the Municipal Act

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

The Policy and Finance Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (September 3, 1999) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:

Purpose:

To obtain Council's authority for the adoption of by-laws for the levying and collection of grants-in-lieu of taxes on hospitals, universities and colleges, and correctional facilities.

Financial Implications:

Revenue of $9.9 million will be raised through the 1999 levy on institutions.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) Council authorize the levy of taxes for the 1999 taxation year on hospitals, colleges and universities and correctional facilities as authorized by Section 157 of the Municipal Act;

(2) the maximum prescribed amount be $75.00 for full time student, provincially rated hospital bed or resident place; and

(3) authority be granted for the introduction of the necessary bills in Council to levy taxes for the year 1999 on hospitals, colleges and universities and correctional facilities in the form or substantially in the form of the draft by-laws attached hereto.

Comments:

Section 157 of the Municipal Act provides for municipalities to pass by-laws to levy an annual tax on colleges and universities, hospitals and correctional institutions. The taxes levied are calculated based on a per annum rate for each full time student, provincially-rated bed or resident place respectively as determined by the owner Ministry of each facility, pursuant to O.Reg. No. 384/98, as amended by O.Reg. No. 379/99. The prescribed rate for 1999 is $75.00.

The attached by-laws provide for levies on institutions in Toronto for 1999. The total amount levied on these facilities is:

Public Hospitals $1,217,550.00

Colleges and Universities $8,569,650.00

Correctional Facilities $150,900.00

------------------

Total: $9,938,100.00

Contact Names:

Raj Mathavan 395-6738

Lynne Ashton 397-4203

--------

Authority:

Intended for first presentation to Council:******

Adopted by Council:

City of Toronto

Bill No.

By-Law No. [By-law number]

To levy an amount for the year 1999 upon

certain Universities and Colleges

Whereas subsection 157(1) of the Municipal Act, as amended (the "Act"), provides among other things that, notwithstanding any general or special Act, the Council of a local municipality may pass by-laws to levy an annual tax upon a university and a college of applied arts and technology designated by the Minister of Colleges and Universities not exceeding the prescribed amount for each full time student enrolled in such university or college in the year preceding the year of the levy as determined by the Minister of Colleges and Universities; and

Whereas pursuant to O.Reg 384/98, as amended, the sum of $75.00 prescribed for 1999, for the purposes of subsection 157(1), (3), (4), (5) and (6) of the Act; and

Whereas the Minister of Colleges and Universities has designated the following institutions as universities and colleges of applied arts and technology for the purposes of subsection 157 of the Act and has determined the following to be the applicable full-time enrolment:

Institution Applicable Full-Time Enrolment

Atkinson College 2,721

Centennial College of Applied Arts & Technology (Scarborough) 9,444

Centennial College (East York) 494

Emmanuel College (U. of T.) 121

George Brown College of Applied Arts & Technology 8,797

Glendon College 1,328

Humber College 11,106

Knox College (U. of T.) 65

Ontario College of Art & Design 1,230

Regis College (U. of T.) 86

Ryerson Polytechnical Institute 10,266

Scarborough College (U. of T.) 4,211

Seneca College of Applied Arts & Technology 8,494

St. Augustine's Seminary (Ottawa University) 59

St. Michael's College (U. of T.) 116

Trinity College (U. of T.) 48

University of Toronto 31,229

Wycliffe College (U. of T.) 76

York University 24,371

Therefore the Council of the City of Toronto Hereby Enacts as follows:

3. The sum of $75.00 is fixed as the amount levied in 1999 for each full time student to be used in computing the amounts hereby levied.

4. There shall be levied for the year 1999 upon the following universities and colleges of applied

arts and technology the total amounts shown as follows, payable on October 21 in the year;

Institution 1999 Amount

Atkinson College $204,075.00

Centennial College of Applied Arts & Technology (Scarborough) $708,300.00

Centennial College (East York) $37,050.00

Emmanuel College (U. of T.) $9,075.00

George Brown College of Applied Arts & Technology $659,775.00

Glendon College $99,600.00

Humber College $832,950.00

Knox College (U. of T.) $4,875.00

Ontario College of Art & Design $92,250.00

Regis College (U. of T.) $6,450.00

Ryerson Polytechnical Institute $769,950.00

Scarborough College (U. of T.) $315,825.00

Seneca College of Applied Arts & Technology $637,050.00

St. Augustine's Seminary (Ottawa University) $4,425.00

St. Michael's College (U. of T.) $8,700.00

Trinity College (U. of T.) $3,600.00

University of Toronto $2,342,175.00

Wycliffe College (U. of T.) $5,700.00

York University $1,827,825.00

Enacted And Passed this day of ,A.D 1999.

Mel Lastman, Novina Wong,

Mayor City Clerk

(Corporate Seal)

--------

Authority:

Intended for first presentation to Council:******

Adopted by Council:

City of Toronto

Bill No.

By-Law No. [By-law number]

To levy an amount for the year 1999 upon

certain Public Hospitals and Provincial Mental Health Facilities

Whereas subsection 157(4) of the Municipal Act, as amended (the "Act"), provides among other things that, notwithstanding any general or special Act, the Council of a local municipality may pass by-laws to levy an annual amount upon a public hospital or provincial mental health facility designated by the Minister of Health not exceeding the prescribed amount for each provincially rated bed in the public hospital or provincial mental health facility as determined by the Minister of Health; and

Whereas pursuant to O.Reg 384/98, as amended, the sum of $75.00 prescribed for 1999, for the purposes of subsection 157(1), (3), (4), (5) and (6) of the Act; and

Whereas the Minister of Health has designated the following institutions as public hospitals or provincial mental health facilities for the purposes of subsection 157 of the Act and has determined the following to be provincially rated beds:

Institution Provincially

Rated Beds

Addiction & Mental Health Services Corporation 127

Baycrest Hospital 300

Bloorview Huge McMillan Medical Centre 170

Branson Hospital 282

Casey House 12

Hospital for Sick Children 699

Humber River Regional Hospital 1,384

New Mount Sinai Hospital 546

North York General Hospital 457

Northwest GTA Hospital Corporation 1,162

Providence Hospital 344

Riverdale Hospital 784

Rouge Valley Health System 792

Runnymede Hospital 114

Salvation Army Grace Hospital 123

Scarborough General Hospital 770

Scarborough Grace Hospital 302

St. Bernard's Convalescent Hospital 59

St. John's Convalescent Hospital 210

St. Joseph's Hospital 831

St. Michael's Hospital 701

Sunnybrook & Women's College Health Sciences Centre 1,733

The Toronto Hospital 1,642

Toronto East General & Orthopaedic Hospital 650

Toronto Rehabilitation Institute 813

Wellesley Central Hospital 770

West Park Hospital 457; and

Therefore the Council of the City of Toronto Hereby Enacts as follows:

5. The sum of $75.00 is fixed as the amount levied in 1999 for each provincially rated bed, and there shall be levied for the year 1999 upon the following public hospitals and provincial mental health facilities the total amounts shown as follows, payable on October 21 in the year;

Institution 1999 Amount

Addiction & Mental Health Services Corporation $9,525.00

Baycrest Hospital $22,500.00

Bloorview Huge McMillan Medical Centre $12,750.00

Branson Hospital $21,150.00

Casey House $900.00

Hospital for Sick Children $52,425.00

Humber River Regional Hospital $103,800.00

New Mount Sinai Hospital $40,950.00

North York General Hospital $34,275.00

Northwest GTA Hospital Corporation $87,150.00

Providence Hospital $25,800.00

Riverdale Hospital $58,800.00

Rouge Valley Health System $59,400.00

Runnymede Hospital $8,550.00

Salvation Army Grace Hospital $9,225.00

Scarborough General Hospital $57,750.00

Scarborough Grace Hospital $22,650.00

St. Bernard's Convalescent Hospital $4,425.00

St. John's Convalescent Hospital $15,750.00

St. Joseph's Hospital $62,325.00

St. Michael's Hospital $52,575.00

Sunnybrook & Women's College Health Sciences Centre $129,975.00

The Toronto Hospital $123,150.00

Toronto East General & Orthopaedic Hospital $48,750.00

Toronto Rehabilitation Institute $60,975.00

Wellesley Central Hospital $57,750.00

West Park Hospital $34,275.00

Enacted And Passed this day of ,A.D 1999.

Mel Lastman, Novina Wong,

Mayor City Clerk

(Corporate Seal)

--------

Authority:

Intended for first presentation to Council:******

Adopted by Council:

City of Toronto

Bill No.

BY-LAW No. [By-law number]

To levy an amount for the year 1999 upon

certain Correctional Facilities

Whereas subsection 157(3) of the Municipal Act, as amended (the "Act"), provides among other things that, notwithstanding any general or special Act, the Council of a local municipality may pass by-laws to levy an annual tax upon a correctional institution or training school designated by the Minister of Correctional Services not exceeding the prescribed amount for each resident place in the institution or school as determined by the Minister of Correctional Services; and

Whereas pursuant to O.Reg 384/98, as amended, the sum of $75.00 prescribed for 1999, for the purposes of subsection 157(1), (3), (4), (5) and (6) of the Act; and

Whereas the Minister of Correctional Services has designated the following institutions as correctional institutions or training schools for the purposes of subsection 157 of the Act and has determined the following to be resident places:

Institution Resident Places

Mimico Correctional Centre 434

Toronto East Detention Centre 368

Toronto Jail 504

Toronto West Detention Centre 564

Toronto Youth Assessment Centre 142; and

Therefore the Council of the City of Toronto Hereby Enacts as follows:

6. The sum of $75.00 fixed as the amount levied in 1999 for each resident place, and there shall be levied for the year 1999 upon the following correctional institutions the total amounts shown as follows, payable on October 21 in the year;

Institution 1999 Amount

Mimico Correctional Centre $32,550.00

Toronto East Detention Centre $27,600.00

Toronto Jail $37,800.00

Toronto West Detention Centre $42,300.00

Toronto Youth Assessment Centre $10,650.00

Enacted And Passed this day of ,A.D 1999.

Mel Lastman, Novina Wong,

Mayor City Clerk

(Corporate Seal)

Proposed Use of Funds from OMB Settlement

Concerning 1661 Queen Street East

(Cinema Development Community Improvement Donation)

(Ward 26 - East Toronto)

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

The Policy and Finance Committee recommends the adoption of the following joint report (September 1, 1999) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, and the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism:

Purpose:

To obtain Council approval for the use of the funds received from EMM Financial Corp. for various park and recreation and cultural heritage improvements in Ward 26, East Toronto.

Financial Implications:

The $150,000.00 received from EMM Financial Corp. will be added to the 1999 - 2003 Capital Budget for the Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Department for expenditures on various park, playground and cultural heritage improvements, as outlined in the report.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the funds received by the City of Toronto from EMM Financial Corp. obtained as a result of an OMB settlement for the development of a cinema at 1661 Queen Street East be credited to the minor parks and recreation Account No. 216 412 (28000295) to be used for various capital community improvements for Ward 26, as follows:

(i) $50,000.00 be allocated to Edgewood Park for various park improvements;

(ii) $25,000.00 be made available to the Toronto Housing Company public housing complex in the vicinity of Queen Street East and Coxwell Avenue for on-site playground improvements, on the condition that the Toronto Housing Company matches this amount for these improvements; and

(iii) $75,000.00 be allocated towards the preservation and refurbishing of "Maple Cottage"on Laing Street in the Leslieville area.

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

Comments:

The Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer has established an account to deposit the funds received from EMM Financial Corp. as part of the settlement reached with Beaches residents over their appeal of the cinema development at 1661 Queen Street East. These funds, in the amount of $150,000.00, are to be earmarked for community improvement projects in Ward 26 and are in addition to the statutory parkland dedication requirements.

The Ward Councillors have worked closely with Beaches residents and the members of the West Beach Steering Committee to determine how this money is to be spent. Several meetings were held in the community and an agreement was reached as to how these funds should be allocated. Staff in the Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Department have assisted the Ward Councillors by attending public meetings and preparing designs for the requested park improvements.

The recommendations in this report reflect the proposal by the West Beach Steering Committee, the Ward Councillors and the residents who attended these meetings on how these funds should be allocated. They are as follows:

(1) $50,000.00 to be allocated to Edgewood Park for various park improvements;

(2) $25,000.00 to be made available to the Toronto Housing Company for on-site playground improvements for a public housing complex in the vicinity of Queen Street East and Coxwell Avenue, on the condition that the Toronto Housing Company matches these funds; and

(3) $75,000.00 to be allocated to preserve and refurbish the historically designated "Maple Cottage" on Laing Street in the Leslieville area.

We are in concurrence with these recommendations. It is also recommended that the appropriate City officials be authorized to implement these recommendations through the 1999 - 2003 Capital Budget Program for the Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Department.

Contact:

Frank Kershaw, 392-8199.

Terms of Reference for the Grants Sub-Committee

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

The Policy and Finance Committee:

(1) recommends the adoption of Recommendations Nos. (1) and (3) embodied in the report (September 13, 1999) from the Chief Administrative Officer; and

(2) reports having appointed Councillors Betty Disero, Ron Moeser and Joe Pantalone to the Grants Sub-Committee.

The Policy and Finance Committee submits the following report (September 13, 1999) from the Chief Administrative Officer:

Purpose:

This report recommends the terms of reference for, and appointment of members to, the Grants Sub-Committee of the Policy and Finance Committee, pursuant to the establishment of the sub-committee through the adoption of Clause No. 5 of Report No. 7 of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee (adopted by City Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999).

Financial Implications:

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

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the Terms of Reference for the Grants Sub-Committee be adopted as presented in Appendix A attached to this report;

(2) in accordance with section 105 (2) of By-Law No. 23-1998 (Procedural By-Law), the Policy and Finance Committee appoint three of its members to serve on the Grants Sub-Committee; and

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

Council Reference:

On July 20, 1999, the Policy and Finance Committee considered a report from the City Clerk listing the various sub-committees, special committees, advisory committees and task forces which were formed under the previous Council Committee structure and which now relate to the Policy and Finance Committee. The Policy and Finance committee referred the Clerk's report to the Chief Administrative Officer for a report thereon no later than October, 1999.

As noted in the Clerk's report, the Policy and Finance Committee is not required to take action with respect to special committees, advisory committees and task forces. These were established by Council on a project or issue basis and involve the participation of members of Council from more than one standing committee.

The Clerk recommended that the Policy and Finance Committee should determine whether the mandate and membership of any sub-committees (i.e. which include members of the standing committee only) should continue. One such sub-committee was listed in the appendix to the Clerk's report. This is the Grants sub-Committee, which was established pursuant to the adoption of Clause No. 5 of Report No. 7 of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, entitled "Legislative Process for Grants Policy and Administration" on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999.

Comments:

Terms of reference have been prepared for the Grants Sub-Committee in accordance with Section 105 (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;

(e) the reason why the work cannot be undertaken by an existing standing committee; and

(f) 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 Grants Sub-Committee established by Council on April 13, 14 and 15, 1999, are attached in Appendix A. The terms of reference have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Procedural By-law. The Policy and Finance Committee must appoint the membership of the sub-committee so that it may commence its mandate.

This report has been prepared in consultation with the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services and the City Clerk.

--------

Appendix A

Grants Sub-Committee

Terms of Reference

(1) Responsibilities:

Individual standing committees have responsibility for grants programs, which fall within their respective program mandates.

The Grants Sub-Committee shall deal with corporate-level grants issues and specifically shall:

(a) recommend line item grants that do not fall within the mandate of the standing committees;

(b) recommend allocations from the grants contingency fund to respond to requests that do not meet the criteria of established grants programs;

(d) review below market rental tenancy agreements between the City and non-profit corporations (pursuant to Corporate Services Committee Report 7 (29) as adopted by Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998);

(e) review the use and continued need for the practice of below market rental tenancies as an alternative to the provision of direct grants;

(f) review compliance of grants programs with City of Toronto Grants Policy; and

(g) complete the development of benchmarks with respect to grants administration practices (begun under the previous Municipal Grants Review Committee).

(2) Reporting and/or Sunset Date:

The sub-committee shall be dissolved at the end of the term of the current City Council. The sub-committee shall report to the Policy and Finance Committee in June 2000 regarding the completion of the sub-committee's workplan and continuing need for a special purpose grants committee beyond the current term.

(3) Membership:

The sub-committee shall have three members who are drawn from the Policy and Finance Committee. The membership shall be appointed by the Policy and Finance Committee in accordance with section 105 (2) of the Procedural By-law.

(4) Reporting Relationship:

The sub-committee shall report to the Policy and Finance Committee.

(5) Reason for Establishing the Sub-Committee:

The sub-committee is established to:

(a) allow for in depth review of corporate-wide grants related issues that time would not otherwise permit given the range and number of other matters before the Policy and Finance Committee; and

(b) complete outstanding policy review items from the workplan of the former Municipal Grants Review Committee.

(6) Staff Resources:

The sub-committee shall be supported by the City Clerk and the Commissioner of Community and Neighbourhood Services or designate without the need for the appropriation of additional funds.

_________

Councillor Irene Jones, Lakeshore Queensway, appeared before the Policy and Finance Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

John Street Roundhouse (222 Bremner Boulevard)

(Ward 24 - Downtown)

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

The Policy and Finance Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (September 10, 1999) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:

Purpose:

To report on the provision of capital funding for the proposed rehabilitation and reuse of the John Street Roundhouse (Phase 1).

Financial Implications:

As outlined in a supplementary report to Policy and Finance Committee on June 23, 1999, the estimated gross capital funds required for the base building standards including the environmental abatement, building services, access road and fire suppression systems are in the amount of $1,822,920.00. This amount to be offset by an outstanding payment from the Metro Toronto Convention Centre of at least $100,000.00 associated with an expired letter of credit against re-assembly of roundhouse bays 1 - 11, and $63,184.00 in the Planning capital account 216994, Roundhouse Renovation, previously identified for close-out, for a total offset of $163,184.00. The estimated net capital funding required is therefore $1,659,736.00.

The proposal from Steam Whistle Brewing Partnership Limited (SWBPL) which was included in the June 15, 1999, report to Policy and Finance Committee referenced a loan to the City in the amount of $250,000.00 to be repaid with interest at 8 percent in the form of net free rent over the first five year period. Because the City is able to borrow funds at a rate significantly lower than 8 percent, this report recommends that the proposed loan not be accepted as a funding source. If the loan is not accepted, the net amount of funding required for Phase I development activities is $1,659,736.00.

An additional as yet undetermined amount of funding will be required to fully develop the site as a mixed use/museum-based facility. Options for securing these funds such as corporate sponsorships, are to be investigated and identified in a subsequent report.

The restoration of this site has not been included in the approved 1999-2003 capital program. Funding in the amount of $1,659,736.00 can be arranged by amending the City's capital program and issuing a corresponding amount of debentures which have been certified not to exceed the City's updated debt and financial obligation limit. The annualized debt service impact on the 2000 operating budget will be approximately $250,000.00 as a result of this arrangement.

Council Reference:

Clause No. 6 of Report No. 1 of the Policy and Finance Committee, was adopted by Council July 6, 7 and 8, 1999, amended so as to allow the Phase I Rehabilitation and Reuse undertaking to proceed. However, an outstanding request from the Policy and Finance Committee exists for the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer to report on the capital funding required for this project, and respecting the report (June 23, 1999) from the Chief Financial Officer.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the net capital funds required in Phase I for the rehabilitation of Bays 1-11 in the amount of $1,659,736.00 be provided by amending the City's capital program;

(2) the proposed loan from SWBPL not be accepted;

(3) the proposed Board of Directors to be established during Phase I (as set out in the June 15, 1999, report to Policy and Finance Committee) be requested to co-ordinate efforts to raise funding for the development and restoration of the site with the City's Corporate Sponsorship Program currently under development;

(4) the Commissioner, Economic Development, Culture and Tourism report back to Economic Development and Parks Committee on the total impact that this project will have on the 2000 Operating Budget; and

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

Background:

The Administration Committee at its meeting of June 15, 1999, dealt with the report dated June 10,1999, relative to the phased reuse and rehabilitation of the John Street Roundhouse (Item No. 18). The June 23, 1999, report to Policy and Finance Committee provided a detailed estimate of the total capital funds required to bring the building to base standards in Phase I. This revised estimate was for $1,412,920.00 after offsetting funding of approximately $160,000.00 in the MTCC's Letter of Credit and Planning Capital Account and a further loan of $250,000.00 from Steam Whistle Brewing Partnership Limited (SWBPL).

Comments:

Costs to restore the remaining Bays 12-32 to base building standards and the estimated costs to restore and rehabilitate ancillary facilities amount to an additional $4,877,000.00 which have been itemized by the City's facilities staff. In addition, the transformation of a portion of the building in future phases into a museum and artefact viewing area will also require new capital and operating expenditures. As it has not yet been determined whether or not there will be any additional sources of capital funds to offset these costs, City staff have been requested to examine other financing alternatives such as corporate sponsorship possibilities to secure the balance of the funds. The City's finance staff are developing a proposal for a Corporate Sponsorship Program subject to Council's approval in the fall. If the program is approved, the proposed governance body for the Roundhouse (i.e. Board of Directors) would be requested to integrate the remaining phases of the rehabilitation and reuse plan within the parameters of the new Sponsorship Program so as to secure optimum benefits for the facility.

Conclusions:

This report recommends an amendment to the 1999 approved capital budget of $1,822,920.00 gross and $1,659,736.00 net to provide funding to bring Bays 1-11 of the facility (Phase I) up to base building standards.

Contact Name:

Rob Hatton, Manager, Financial Planning, Treasury and Financial Services, Telephone No. 392-9149 Fax No. 397-4555; e-mail: rhatton@mta1.metrodesk.metrotor.on.ca

________

(Mayor Lastman declared his interest in the foregoing matter in that the applicant's solicitor is employed by the same law firm as his son who is not a real estate lawyer and does not personally act on this file.)

(Mayor Lastman, at the meeting of Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, declared his interest in the foregoing Clause, in that the Applicant's Solicitor is employed by the same law firm as his son who is not a real estate lawyer and does not personally act on this file.)

Proposed Alternative Financing Feasibility Study

TTC Subway Cars

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

(1) inserting in Recommendation No. (1) embodied in the report dated September 13, 1999, from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, after the word "drafted", the words, "in consultation with staff of the Toronto Transit Commission", so that such recommendation shall now read as follows:

"(1) a Request for Proposal be drafted, in consultation with staff of the Toronto Transit Commission, for the purpose of seeking suitable external financial advice with respect to the potential use of alternative methods to finance the purchase of TTC subway cars;"; and

(2) adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer be requested to submit a report to the Policy and Finance Committee on the results of the Request for Proposals.")

The Policy and Finance Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (September 13, 1999) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:

Purpose:

To seek funding approval for the engagement of a financial advisor or advisors to determine the advisability and feasibility of employing alternative and innovative financing methods, such as cross-border leasing, to finance the acquisition of subway cars to be operated by the Toronto Transit Commission.

Costs/Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Savings would accrue in the form of a lower cost of funds as compared to the issuance of debentures. Depending upon capital market conditions, savings of 3 percent to 5 percent of the value of the transaction, or a present value of approximately $20 to 40 million could be realized.

Costs associated with studying the viability of the project will be approximately $200,000.00. If the project proceeds, total transaction costs could range from $500,000.00 to $1,500,000.00. These funds are available from the Capital Financing Reserve and will be considered when comparing the costs and benefits of a potential transaction.

The project will be structured to enable the City to abandon the transaction at any point until a commitment letter is executed. This may result in the City having responsibility for payment of various costs of approximately $500,000.00 Agreeing to such a stipulation would not be unusual, or unreasonable, given that the City would have the privilege of abandoning a deal should it begin to appear unfeasible.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) a Request for Proposal be drafted for the purpose of seeking suitable external financial advice with respect to the potential use of alternative methods to finance the purchase of TTC subway cars; and

(2) funding not to exceed $200,000.00 be provided from the Capital Financing Stabilization Reserve.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At its meeting of June 3, 1998, in consideration of Clause No. 11 of Report No. 9 of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, Council approved the acceleration of the replacement of 156 H2 and H4 subway cars with T1 cars, at a total cost of $307.9 million. This formed part of a larger subway car deal, for the purchase of 216 cars, at a total cost of $580 million that was approved by Council of the former Metropolitan Toronto on August 20, 1991. To date, temporary financing measures have been taken, with the intention of arranging a more cost-effective transaction.

On April 26, 1999, in consideration of Clause No. 1 Report No. 8, Recommendation No. 213 (ix)(a) of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee, Council approved the investigation of the option of using cross-border financing to reduce the debt requirements for the TTC Capital program in 1999.

Discussion:

Finance Department staff have investigated various options that are available to finance the purchase of TTC subway cars other than traditional debenture financing that could result in lower cost of funds. An option that has previously been highlighted to Council is the sale-leaseback of subway cars, involving a foreign-based firm. This would entail the purchase of the subway cars by the City, followed by their immediate sale to the foreign firm, who would then lease the cars back to the City. Subway cars are an appropriate source for sale-leaseback initiatives due to their long life span, high depreciable capital costs, and physical portability to other jurisdictions (a theoretical requirement necessary to effect the transaction). This financing plan would not have any negative impact on TTC operations. A separate working group will be established, that will include TTC staff members, in order to address any operational concerns that they may have.

Cross-border sale-leaseback presents the potential opportunity to reduce carrying costs, in the form of reducing financing costs for rolling stock. The tax benefits available within a foreign jurisdiction would be used to reduce the implicit financing costs below those of conventional debenture financing. The City, as lessee would be responsible for the payment of the debt and therefore able to access funds at a lower cost, while at the same time realizing the benefit of tax savings that are available to the foreign entity.

Recent changes in tax legislation proposed in the US may have an effect on the mechanics of a transaction or the financing method selected. Finance staff has informally examined these changes with various financial advisors and feel that there is still merit in proceeding with a comprehensive feasibility study on various alternative-financing options.

Savings would take the form of lower financing costs. Depending upon market conditions, the result could be savings of 3 percent to 5 percent of the value of the transaction, or a total of approximately $20 million to $40 million. These potential savings could be accessed in a lump sum, to be paid up front, or may be received on an ongoing basis over the life of the transaction.

The process will be structured such that the City would be able to abandon the transaction up until the point that a commitment letter is executed. This will allow the City to continually evaluate the financing option with respect to its potential benefits and related risks, as more complete information is received. If investigation of the project results in evidence indicating a net benefit to the City, then it will proceed. If evidence indicates the contrary, however, then the financing would be replaced by the issuance of debentures.

There are certain inherent risks that must be considered and managed in order to ensure a successful transaction. Potential changes to related tax legislation must be evaluated for the impact that they may have upon a potential plan. Additionally, any cross-border aspect should be structured so as not to trigger a potential Canadian withholding tax liability. Provincial Sales Tax and GST issues must be identified and addressed. The risk of foreign currency fluctuations must also be recognized and managed.

In addition, the TTC should be assured that the details of the financing arrangements would not affect their operations, or the "quiet enjoyment of the subway cars".

It will be necessary to consider the advice of external financial advisors with the necessary tax expertise, an understanding of municipal entities and their restrictions, as well as those with experience in structuring such innovative financing deals. Additionally, external legal advisors with similar experience will be required. It may be possible to retain all of the required external advisors in the form of a consortium.

A Request for Proposals would be developed and advertised by Finance Department staff in order to find the most appropriate advisors. Payment for services would not depend upon a successful outcome, so as to ensure unbiased advice. Fees incurred for the investigation of the potential use of cross-border financing will likely be approximately $200,000.00.

A City Workgroup, to include members from the Legal and Finance Departments as well as other participants who are able to contribute to the process will review the Request for Proposals. The successful candidate will be selected upon the basis of experience and having the resources and ability to propose, arrange and execute a transaction that will result in a lower cost of funds as compared to traditional financing methods. Finance Department staff will review the feasibility of various proposals, subsequently reporting back to the Policy and Finance Committee when the selection process is concluded with an anticipated date of December 1999.

Conclusion:

It may be possible to achieve a lower cost of funds by utilizing innovative financing methods such as a cross-border sale-leaseback. In order to investigate the viability of potential financing methods, it is necessary to obtain external financial, taxation, and legal advice.

Due to the size and scope of a potential transaction as well as the diversity of prospective participants, it is considered to be appropriate that a Request for Proposals be issued in order to identify and retain suitable external advisors.

Contact Names:

Martin Willschick, Manager, Treasury Services, 392-8072

Len Brittain, Director, Treasury and Financial Services, 392-5380

Dundas Street West Community,

Assistance to Local Residents

(Ward 21 - Davenport)

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

The Policy and Finance Committee recommends that:

(1) City Council advise the Licensing Tribunal that it supports the Urban Planning and Development Services refusal of this licence; and

(2) in the event that the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services is unable to resolve this matter to the satisfaction of the local residents, an amount of $2,000.00 be provided to the local residents to retain a lawyer to oppose the application.

The Policy and Finance Committee submits the following motion dated September 14, 1999:

Moved By: Councillor Dennis Fotinos

Seconded By: Councillor Betty Disero

WHEREAS the Dundas Street West Community has gone to great lengths to clean-up the area of undesirable activity; and

WHEREAS some business operators have been an obstacle to these efforts; and

WHEREAS the operators of Jeen's Café and Restaurant located at 2798 Dundas Street West, formerly L & J Donuts have not been helpful in the communities efforts;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT City Council approve an amount not to exceed $2,000.00 to assist local residents to retain a solicitor to appear at the Licensing Commission hearing to oppose the application by the proprietors of Jeen's Café and Restaurant, formerly known as L & J Donut.

Appointment to Board of Toronto Hydro Corporation

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

The Policy and Finance Committee recommends the adoption of the following report (September 2, 1999) from Mayor Mel Lastman:

Purpose:

To approve the appointment of the Mayor's designate to the Toronto Hydro Corporation Board of Directors.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Not applicable

Recommendation:

It is recommended that Council ratify the appointment of Councillor Betty Disero as the Mayor's designate on the Board of Directors of the Toronto Hydro Corporation.

Comment:

Under the Ontario Business Corporation Act, one of the duties of the shareholder of a corporation is to appoint the members of the Board of Directors, Council as a whole represents the shareholder's interest and appoints all directors. At its meeting of April 13, 14, and 15, 1999, Council approved my recommendation that the Board of Directors be comprised of the Mayor or his designate, 2 Councillors, and 8 citizens. Because of the unique nature of Toronto Hydro as a share capital corporation of the City rather than an agency, all director appointments must be ratified by Council.

The Mayor's designate has since resigned this position and I am naming Councillor Betty Disero to fill the vacancy.

Relocation of the Lancaster Bomber

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted the following recommendation:

"It is recommended that the joint report dated September 24, 1999, from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, embodying the following recommendations, be adopted:

'It is recommended that:

(1) the City assume the cost of the restoration of the Coronation Park location, including the removal of the plinth and demolition of the concrete base, such costs estimated to be approximately $10,000.00, to be allocated from the Corporate Contingency fund;

(2) the loan agreement be revised to establish the loan as a ten year loan with a ten year renewal period, and that the City obtain the right to undertake a formal assessment every five years of Toronto Aerospace Museum's work in fulfilling the loan agreement;

(3) the Toronto Aerospace Museum be required to fulfill its commitment to place the Bomber immediately on public display and to interpret its restoration for the benefit of the public, while demonstrating appropriate safety precautions; and

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

The Policy and Finance Committee reports having referred the following communication (September 14, 1999) from Councillor Tom Jakobek, East Toronto, to the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer for report thereon to the meeting of Council scheduled to be held on September 28, 1999:

(1) respecting the Toronto Aerospace Museum being permitted to remove the bomber without being liable for the cost of the work to the Park, and extending the lease to a 10/10 year lease with the appropriate mechanisms in place to ensure that the bomber is on display for the public to view at all times; and

(2) on the future of the rest of the site and any military memorabilia therein.

The Policy and Finance Committee submits the following communication (September 14, 1999) from Councillor Tom Jakobek (East Toronto):

For years, the Lancaster Bomber on Lakeshore has continued to deteriorate.

Finally, it has a chance for a new home where all Canadians will have a chance to see this important part of our history.

I urge the Committee to review the attached letter dated September 14, 1999, from the Director, Toronto Aerospace Museum and ask staff to report thereon, directly to City Council.

--------

(Letter dated September 14, 1999, addressed to

Councillor Tom Jakobek from Mr. Robert Murphy,

Director, Toronto Aerospace Museum)

I am writing you in my capacity as a Director of the Toronto Aerospace Museum. The materials I am enclosing will give you a little background on our organization's efforts to date to move the Lancaster Bomber from the CNE to our Museum at the former Downsview Air Force Base. Our current concern is the proposed legal agreement between the City and the Museum which contains several clauses which in our opinion go far beyond the intentions of the Toronto Historical Board in awarding us custody of the Bomber in the first place. These clauses are of a significantly onerous nature as to make them impossible for our organization to accept.

Time is of the essence if we are to resolve these issues and move the Bomber this Fall. In fact we are already one week behind our originally proposed schedule due to our inability thus far to negotiate an acceptable agreement. The TAM, a charitable non-profit group, intends to house and restore the Bomber to museum quality condition at no cost to the City. This represents an investment on our part of about 7-10 years of effort at a cost of between 5-8 million dollars. The move itself from the CNE to Downsview will cost TAM approximately $40,000.00. In addition, we have now been verbally advised by the Parks Department that prior to receiving an occupancy permit to remove the Bomber, TAM must agree to demolish the reinforced concrete pylon and related buried foundations which now support the plane.

We believe that in its present location and condition the artifact represents a significant liability to the City. Thirty years of outdoor storage have allowed the Bomber to deteriorate to a condition and real value not much above scrap metal. The risk of it falling from the pylon is not exaggerated and recent acts of vandalism only underscore the problems. This symbol of Toronto's aviation history and sacrifice in WW2 is badly in need of rescue, restoration and display in a suitable environment. TAM will accomplish all of these objectives. However, we respectfully ask for City Council's help in the following areas:

(1) the City should contribute financially towards the costs of relocating the Lancaster Bomber;

(2) the Toronto Aerospace Museum should not be obligated for any costs related to the demolition of the pylon or restoration of the Bomber's current display site; and

(3) in recognition of the time, effort and expense involved in restoring the Lancaster to museum condition, the term of the loan should be extended to 20 years in order to allow TAM to actually have time to display the artifact in its restored state. In the alternative, we would ask that the condition that the Museum receive no compensation for its efforts be waived in the event that the City wishes to have the Bomber returned to it in the future.

The Toronto Aerospace Museum is poised to commence relocation activities immediately and a sizable work force of specialists, volunteers and equipment is now on "standby" pending resolution of the agreement. Any help you could provide us in this endeavour would be most appreciated.

--------

The following Members of Council appeared before the Policy and Finance Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

- Councillor Douglas Holiday, Markland Centennial; and

- Councillor Chris Korwin-Kuczynski, High Park.

(A copy of the background material referred to in the foregoing communication was forwarded to all Members of Council with the September 16, 1999, agenda of the Policy and Finance Committee and a copy thereof is also on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following joint report (September 24, 1999) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:

Purpose:

To provide information in response to a request from the Policy and Finance Committee on the relocation of the Lancaster Bomber from Coronation Park to the Toronto Aerospace Museum (TAM).

Source of Funds:

Costs associated with the restoration of the Coronation Park location are estimated at $10,000, to be allocated from the corporate contingency fund.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the City assume the cost of the restoration of the Coronation Park location, including the removal of the plinth and demolition of the concrete base, such costs estimated to be approximately $10,000, to be allocated from the corporate contingency fund;

(3) that the TAM be required to fulfill its commitment to place the Bomber immediately on public display and to interpret its restoration for the benefit of the public, while demonstrating appropriate safety precautions; and

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

Council Reference:

The Policy and Finance Committee, at its meeting held September 16, 1999, referred a communication from Councillor Tom Jakobek (East Toronto) to the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer for report thereon to the meeting of Council scheduled to be held on September 28, 1999:

(1) respecting the Toronto Aerospace Museum being permitted to remove the bomber without them being liable for the cost of the work to the Park, and extending the lease to a 10/10 year lease with the appropriate mechanisms in place to ensure that the bomber is on display for the public to view at all times; and

(2) on the future of the rest of the site and any military memorabilia therein.

Background/History:

The former Metro Council, at its meeting of July 2 and 3, 1997, authorized Heritage Toronto (Toronto Historical Board) to hold a national competition in which Canadian museums could apply for a number of military artifacts displayed at Coronation Park. The results of their proposal call were summarized in a report to Economic Development Committee in December 1998.

At its meeting of December 16 and 17, 1998, Council of the City of Toronto approved the report from the Managing Director of Heritage Toronto (Toronto Historical Board) on the transfer of artifacts at Coronation Park to suitable museum locations. Specifically with respect to the Lancaster Bomber, Council approved that the Lancaster Bomber be offered on loan to the Toronto Aerospace Museum, within a negotiated loan agreement process, which included but was not limited to the following provisions:

(a) that the TAM remove the bomber from Coronation Park in coordination with Heritage Toronto and City staff, within the framework of a professionally prepared removal plan produced by the TAM and approved by the Heritage Toronto conservator;

(b) that the TAM be allowed to restore the bomber, within the framework of a professionally prepared restoration plan produced by the TAM (in consultation with the Canadian Conservation Institute) and approved by the Heritage Toronto conservator;

(c) that the TAM house and display the bomber indoors within its Downsview premises;

(d) that the City be able to inspect the bomber on forty-eight hours' notice during normal business hours; and

(e) that the City affirm its intention to leave the bomber at the TAM so long as the museum fulfills the conditions of the loan agreement.

On September 1, 1999, staff from the Culture Division and Heritage Toronto met with staff and Board members of the Toronto Aerospace Museum to negotiate the outstanding issues in relation to the loan agreement. At that meeting the period of the loan was extended from two years to five years and item (e) from the Council extract was added, namely "that the City affirm its intention to leave the bomber at the TAM so long as the museum fulfills the conditions of the loan agreement." The period of five years was chosen because this would be an appropriate time frame in which to review the status of the work on the Bomber, as well as a logical time for TAM to request a change in the status of the loan to either a permanent loan or a donation. A ten-year renewal period would be acceptable if the City were to obtain the right to undertake a formal mid-term assessment of TAM's work in fulfilling the loan agreement.

The proponent is required by the terms of the Request for Proposal to provide the financial and physical resources to move the object.

The requirement to clean up Coronation Park after the removal of the artifacts was not included in the terms of the RFP. This requirement was negotiated between Heritage Toronto and the Toronto Aerospace Museum. Given the City's interest in ensuring that the Bomber is transferred to an appropriate facility which will see to its restoration, it is recommended that the City assume the cost of the clean up of the site, which is estimated at $10,000. This will include removal of the plinth and demolition of the concrete pad. Funding would be allocated from the corporate contingency fund.

With regard to the public display of the Lancaster Bomber, TAM indicated in its response to the RFP that: "The aircraft will go on display immediately. The restoration will be carried out as a work in progress in front of the public, as an educational experience within the museum."

At its meeting of December 1998, Council also approved the transfer of the other military artifacts located in Coronation Park and the reissuing of the competition for the American Anti-Aircraft Gun. The following progress has been made in regards to these objects:

(a) a gift agreement is being finalized to transfer ownership of the Sherman Tank and 25-Pounder Gun to the Canadian War Museum in Ottawa;

(b) a gift agreement is being finalized to transfer ownership of the Bofors Gun to the RCAF Memorial Museum in Trenton, the second-place contender for these artifacts. The first-place contender, the Naval Museum of Manitoba, decided against acquiring the gun when a better example became available; and

(c) a new competition for the American Anti-Aircraft Gun has been held because there was no successful applicant for it in the first competition. Heritage Toronto staff are currently working on a report to recommend a successful competitor as a result of the second competition.

Contact Names:

Beth Hanna, Carl Benn,

Culture Division Heritage Toronto

392-5225 392-6907, ext. 225

Josie LaVita,

Finance

397-4229)

Jury Recommendations from the Coroner's

Inquest into the Death of Edmond Wai-Kong Yu

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted the following recommendations:

"It is recommended that:

(a) the report dated September 28, 1999, from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, embodying the following recommendations, be adopted:

'It is recommended that:

(1) this report be received for information; and

(2) the Toronto Police Services Board be requested to submit a detailed cost report on this matter to the Policy and Finance Committee, including in such report how this item can be accommodated as part of its 2000 Operating Budget submission.'; and

(b) the Toronto Police Services Board be requested to submit a report to the Administration Committee outlining the progress of its implementation of the recommendations of the Coroner's Inquest.")

The Policy and Finance Committee reports having referred the following communications (May 5, 1999) from the Chief Coroner for Ontario and (June 16, 1999) from the Toronto Police Services Board, to the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, for report thereon to Council for its meeting scheduled to be held on September 28, 1999:

Please find enclosed a copy of the Coroner's Verdict Explanation, Verdict, and Recommendations of the Coroner's Jury, from the Inquest into the death of the above.

The Jury has indicated that your Council may be in a position to implement the following Recommendations Nos. (14) and (22).

"(14) the Toronto City Council provide adequate funding to allow the Toronto Police Service Board and the Toronto Police Service to implement the recommendations of this Coroner's jury; and

(22) the jury endorses the Use of Force report and recommends that the Toronto Police Service implement the recommendations in this report."

I would appreciate your response to their recommendations and any other comments you may wish to make. the staff of the Inquest Unit at the Office of the Chief Coroner will be classifying your response utilizing the codes given below.

Please be advised that your reply will be considered a public document and may be released to interested parties upon request.

The Office of the Chief Coroner will be preparing an annual report on activities such as Inquests. The statistics may include an analysis of the responses received to this Inquest. To facilitate this process your response is requested by April 2000.

Please direct your response to:

Dr. Bonita Porter

Deputy Chief Coroner of Inquests for Ontario

Office of the Chief Coroner

26 Grenville Street

Toronto ON M7A 2G9.

The Policy and Finance Committee submits the following communication (June 16, 1999) from the Board Administrator, Toronto Police Services Board:

On April 6, 1999, the jury of the Coroner's Inquest into the death of Edmond Yu released 24 Recommendations that impact police training, mental health law, housing issues, social services, diversity and employment.

At its meeting on May 20, 1999, the Toronto Police Services Board reviewed the final report of its counsel at the Inquest and considered the recommendations which were directed to the Toronto Police Service. The Board also noted that two Recommendations Nos. (14) and (22) affect the Toronto Police Service but were directed to Toronto City Council.

It would be appreciated if a copy of the City of Toronto's response to Recommendations Nos. (14) and (22) is provided to the Board for information at the time the City submits its formal response to the Chief Coroner of Ontario.

If you have any questions about this request, please contact me at (416) 808-8094.

--------

(Copies of the "Coroner's Verdict Explanation, Verdict and Recommendations of the Coroner's Jury" from the Inquest into the death of Edmond Wai-Kong Yu were forwarded to all Members of Council with the September 16, 1999, agenda of the Policy and Finance Committee and copies thereof are also on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

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

Purpose:

To respond to Policy & Finance Committee's request at its meeting of September 16, 1999 that the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer report to Council on September 28, 1999 regarding two communications on the Coroner's Inquest into the death of Edmund Wai-Kong Yu.

Financial Implications:

Recommendation #14 of the Jury Recommendations at the Coroner's Inquest on the death of Edmond Yu could represent some minor expenditure impacts if calls for improvements in police training requirements can not be accommodated within existing training budgets. Toronto Police Services will examine the potential impacts of changed training requirements and report on any adjustments as part of their 2000 operating budget request. An overexpenditure of $400,000 has been identified in the Toronto Police Services current operating budget variance report (as at June 30, 1999) for the Use of Force initiative that will be a 2000 operating budget pressure. In addition, Toronto Police Services expects to incur unbudgeted operating expenses of $520,000 in 1999 for counsel representation at the Inquest on behalf of the Toronto Police Services Board. The unbudgeted expense for this issue therefore totals approximately $920,000 in 1999.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) this report be received for information; and,

(2) Toronto Police Services report back to Policy & Finance Committee with a detailed cost report on this matter including how this item can be accommodated as part of its 2000 Operating Budget submission.

Council Reference/Background/History:

The Policy and Finance Committee, on May 5, 1999 reviewed a communication from the Chief Coroner for Ontario and on June 16, 1999 reviewed a communication from the Toronto Police Services Board, both in connection with the Jury Recommendations from the Coroner's Inquest into the death of Edmond Wai-Kong Yu. The Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer was requested to report to Council on these communications at its next meeting scheduled for September 28, 1999.

Discussion:

The letter dated May 5, 1999 from the Coroner of Ontario to the City Clerk's Office provided a copy of the Coroner's Verdict explanation, Verdict and Recommendations of the Coroner's Jury from the Inquest into the death of Edmund Wai-Kong Yu, and included a total of 24 jury recommendations. The Coroner noted that the Jury had maintained that City Council might be in a position to implement items 14 and 22 of the recommendations. The Coroner requested a response, as well as other comments, from the City of Toronto on the jury's remarks. The Coroner further advised that such response would be considered a public document and may be released to interested parties upon request. The June 16, 1999 letter from the Toronto Police Services Board to the City Clerk's Office asked that a copy of the City of Toronto's formal response to the Coroner of Ontario's May 5 request be provided to the Board for information.

Recommendation #14 states that, "The Toronto City Council provide adequate funding to allow the Toronto Police Services Board and the Toronto Police Service to implement the recommendations of this Coroner's jury." Of the 24 recommendations, recommendations 15 through 20 specifically relate to Police Services activities primarily seeking better crisis and integrated training programs for front-line officers. If adopted in full (i.e. not in concert with other police organizations within Ontario) it is unclear whether these changes would pose a significant financial impact as savings related to integrating training could offset increased costs related to the more comprehensive crisis or other related training requirements. Toronto Police Services will examine this issue and identify any budget adjustments (if necessary) as part of the 2000 operating budget deliberations.

Recommendation #22 states that, "The Jury endorses the Use of Force report and recommends that the Toronto Police Service implement the recommendations contained in this report." The current 1999 operating budget variance report (as at June 30, 1999) for Toronto Police Services includes a total of $400,000 for the Use of Force initiative as recommended by the Police Services Board, but not approved by Council.

Conclusion:

The Jury for the Coroner of Ontario has made 24 recommendations with respect to the Coroner's Inquest into the death of Edmund Wai-Kong Yu. City of Toronto Council has been asked to respond to recommendations #14 and #22 of this list. Potential budgetary impacts of the City of Toronto's formal response will be addressed in the 2000 budget cycle.

Contact Names:

Al Horsman 397-4532

Glenn Vollebregt 392-8095)

Reporting on Time-Critical Telecommunications Matters

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted the following recommendations:

"It is recommended that:

(a) the confidential report dated September 27, 1999, from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, be adopted, subject to:

(i) amending Provision No. (12) of the Standard Form Municipal Access Agreement (MAA) by inserting, after the words "Federation of Canadian Municipalities", the words "Association of Municipalities of Ontario";

(ii) the inclusion of a $50,000.00 one-time processing fee in the MAA relating to negotiations, preparation and administration of such agreement; and

(iii) amending such agreement to provide that, pursuant to the City of Toronto's policy regarding disclosure as applied in the agreement, the City not entertain any non-disclosure provisions that might limit its ability to convey information to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario and/or other municipalities;

such report to remain confidential in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act, save and except the following recommendations embodied therein:

'It is recommended that:

(1) approval be granted for the use of a Municipal Access Agreement ("MAA") generally in the form described in this report and such other terms and conditions as may be satisfactory to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor, which shall be used in negotiations with qualified individuals or companies wishing to access public street allowances for the purposes of installing, maintaining and operating telecommunications systems, subject always to the City's requirements and permissions for construction within the street allowance;

(2) should Council decide to include a definition of "cable" in the MAA, then such definition refer to a diameter of 1 inch;

(3) City Council state its intention to seek Access Agreements in due course with the incumbent local telephone carrier, national telecommunications providers, cable TV companies and any other party which may maintain and operate existing telecommunications networks within public highways;

(4) authorization be granted for the introduction of a Bill to repeal Chapter 323, Telecommunications Cable and Ancillary Equipment, of the Municipal Code of the former City of Toronto and replace it on a city-wide basis with a by-law in substantially the form attached to this report as Appendix "A" to regulate the installation, maintenance and operation of telecommunications equipment in City streets by requiring the consent and permission of the City to undertake such activities; and

(5) the appropriate City Officials be authorized to take the necessary steps to implement the foregoing, including the introduction in Council of any Bills that may be required.';

(b) the confidential report dated September 27, 1999, from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, embodying the following recommendations, be adopted, subject to the inclusion of a $50,000.00 one-time processing fee in the MAA with GT Group Telecom relating to negotiations, preparation and administration of such agreement:

'It is recommended that:

(1) authorization be granted to enter into an MAA with GT Group Telecom Inc. or a successor or assign approved by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services to allow the Company to enter upon the public highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Toronto for the purposes of installing, maintaining and operating a fibre optic telecommunications network throughout the City, subject always to the City's requirements and permissions for construction within the street allowance;

(2) the MAA generally contain such terms and conditions as have been negotiated between the parties and as generally contained in the City's Standard Form MAA, and approved by City Council, and such other terms and conditions as may be satisfactory to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and the City Solicitor; and

(3) the appropriate City Officials be authorized to take the necessary steps to implement the foregoing, including the introduction in Council of any Bills that may be required.';

(c) the confidential report dated September 28, 1999, from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, be adopted, such report to remain confidential in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act, save and except the following recommendations embodied therein:

'It is recommended that:

(1) the application by Ledcor Communications Ltd (or its Corporate Affiliate Worldwide Fiber (F.O.T.S.) Ltd.) ("Ledcor") to install conduits and fibre optic cable laterally across various City of Toronto streets be authorized subject to the applicant (or its successor or assign approved by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services) entering into an agreement with the City containing terms and conditions generally as set out in this report and such other terms and conditions as may be satisfactory to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and City Solicitor;

(2) the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and the City Solicitor be authorized to negotiate and finalize any outstanding issues with Ledcor; and

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

(d) the confidential report dated September 28, 1999, from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, be adopted, such report to remain confidential in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act, save and except the following recommendations embodied therein:

'It is recommended that:

(1) authorization be granted to enter into an agreement with Stream Intelligent Networks Corp. to install conduits and fibre optic cable laterally across various City of Toronto streets within the underground PATH system in the downtown core, subject to the applicant or a successor or assign as approved by the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services providing the written consent of the tunnel owners and entering into an agreement with the City containing terms and conditions generally as set out in this report, and such other terms and conditions as may be satisfactory to the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and City Solicitor;

(2) the offer of Stream Intelligent Networks Corp. to provide the City with 12 strands of dark fibre for its own use be accepted; and should Council decide to include a definition of "cable", then such definition refer to a diameter of one inch; and

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

(e) in the event that any application is made to the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) relating to the use of City roads or other property under the jurisdiction of the City of Toronto, the City Solicitor be authorized to participate in the CRTC proceeding to protect the City's interests and to retain outside counsel and other experts, if deemed desirable, funding therefor to be allocated from the Corporate Contingency Account;

(f) the Telecommunications Steering Committee be authorized to draw up to $100,000.00 from the Corporate Contingency Account for Telecommunications Steering Committee purposes;

(g) the one-time funds received from Standard Form Municipal Access Agreements be set aside in a new Reserve Fund, entitled 'Telecommunications Development', for the purpose of funding initiatives that further develop the City of Toronto's strategy with respect to telecommunications matters, and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer be requested to take whatever action deemed necessary to give effect thereto;

(h) the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be directed to request the Toronto federal Liberal Caucus to meet with the Telecommunications Steering Committee and other interested Members of Council to discuss telecommunications issues;

(i) the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be requested to submit a further report to the Telecommunications Steering Committee on specific details of the Standard Form Municipal Access Agreement for possible refinements;

(j) Recommendations Nos. (A)(1), (A)(2) and (A)(3) of the Telecommunications Steering Committee embodied in the communication dated September 27, 1999, from the City Clerk, be received; and

(k) the following Recommendations Nos. (B), (C) and (D) of the Telecommunications Steering Committee embodied in the communication dated September 27, 1999, from the City Clerk, be adopted:

'(B) FCM Sub-Committee on Telecommunications.

Recommendation:

The Telecommunications Steering Committee recommends the adoption of the following five rights-of-way principles approved in September, 1999, by the Standing Committee on National Transportation and Communications and the FCM National Board of Directors:

(1) in pursuance of bona fide municipal purposes, municipal governments must have the ability to manage the occupancy and uses of rights-of-way, including the establishment of the number, type and location of telecommunications and broadcasting facilities, while taking into account applicable technical constraints;

(2) Municipal governments must recover all costs associated with occupancy and use of rights-of-way by telecommunications service providers and broadcasting undertakings;

(3) Municipal governments must not be responsible for the costs of relocating telecommunications and broadcasting facilities if relocation is required for bona fide municipal purposes;

(4) Municipal governments must not be liable for losses associated with the disruption of telecommunications or broadcasting services or with damage to the property of telecommunications service providers or broadcasting undertakings as a result of usual municipal activities or the activities of other parties; and

(5) recognizing that rights-of-way have value, municipal governments must receive full compensation for the occupancy and use of municipal rights-of-way by telecommunications service providers and broadcasting undertakings.

(C) Establishing a Level-Playing Field for Access To and

Use of City Rights-of-Way by Telecom Organizations.

Recommendation:

The Telecommunications Steering Committee recommends that City Council request the Toronto District Heating Corporation and Toronto Hydro to refrain from making any further agreements until such time as the Telecommunications Steering Committee has had the opportunity to discuss this matter further.

(D) Audit of Telecommunications Leased

Line Costs for Traffic Control Systems.

Recommendation:

The Telecommunications Steering Committee recommends the adoption of the recommendation of the Works Committee embodied in the communication (July 14, 1999) from the City Clerk wherein it is recommended that the following recommendations contained in the report (June 25, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services be adopted:

(1) the proposal received from Expense Recovery and Overhead Reduction Services (ERORS) Inc., to audit the past payments made to Bell Canada for leased telecommunications lines associated with the traffic signal control systems be accepted; and

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

The Policy and Finance Committee reports having concurred with the Recommendations embodied in the following report (September 10, 1999) from the Chief Administrative Officer:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to advise the Policy and Finance Committee that several time-critical telecommunications matters have emerged in recent weeks, including several requests for access to the public rights-of-way. The issues have significant policy and financial implications for the City and are taking place in a sensitive legal climate. In order to facilitate successful processes and procedures, direct reporting to the next meeting of Council on September 28, 1999, is required.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

There are no immediate or direct expenditures arising from the recommendations of this report. The matters being addressed by the Steering Committee, however, have significant policy and financial implications for the City since they involve access to and use of City property by telecommunications providers.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the Telecommunications Steering Committee, in consultation with the Chief Administrative Officer and the Inter-Departmental Working Group, report on current time-critical developments directly to the September 28, 1999, meeting of Council; and

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

Council Reference/Background/History:

Council established the Telecommunications Steering Committee in February 1999, to develop a corporate-wide and strategic City approach to telecom issues. In accordance with its mandate, the report from the Steering Committee, that was adopted at the July 1999 meeting of Council, recommended a number of activities to ensure City-wide coordination and the development of a comprehensive policy respecting the use of the municipality's rights-of-way.

Comments and Justification:

In recent weeks, the respective (legal) positions of telecom companies and municipalities have become more refined in anticipation of the imminent Public Notice (of Hearing) process by the CRTC. This process was reported to the July 1999 Council meeting in the report from the City Solicitor and the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services titled, "Vancouver v. Ledcor: CRTC Hearing - City of Toronto Support of FCM Position". In summary, an issue has arisen across Canada over the interpretation of the jurisdictional authority of municipalities to seek cost-recovery for the use of its rights-of-way (ROW). This is considered by the CRTC to have sufficient importance to merit national attention and comment by affected parties. City Council has adopted a position in support of the FCM, whom shall be taking part in the proceedings.

The Steering Committee has been contacted by four major telecom providers all of whom are seeking application and permits for access to and the use of the public ROW, to varying degrees and for varying types of systems/installations. Municipal consent is required for such access on such conditions and terms, including cost-recovery, as agreed by the parties and as are necessary to protect both the public interest and the integrity of the ever-decreasing available space in ROW.

Some municipalities have agreed to permit telecom companies access to the ROW for installation/construction on a minimal cost-recovery basis pending the results of the current CRTC proceedings. The Steering Committee shall report on a strategy for responding to applications pending a CRTC decision. For the longer-term, they will also report on a plan to ensure that no unfair advantage is applied to one company over another due to past agreements, or traditional arrangements whereby some incumbent carriers (i.e. Bell Canada) were not subject to such agreements.

Next Steps and Conclusion:

Prior to the September 28, 1999, meeting of the City of Toronto Council, the Steering Committee will be continuing its discussions with Ledcor Industries Inc. and/or their designated representatives with respect to an agreement in accordance with a proposed Municipal Access Agreement (MAA). It is hoped that the outcome of these discussions may result in a mechanism for responding to other applications as well.

The initiatives of the Steering Committee are in conformance with Council approved directives and are being undertaken in consultation with the Chief Administrative Officer and key members of the Inter-Departmental Working Group on Telecommunications. As a result of external factors beyond the control of the City, the resolution of these matters require reporting by the Steering Committee directly to the next meeting of Council on September 28, 1999.

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (September 27, 1999) from the City Clerk:

The Telecommunications Steering Committee on September 24, 1999, recommended that the following time-critical telecommunications matters be forwarded directly to Council for consideration on September 28, 1999:

(A) Applications from Telecommunications Organizations.

(1) Street Crossing Agreement - Ledcor Communications Ltd. (All Wards).

Recommendation:

The Telecommunications Steering Committee recommends the adoption of the confidential report (September 22, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, respecting a Street Crossing Agreement - Ledcor Communications Ltd.

Background:

The Telecommunications Steering Committee had before it a confidential report (September 22, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services respecting a Street Crossing Agreement - Ledcor Communications Ltd.

(2) Request for Street Crossing Agreement - Stream Intelligent Networks Corp. (Ward 24 - Downtown).

Recommendation:

Background:

(3) Municipal Access Agreement for Telecommunications Purposes - GT Group Telecom Inc.

Recommendation:

The Telecommunications Steering Committee recommends the adoption of the confidential report (September 22, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, respecting Municipal Access Agreement for Telecommunications Purposes - GT Group Telecom Inc.

Background:

The Telecommunications Steering Committee had before it a confidential report (September 22, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services respecting a Municipal Access Agreement for Telecommunications Purposes - GT Group Telecom Inc.

(B) FCM Sub-Committee on Telecommunications.

Recommendation:

(1) In pursuance of bona fide municipal purposes, municipal governments must have the ability to manage the occupancy and uses of rights-of-way, including the establishment of the number, type and location of telecommunications and broadcasting facilities, while taking into account applicable technical constraints;

(2) Municipal governments must recover all costs associated with occupancy and use of rights-of-way by telecommunications service providers and broadcasting undertakings;

(3) Municipal governments must not be responsible for the costs of relocating telecommunications and broadcasting facilities if relocation is required for bona fide municipal purposes;

(5) Recognizing that rights-of-way have value, municipal governments must receive full compensation for the occupancy and use of municipal rights-of-way by telecommunications service providers and broadcasting undertakings.

Background:

The Telecommunications Steering Committee had before it a document from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities submitted by Councillor John Adams, Chair, entitled "Telecommunications: Occupancy and Use of Municipal Rights-of-Way."

(C) Establishing a Level-Playing Field for Access

to and Use of City Rights-of-Way by Telecom Organizations.

The Telecommunications Steering Committee recommends that City Council request the Toronto District Heating Company and Toronto Hydro to refrain from making any further agreements until such time as the Telecommunications Steering Committee has had the opportunity to discuss this matter further.

The Telecommunications Steering Committee reports, for the information of Council, having requested:

(1) the members of the Telecommunications Steering Committee, the Councillors on the Board of Toronto Hydro and the respective city staff to meet with the appropriate management staff of Toronto Hydro and the Toronto District Heating Company to ensure that they are aware of the City's overall objectives and to engage in an open exchange of information; and

(2) the City Solicitor to report back to the Telecommunications Steering Committee on the rights and privileges that Toronto Hydro has to use the rights-of-way for the purpose of electricity and if they apply in the same way to telecommunications and to provide specific legal advice as to how broad the City's powers are as a shareholder of Toronto Hydro.

Background:

The Telecommunications Steering Committee briefly discussed a forthcoming report from the Chief Administrative Officer respecting this matter.

(D) Audit of Telecommunications Leased

Line Costs for Traffic Control Systems.

Recommendation:

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

Background:

The Telecommunications Steering Committee had before it a communication (July 14, 1999) from the City Clerk recommending to Council, through the Telecommunications Steering Committee, the adoption of the report dated June 25, 1999, from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services respecting the Audit of Telecommunications Leased Line Costs for Traffic Signal Control Systems.

(Copies of the aforementioned confidential reports were forwarded to all Members of Council under Confidential Cover.)

(A copy of the report, entitled "Telecommunications: Occupancy and Use of Municipal Rights of Way" from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, referred to in the foregoing report, is on file in the office of the City Clerk.)

(Report dated July 14, 1999

from the City Clerk addressed to the

Telecommunications Steering Committee, referred to above)

Recommendation:

The Works Committee recommends to Council, through the Telecommunications Steering Committee, the adoption of the report dated June 25, 1999, from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services.

Background:

The Works Committee on July 14, 1999, had before it a report (June 25, 1999) from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services recommending that:

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

Councillor Howard Moscoe, North York Spadina, appeared before the Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

(Report dated June 25, 1999, addressed to the

Works Committee from the

Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services)

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to advise of the results of the Request for Proposals for a Telecommunications Audit of past payments made to Bell Canada for leased line services associated with the City of Toronto's traffic signal control systems, and to request authority to award a contract to the recommended firm.

Funding Sources:

There are no funds required for this agreement. Under the proposed agreement, the recommended firm will be compensated on a percentage basis of all recovered overpayments previously made by the City of Toronto for the lease of telecommunications lines. The City will retain all future savings resulting from billing errors identified through the audit. If no savings are found as a result of the audit, the City will not be charged any fee.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

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

Background:

The City's traffic signal systems include approximately 1,830 traffic control signals. The City currently leases the use of Bell Canada's communication lines to control and monitor the operation of these signalized intersections via central traffic control computer systems located in the Integrated Traffic Control Centre at 703 Don Mills Road.

The traffic signal systems communication network configuration consists of:

(a) one hundred and twenty (120) dedicated high speed 4 wire, full duplex S4T4 data circuits;

(b) one thousand five hundred and twenty four (1524) dedicated low speed 4 wire, full display class C data circuits; and,

(c) two hundred and forty (240) 2 wire, full duplex, class C data circuits.

Bell Canada's billing practices for these services are subject to a complex variety of tariffs, as well as Canadian Radio and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) rulings and do not follow those which apply to more commonly used Bell leases, such as for telephone voice lines. Annual telecommunication costs for Toronto's traffic signal control systems total approximately $1.4 million and include, primarily charges for data transmission over Bell's various classes of lines and charges for routing data through Bell's Communication Offices.

Discussion:

In recent years a number of municipalities in Ontario have conducted telecommunication cost audits and have recovered significant funds due to billing errors by their communication provider (Bell Canada). Article 19 of Bell Canada's Terms of Service provides a limited right of recourse for charges that should not have been billed and for those that were over billed.

In 1997, staff of the Transportation Services Division began to research the possibility of conducting an audit of telecommunication costs related to Toronto's traffic signal control systems. In recognition that staff did not have the expertise in the area of Bell Canada tariffs and CRTC rulings, or the resources to conduct a review of the complex telecommunication billings, the law firm of McCarthy Tetrault was retained to assist Transportation staff. During 1998, McCarthy Tetrault prepared a brief on the issues, drafted a request for proposals, recommended candidate telecommunication auditing firms, reviewed the submissions and made recommendations regarding the award of a contract.

On October 19, 1998 a detailed request for proposals was issued to the following six firms, ERORS Inc., Kawchuk Associates, ProbeTel Inc., Pacomm Consulting Inc., Angus Dortman Associates Inc., and Deloitte & Touche Consulting Group. ERORS Inc., ProbeTel Inc. and Kawchuk Associates submitted proposals.

The proposal received from Kawchuk Associates included a provision for payment based on savings accruing to the City of Toronto subsequent to the Audit Period. The request for proposals document clearly stated that this would not be permitted; therefore, the submission of Kawchuk Associates was not given further consideration.

McCarthy Tetrault and Transportation staff using the evaluation criteria attached as Appendix 1 reviewed the remaining two submissions. The ERORS Inc. submission was determined to be the superior based on a detailed work plan, comprehensive/relevant references, and demonstrated understanding of the task responsibilities and schedule. ERORS will receive compensation based on a percentage of the refund received by the City of Toronto from Bell Canada for any billing errors previously made for the lease of telecommunications lines. The City will retain all future savings resulting from billing errors identified through the audit. If no savings are found as a result of the audit, the City will not be charged any fee. The amount of such savings and/or underbilling from Bell cannot be determined before the audit is commenced. Similar audits of other municipal traffic signal telecommunications costs have found errors varying from zero to fifty per cent. Since the audit will cover a six-year period, the refund on the approximately $9 million paid to Bell Canada by the City of Toronto during that period could be a very large amount and the compensation to ERORS Inc. could range from $0.00 to more than $250,000.00.

Since the major reconfiguration of the telecommunications network completed in 1994 resulted in significantly reduced annual lease costs, it is expected that the greatest potential refunds will accrue from the period prior to January 1, 1995. Accordingly because of the six-year limitation period, it is important that the audit commence quickly to maximize the City's potential refund.

Because this procurement process began more that a year ago, it does not comply with the procedure adopted by Council at its meeting on March 2, 3 and 4, 1999, requiring the Purchasing Materials Management Division to be involved in the process and the Director of Purchasing and Materials Management has been advised of this. However the Transportation Services Division is submitting this report for the consideration of Council in the belief that the process followed was fair and equitable. It has resulted in a proposed contractual agreement that has no cost obligation to the City of Toronto, could recover significant funds and reduce current/future operating expenses.

Conclusions:

This report requests authority for the appropriate officials to complete the necessary contract documents for the audit of past payments made to Bell Canada for leased telecommunications lines for the traffic signal control systems, to the firm of ERORS Inc. on a percentage of costs recovered basis.

Contact Name:

Bruce Zvaniga

Manager, Traffic Signal Control Systems

Transportation Services Division

Telephone: 392-8826

APPENDIX 1

TORONTO TRANSPORTATION

TELECOMMUNICATIONS AUDIT

EVALUATION CRITERIA

1. Any major proposal compliant omissions (clause 55)

2. Depth of qualifications - firm and staff

3. Prior experience and successful claims

4. Comprehensive work plan/approach

(a) Compensation formula (scenarios - high; medium, low)

(b) Saving potential

(c) Minimum municipal cost

(d) Firm's motivation

(e) Other

5. Any unacceptable limiting conditions

6. Significant reference checks

7. Understanding of the scope of work

8. Demands on city staff efforts

9. Schedule concerns

10. Specific reference of applicable billing errors

11. Is Bell claim follow up process acceptable?

12. Major contract agreement issues (eg., letter of credit)

(The confidential reports, all dated September 22, 1999, from the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, respecting a Street Crossing Agreement - Ledcor Communications Ltd.; a Street Crossing Agreement - Stream Intelligent Networks Corp.; and a Municipal Access Agreement for Telecommunications Purposes - GT Group Telecom Inc., referred to in the foregoing communication dated September 27, 1999, remain confidential in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act.)

(Extract from the Confidential Report

dated September 27, 1999 from the

Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services)

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(2) should Council decide to include a definition of "cable" in the MAA, then such definition refer to a diameter of 1 inch;

(5) the appropriate City Officials be authorized to take the necessary steps to implement the foregoing, including the introduction in Council of any Bills that may be required.

(Confidential Report dated September 27, 1999 from the

Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, referred to above)

Purpose:

To authorize a Municipal Access Agreement (MAA) with GT Group Telecom Inc. for the purposes of installing, maintaining and operating a fibre optic telecommunications network within public highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Toronto.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

The proposal will result in revenue generation potential for the City. No direct costs to the City are involved.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(3) the appropriate City Officials be authorized to take the necessary steps to implement the foregoing, including the introduction in Council of any Bills that may be required.

Background:

The Policy and Finance Committee, at its meeting of September 16, 1999, concurred in the Recommendations contained in a report (September 10, 1999) from the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), namely that the Telecommunications Steering Committee, in consultation with the CAO and the Inter-Departmental Working Group, report on time-critical developments to the September 28, 1999, meeting of Council.

Once such matter is a request from GT Group Telecom Inc., a Vancouver-based telecommunications firm to secure a Municipal Access Agreement (MAA) to enable it to install, maintain and operate a fibre optic telecommunications network within public highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Toronto. We advised the Telecommunications Steering Committee of this in an In Camera report to the Committee's September 24, 1999 meeting. The members present requested that this matter be sent to Council. We note that we are also submitting a separate report on a standard form MAA which would have to be approved by Council as the basis of entering a specific agreement with GT Group Telecom.

Comments:

We have reported previously to the Telecommunications Steering Committee (In Camera report of June 8, 1999) on a Standard Form Municipal Access Agreement, as directed by City Council at its meeting of July 29, 30 and 31, 1998 (Clause No. 2 of Report No. 16 of the Strategic Policies and Priorities Committee). Although the matter was deferred by the Committee and Council, due to the current application by Group Telecom, we have been requested to bring forward the issue at this time.

City Council, in considering an extension of an existing agreement with Metronet Communications Group Inc. acknowledged that a standard form access agreement was needed to enable qualified individuals or companies to access the public streets for the purposes of installing, maintaining and operating telecommunications systems. The objective is to facilitate access for legitimate competitors in a consistent, equitable fashion.

The standard form MAA provisions as described in our companion report have been discussed by staff with GT Group Telecom's representative and the firm has requested that the matter be brought forward for Council endorsement.

The existing and proposed by-laws stipulate that applications for access to City streets for telecommunications purposes should include:

(a) plans of the proposed telecommunications network, showing locations of proposed or existing telecommunications equipment, summarizing the extent of the network and specifying the boundaries of the area of the City in which the network is proposed;

(b) technical specifications for telecommunications equipment to be installed; and

(c) a list of third party facilities presently used or proposed to be used for the installation of telecommunications equipment.

GT Group Telecom, under date of August 9, 1999, supplied a variety of information related to its application. The firm was founded in 1996 to provide telecommunications services to business customers. GT Group Telecom has an operational network, under an MAA in Vancouver and plans to expand to cover the top 10 largest Canadian business centres by 2000. According to the material, GT Group Telecom has recently reached an agreement with Toronto Hydro to utilize dark fibre from Hydro as extensively as possible. Where Hydro does not have fibre to certain target buildings, GT Group Telecom would build its own. Schematic maps submitted show a proposed network comprising 3 rings (King Street, Adelaide Street and Queen Street) which covers the area from Lake Shore Boulevard, Church Street, John Street and Queen Street. The GT Group Telecom hub is at 20 Bay Street, with connections to Bell sites on Adelaide and Simcoe Streets. The total length of cable in the 3 rings is approximately 15,460 metres.

Conclusions:

The application by GT Group Telecom Inc. to enter into a Municipal Access Agreement (MAA) in order to establish a telecommunications network in the City of Toronto is a positive initiative that will advance the City's objective of facilitating a competitive telecommunications infrastructure.

The terms and conditions negotiated are consistent with a standard form MAA that we have recommended in a companion report and will result in direct revenues and services to the City.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Andrew Koropeski, Director

Transportation Services District 1

392-7711

(Extract from the Confidential Report

dated September 28, 1999 from the

Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, referred to above)

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(2) the Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services and the City Solicitor be authorized to negotiate and finalize any outstanding issues with Ledcor; and

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

(Extract from the Confidential Report

dated September 28, 1999 from the

Commissioner of Works and Emergency Services, referred to above)

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

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

Procurement Authorization - Supply and Installation of

Permanent Inspection Platforms

on the Prince Edward Viaduct

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted the following recommendation:

"It is recommended that the report dated September 27, 1999, from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, embodying the following recommendations, be adopted:

'It is recommended that:

(1) funding for this project [Prince Edward Viaduct Permanent Inspection Platform, included in Project #340 Bridges and Tunnels - Various of the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) Capital Program] be financed through the issuance of debentures for a term not exceeding twenty years, noting that the amount is within the City's updated debt and financial obligation limit, and the City Solicitor be directed to apply to the Ontario Municipal Board for approval as required under the City of Toronto Act; and

(2) the future year funding request for the Prince Edward Viaduct - Beam Replacement, included in Project #340, Bridges and Tunnels - Various of the TTC Capital Program, be reduced by a total of $400 thousand in the 2000-2004 Capital Program ($100 thousand per year from 2000 to 2003).' ")

The Policy and Finance Committee reports having referred the following communication (September 3, 1999) from the Interim General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission to the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer for report thereon directly to Council for its meeting scheduled to be held on September 28, 1999, respecting the availability of funds for this project:

At its meeting on Wednesday, September 1, 1999, the Commission considered the attached report entitled, "Procurement Authorization - Supply And Installation Of Permanent Inspection Platforms On The Prince Edward Viaduct."

The Commission adopted the Recommendation embodied in the above report, as listed below:

"It is recommended that the Commission approve:

(1) acceptance of the tender submitted by Dundas Iron and Steel Limited in the amount of $959,400.00 for the supply and installation of permanent inspection platforms on the Prince Edward Viaduct;

(2) proceeding with this work as a result of the City Works and Emergency Services Department's project to install a suicide barrier on the Prince Edward Viaduct and holding the expenses in TTC accounts pending City Council approval; and

(3) forwarding this report to City Council to confirm funding."

The foregoing is forwarded to City of Toronto Council for the purpose of confirming the availability of funding for this project.

--------

Toronto Transit Commission

Report No. 20, entitled "Procurement Authorization -

Supply And Installation Of Permanent Inspection

Platforms On The Prince Edward Viaduct"

from its meeting of September 1, 1999.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the Commission approve:

(1) acceptance of the tender submitted by Dundas Iron & Steel Limited in the amount of $959,400.00 for the supply and installation of permanent inspection platforms on the Prince Edward Viaduct;

(3) forwarding this report to City Council to confirm funding.

Funding

No funds were budgeted for this expenditure in the 1999-2003 TTC Capital Program as approved by City Council on March 2, 1999. At its meeting of May 11 and 12, 1999, City Council approved an $800,000.00 expenditure associated with the purchase of a Bridgemaster unit which was required to allow TTC to continue to inspect the underside of the concrete track and steel walkways. At that time, it was agreed that funding for the purchase would be determined as part of the 2000-2004 budget process.

The TTC has been unable to secure a suitable Bridgemaster unit and therefore have proceeded with a tender for the installation of permanent inspection platforms. The platforms require additional funding of $159,400.00 which will be included in the TTC 2000-2004 Capital Program. As before, the funding arrangements will be determined as part of the budget process.

Background

At its meeting of March 23, 1999 the Commission approved in principle, the procurement of a specialized inspection vehicle (modified Bridgemaster), in the estimated amount of $800,000.00. This estimated cost was based on preliminary pricing received from a prospective supplier. This requirement was based on the need to allow TTC to continue to inspect the underside of the TTC concrete track and steel walkway beams, as a result of the City's program to construct the suicide prevention barrier on the Prince Edward Viaduct.

At its meetings of May 11 and 12, 1999, City Council approved an amount of $800,000.00 for the purchase of a modified Bridgemaster vehicle to be included in the TTC's 2000 Capital Budget as a special item over and above the TTC's capital funding needs and that these costs be recovered over 10 years by a yearly rental. The final arrangements for the funding were to determined as part of the 2000-2004 Capital Program process.

Subsequently, staff prepared specifications for the procurement of a specialized inspection vehicle to ensure that the Commission could continue to inspect the Prince Edward Viaduct structure every two years, in accordance with recommendations from the National Bridge Inspection Standards and published MTO Standards - Ontario Structure Inspection Manual. An advertisement was placed in the Daily Commercial News and a total of seven (7) companies requested tenders, out of which one (1) submitted a tender which was technically non-compliant.

As a result of the formal tendering process, manufacturers have advised that a vehicle meeting inspection requirements (extended reach) is not currently available on the market and that to produce one would require extensive research and development. It should be understood that the preliminary pricing was based on an off-the-shelf vehicle and that a modified vehicle would cost substantially more to design and manufacture than previously indicated.

The City's project schedule is to install the suicide prevention barrier by the end of December 1999, and due to its impact on TTC inspections, staff proceeded to obtain tenders for a second option. This option was for the installation of permanent inspection platforms on the Prince Edward Viaduct.

The work entails fabricating and installing small steel platforms at the end of each row of beams, which would be accessible from track level to carry out inspections. There would be an added benefit that during the annual replacement program for track beams, the contracting out of the erection and dismantling of temporary wooden stages and work platforms would not be required. By enabling TTC to carry out its inspections and work on its own, permanent platforms would reduce lane closures and disruptions both on Bloor Street across the Prince Edward Viaduct and on the roadways beneath the bridge. The tender indicated that the temporary suspended scaffolds on the Don Valley Parkway and Bayview Avenue would remain in place to enable this installation. A window of opportunity exists to utilize these temporary suspended scaffolds, currently in place for replacement of the walkway beams on the Prince Edward Viaduct, to install the permanent platforms. However, some scaffolds are scheduled to be removed this fall and it is essential that this procurement proceed now, otherwise the cost and complexity of the work would increase substantially.

The order of magnitude for the permanent platform option is comparable to the procurement of the specialized inspection vehicle previously approved by City Council at its meetings of May 11 and 12, 1999. Also, there will be a reduction of approximately $100,000.00 in the annual procurement of temporary work platforms. Staff consider the permanent platforms as a preferable option which avoids the complications of using a specialized vehicle for a brief annual period, rental payments and vehicle maintenance. The TTC will be able to minimize road closures on the Don Valley Parkway and Bayview Avenue in the future as a result of the installation.

The TTC is currently scheduled for a weekend closure of the Don Valley Parkway on the weekend of October 15, 1999 to remove the temporary suspended scaffold platforms. To accommodate this procurement, it will be necessary to defer this closure to November.

Discussion

Specifications and drawings were prepared for the above noted contract and a request for tender was issued with a closing date of August 9, 1999. An advertisement was placed in the Daily Commercial News and a total of seventeen (17) companies requested tenders, out of which seven (7) submitted tenders. All responses are summarized in Appendix "A".

The lowest tender was submitted by Canron Construction Corporation East in the amount of $877,688.00. However their tender included the following exceptions which are considered unacceptable: Canron could not meet the scheduled completion unless they received notification of award immediately after the tender closing; Canron took exception to the specified terms of payment as their tender was based on monthly progress payments in lieu of payment following completion of each span of the platforms; and Canron's tender was based on the TTC being responsible for re-routing all hydro, telephone and other utilities rather than the contractor as specified in the tender documents. Based on the above, the tender submitted by Canron Construction Corporation East is considered commercially unacceptable.

The second lowest tender, which meets all contract requirements and contains no exceptions or qualifications, was submitted by Dundas Iron & Steel Limited in the amount of $959,400.00. Dundas Iron & Steel has satisfactorily completed work for the Commission as a sub-contractor. Reference checks were completed which indicated they have satisfactorily performed work of a similar size and nature in the past. Their tender is considered commercially and technically compliant.

The Agreement to Bond submitted by Dundas Iron & Steel Limited covers both a Labour and Material Payment Bond and a performance Bond and was submitted by a Surety Company licensed to transact business in Ontario.

Justification

It is necessary to proceed with the foregoing procurement expenditure in order to meet published safety recommendations for bridge inspection. Given the City's program to construct a suicide barrier, the installation of permanent inspection platforms are necessary to inspect the underside of the TTC concrete track and steel walkway beams, thus ensuring the safety and integrity of the subway system on the Prince Edward Viaduct and the safety of human and vehicular traffic on the roadways and pathways located beneath.

August 10, 1999

6-123-124

Attachments

Appendix "A"

Supply, Installation Of Permanent Inspection Platforms

On The Prince Edward Viaduct

Tender no. T31W9807

Firms Total Tendered Price

Canron Construction Corporation East $ 877,688.00*

Dundas Iron & Steel Ltd. $ 959,040.00

Autogene Industries North Bay Inc.

O/A Central Welding & Iron Works $1,292,832.00

Consolidated Canadian Contractors

(1031695 Ontario Inc.) $1,316,000.00

M & G Steel Ltd. $1,355,000.00

E.S. Fox Ltd. $1,402,971.70

Lorvin Steel Ltd. $1,643,200.00

Engineer's Estimate - $1,300,000.00

* Commercially Non-compliant.

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, the following report (September 27, 1999) from the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer:

Purpose:

To respond to the request on the source of funding for the project.

Financial Implications:

The project cost of $959.4 thousand should be financed from an amendment to the 1999 program. The recommendations in this report will result in an operating budget impact of capital financing of $125 thousand in 2000, to be partially offset in future years by the reduced capital financing requirements from the Beam Replacement component ($52 thousand operating savings of capital financing by 2003). Future year capital expenditure reductions resulting from this project are: $400 thousand project cost reduction in four years in the Prince Edward Viaduct - Beam Replacement, included in Project #340 Bridges and Tunnels - Various ($100 thousand per year from 2000 to 2003), through the elimination of the requirement of temporary work platforms; and $100 thousand yearly operating budget reductions related to the deletion of the previously required rental of a bridgemaster for scheduled inspections.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) funding for this project (Prince Edward Viaduct Permanent Inspection Platform, included in Project #340 Bridges and Tunnels - Various of the TTC Capital Program) be financed through the issuance of debentures for a term not exceeding twenty years, noting that the amount is within the City's updated debt and financial obligation limit, and direct the City Solicitor to apply to the OMB for approval as required under the City of Toronto Act.; and

(2) the future year funding request for the Prince EdwardViaduct - Beam Replacement, included in Project #340, Bridges and Tunnels - Various of the TTC Capital Program, be reduced by a total of $400 thousand in the 2000-2004 capital program ($100 thousand per year from 2000 to 2003).

Background:

The Policy and Finance Committee, on September 16, 1999, adopted the recommendations to approve the project, and referred the matter to the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer for report thereon directly to Council for its meeting scheduled to be held on September 28, 1999, respecting the availability of funding for this project.

At its meeting of May 11 and 12, 1999, Council adopted a recommendation from the Urban Environment and Development Committee that an amount of $800,000.00 for the purchase of a modified Bridgemaster vehicle be included in the TTC's 2000 capital budget estimates as a special item over and above the TTC's capital funding needs and that these costs be recovered over 10 years by a yearly rental. The modified bridgemaster, a specialized inspection vehicle, would allow TTC to continue to inspect the underside of the TTC concrete track and steel walkway beams, as a result of the construction of the suicide prevention barrier to be installed on the Prince Edward Viaduct.

TTC indicates that, at the formal tendering process, manufacturers have advised that a vehicle meeting inspection requirements (extended reach) is not currently available on the market and that to produce one would require extensive research and development.

TTC is currently proposing the installation of permanent inspection platforms on the Prince Edward Viaduct at a total cost of $959.4 thousand in November, 1999. The platforms would be accessible from track level to carry out inspections and, as an added benefit, would eliminate the current requirement of erecting and dismantling temporary wooden stages and work platforms for the annual replacement program of track beams.

Discussion:

No funds were provided for this expenditure in the approved TTC 1999 Capital Program. The current option also does not allow for future rental revenues, as were anticipated in the original request for the purchase of the inspection vehicle.

However the permanent platform, as currently recommended by the TTC, will result in a project cost reduction in the Prince Edward Viaduct - Beam Replacement, included in Project #340 Bridges and Tunnels - Various, of $400 thousand ($100 thousand per year from 2000 to 2003), through the elimination of the requirement of temporary work platforms. This reduction is however not available in 1999 and will be reflected in the 2000-2004 Capital Program.

In addition, the project will result in future Operating Budget reductions of $100 thousand per year, starting in 2000, from the deletion of the previously required rental of a bridgemaster used for the scheduled inspections.

Therefore, the project will result in future year capital and operating expenditure reductions that will repay the cost of the project in approximately 6 years. The 1999 expenditure, however, has no available funding for this purpose.

Funding for the TTC capital expenditure, excluding the Sheppard Subway, is primarily from four sources:

(1) the TTC Capital Subsidy Reserve Fund (based on the amount prepaid by the Province in 1998 of all future TTC capital subsidies under the Capital Subsidy Agreement);

(2) depreciation expenses included in the TTC operating budget related to the depreciation of capital assets funded by the Commission;

(3) capital from current; and

(4) debenture financing.

The TTC Capital Subsidy Reserve Fund is anticipated to be depleted in 1999, as per the approved 1999 capital program. The available funding for 1999 through the TTC depreciation funding and capital from current has been also fully allocated in the 1999 approved capital program. Therefore any capital expenditure increase would have to be funded through debt issuance.

The current year project status summary of the TTC, as of July 31, 1999, indicates a year-to-date underexpenditure of $58.2 million. However, the 1999 year-end variance as projected by the TTC, after taking into consideration timing differences and other factors, is a $15.8 million overexpenditure. It is therefore recommended that funding for this expenditure be provided from an amendment to the 1999 program.

Conclusion:

No funds were provided for this expenditure in the approved TTC 1999 Capital Program. It is recommended that funding for the Prince Edward Viaduct Permanent Inspection Platform, included in Project #340 Bridges and Tunnels - Various of the TTC capital program, be financed through the issuance of debentures.

The recommendations in this report are intended to permit the additional financing required for this project. Future year reductions resulting from this project are: $400 thousand project cost reduction in four years in the Prince Edward Viaduct - Beam Replacement, included in Project #340 Bridges and Tunnels - Various ($100 thousand per year from 2000 to 2003), through the elimination of the requirement of temporary work platforms; and $100 thousand yearly operating budget reductions related to the deletion of the previously required rental of a bridgemaster for scheduled inspections.

Contact Name:

Andres Hachard (416) 392-5377)

Toronto District Heating Corporation (TDHC)

Proposed Shareholder Agreement

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, adopted the following recommendations:

"It is recommended that:

(a) the confidential report dated September 27, 1999, from the Chief Administrative Officer, be adopted, such report to remain confidential in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act, save and except those portions authorized by Council to be made available in the public domain and the following recommendations embodied therein:

'It is recommended that:

(1) in accordance with Council's approval of the composition of the Board on July 27, 1999, as shareholder of TDHC, Council approve the election of the members of the Board of Directors, to take effect on October 5, 1999, or as soon thereafter as the TDHC Act is proclaimed, as follows:

(a) Mayor Mel Lastman; and

(b) Mr. Dale Richmond, Chair of Borealis Penco Corporation (a subsidiary of OMERS), Mr. Tomlinson Gunn, the Chief Executive Officer of Borealis Penco, and Mr. Michael Nobrega, of Borealis Penco as the OMERS' nominees;

(2) using the selection process approved by Council, the Selection Committee consisting of the Mayor, the current Chair of TDHC and the City Chief Administrative Officer bring forward the citizen nominees of the City for Council approval as soon as possible;

(3) Council authorize execution of the Shareholders' Agreement substantially in the form attached to this report as Appendix I, which was developed in accordance with the terms previously approved by Council;

(4) as shareholder of TDHC, the City approve the Articles of Amendment attached to this report as Appendix II which reorganizes the share capital structure as necessary to enable investment by OMERS through its subsidiary Borealis Penco;

(5) Council declare that TDHC has title to, and authorize the preparation and execution of such documents which, in the opinion of the City Solicitor, may be necessary to evidence that TDHC owns:

(a) the pipes and appurtenances constructed to interconnect the individual steam systems of the Province, the hospitals, and the City; and

(b) any other pipes previously owned by the City which form part of TDHC's district system;

(6) Council authorize the City Solicitor to prepare a Bill for introduction into Council substantially in the form as attached to this report as Appendix III which authorizes the Chief Administrative Officer or designated alternates to sign and affix the corporate seal on behalf of the City to the various documents required to complete the TDHC transaction at the closing on October 6 and 7, 1999, and/or such other dates as agreed to by the parties to the transaction;

(7) Appendices II and III be made available in the public domain upon approval by Council; and

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

(b) the Chief Administrative Officer be requested to create an initial shareholder direction outlining the City of Toronto's interest and provide policy and procedural direction to the City's directions for approval at the October 26, 1999 meeting of Council, if possible through the Policy and Finance Committee;

(c) the Chief Administrative Officer and the Chief Executive Officer of the Toronto District Heating Corporation (TDHC) be requested to send a joint letter to the employees of TDHC and the Unions representing such employees, outlining the changes in the financing and governance which Council has approved;

(d) the Closing Documents include a letter of assurance from OMERS that OMERS will not sell its controlling interest in Borealis Penco Corporation to any unrelated third party; and

(e) the following motion be referred to the Chief Administrative Officer for consideration in the preparation of the Shareholder Direction Document:

Moved by Councillor Moscoe:

'It is further recommended that the following statement be included in the Articles of Incorporation:

"The Toronto District Heating Corporation not be authorized to engage in telecommunication activity without the express consent of the City of Toronto, through the Telecommunications Steering Committee." ' ")

The Policy and Finance Committee reports having concurred with the following motion requesting that the Chief Administrative Officer submit a confidential report to Council for its meeting scheduled to be held on September 28, 1999, respecting the Proposed Shareholder Agreement with the Toronto District Heating Corporation:

Moved by: Councillor Dennis Fotinos

Seconded by: Councillor Gordon Chong

WHEREAS at the Council meeting of July 28, 29, and 30, 1999, Council approved recommendations to restructure the Toronto District Heating Corporation (TDHC) into a company with shared capital operating under the Ontario Business Corporations Act; and

WHEREAS Council approved the recommendations to partner with OMERS in the new company; and

WHEREAS Council instructed staff to report to the September 28, 1999, meeting of Council with the draft terms of a shareholder agreement between OMERS and the City of Toronto as joint owners of TDHC;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Chief Administrative Officer be instructed to submit to Council for consideration at the September 28, 1999, meeting a confidential report detailing the proposed shareholder agreement.

(City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999, had before it, during consideration of the foregoing Clause, a confidential report (September 27, 1999) from the Chief Administrative Officer, such report to remain confidential, save and except the following recommendations embodied therein, and Appendices II and III referred to therein:

(Extract from the Confidential Report dated September 27, 1999

from the Chief Administrative Officer,

headed "Toronto District Heating Corporation - Shareholders' Agreement")

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(a) Mayor Mel Lastman; and

(b) Dale Richmond, Chair of Borealis Penco Corporation (a subsidiary of OMERS), Tomlinson Gunn, the Chief Executive Officer of Borealis Penco, and Michael Nobrega, of Borealis Penco as the OMERS' nominees;

(2) using the selection process approved by Council, the Selection Committee consisting of the Mayor, the current Chair of TDHC and the City CAO bring forward the citizen nominees of the City for Council approval as soon as possible;

(5) Council declare that TDHC has title to, and authorize the preparation and execution of such documents which, in the opinion of the City Solicitor, may be necessary to evidence that TDHC owns:

(a) the pipes and appurtenances constructed to interconnect the individual steam systems of the Province, the hospitals, and the City; and

(b) any other pipes previously owned by the City which form part of TDHC's district system;

(6) Council authorize the City Solicitor to prepare a bill for introduction into Council substantially in the form as attached to this report as Appendix III which authorizes the CAO or designated alternates to sign and affix the corporate seal on behalf of the City to the various documents required to complete the TDHC transaction at the closing on October 6 and 7, 1999 and/or such other dates as agreed to by the parties to the transaction;

(7) Appendices II and III be made available in the public domain upon approval by Council; and

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

(A copy of Appendices II and III, which were attached to the foregoing report, is 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, for information.)

(a) Toronto Police Service Helicopter Pilot Project - Trust Account.

The Policy and Finance Committee reports having referred the following communication to the Chief Administrative Officer for a full review, in consultation with the Mayor's Office, and report thereon to the Policy and Finance Committee as per the City Council decision of July 6, 7 and 8, 1999:

(July 15, 1999) from the City Clerk advising that City Council, at its meeting on July 6, 7 and 8, 1999, had before it Clause No. 1 of Report No. 7 of The Emergency and Protective Services Committee, headed "Toronto Police Service Helicopter Pilot Project - Trust Account"; and that Council directed that the aforementioned Clause be struck out and referred to the Policy and Finance Committee for further consideration:

(1) as it pertains to the Capital and Operating impacts of helicopters; and

(2) in conjunction with the Year 2000 Capital and Operating Budget review.

(b) Toronto Coach Terminal Inc. - Financial Statements Year Ended December 31, 1998.

The Policy and Finance Committee reports having received the following communication:

(July 7, 1999) from the Interim General Secretary, Toronto Coach Terminal Inc., providing to City Council, through the Policy and Finance Committee, Financial Statements for the Year Ended December 31, 1998, from the Toronto Coach Terminal, Inc.

(c) Toronto Transit Commission Insurance Company Limited Financial Statements - Year Ended December 31, 1998.

The Policy and Finance Committee reports having received the following communication:

(July 29, 1999) from the Secretary, TTC Insurance Company Limited, providing to City Council through the Policy and Finance Committee, Financial Statements for the Year Ended December 31, 1998 from the Toronto Transit Commission Insurance Company Limited.

(d) Confirmation of Procurement Authorization Replacement and Repair of Expansion Joints and Repair of the Roof Slab at St. Clair West Station.

The Policy and Finance Committee reports having received the following communication:

(September 2, 1999) from the Interim General Secretary, Toronto Transit Commission, advising that at its meeting on September 1, 1999, the Toronto Transit Commission considered the report entitled "Confirmation of Procurement Authorization - Replacement and Repair of Expansion Joints and Repair of the Roof Slab at St. Clair West Station", and adopted the Recommendation as listed below:

"It is recommended that the Commission approve:

(1) issuing a sole source purchase order in the upset limit amount of $180,000 to 124686 Ontario Ltd. (Loblaws Properties) for the replacement and repair of the expansion joints and repair of the roof slab at St. Clair West Station below the new Loblaws store at 480 St. Clair West Avenue; and

(2) forwarding this report to City Council for information."

(e) OMB Appeal - Committee Of Adjustment Decision 7 Gange Avenue (Ward 23-Midtown).

The Policy and Finance Committee reports having requested the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer to submit a report directly to Council for its meeting scheduled to be held on September 28, 1999, for consideration with Clause No. 1 of Report No. 12 of the Toronto Community Council respecting the source of funds to implement the Recommendation of the Toronto Community Council respecting this matter:

(September 15, 1999) from the City Clerk, advising that the Toronto Community Council on September 14, 1999, recommended that the Policy and Finance Committee report directly to Council on September 28, 1999, on the source of funds to implement the following recommendations:

"(1) that the City Solicitor and appropriate staff be directed to attend at the Ontario Municipal Board in support of the Committee of Adjustment Decision to refuse the application for the development at 7 Gange Avenue; and

(2) that the City Solicitor be authorized to retain outside planning consultants, as needed."

Respectfully submitted,

MEL LASTMAN

Chair

Toronto, September 16, 1999

(Report No. 7 of The Policy and Finance Committee, including additions thereto, was adopted, as amended, by City Council on September 28 and 29, 1999.)