Members of council, can you please tell come to the council chambers? Members, please come to the council chambers. They're just coming. What is this one here? Members of council, please come to the council chambers. So it's fine. Members of council, please come into the council chambers. 6 8 9 10 13 Okay. before we go to the mailboxes, we'll do quick releases. >> All right, >> council co. What do I look like? Someone to get you water? >> What? What am I? Okay, quick releases. Can we clear the screen and we can put names up for quick releases, please? Okay. If anybody has quick councelor Fletcher, you said yeah. Quick. Do you want to put your name up for quick releases? You can't put your name on. Okay. If we can have staff put your name on. We'll start with Deputy Mayor Malik. Go ahead. Um, uh, CC 43.26, uh, 19 to 37 Queens Key East. I have a amendment. >> Okay, we'll wait for the staff to put it that Does the staff have your amendment? >> Uh, I sent it earlier today. >> Okay, so we'll put it up. Okay. Um, Deputy Mayor Malik is referring to the city solicitor. It's on the screen, the amendment. Has everyone seen it? >> Okay. On favor carried. Thank you, Councelor Meyers. Uh, thank you, speaker. MM43.58. Uh, are the amendments ready? >> It's not ready. >> Okay. And then the other one is MM43.47, the pollinator garden. Is the new language ready? >> I gave it to them this morning. Not ready. Okay, that's fine. >> Okay. But councelor Myers, you held down CC 4323. What about that one? >> The staff are working on that one. And I can consider CC 43 uh23 and MM43114 at the same time if it's easier because >> Okay, let's try to get those those amendments done so we can clear um councelor Fletcher. Thank you, speaker. Uh, the clerks have written that motion for me for TE 34.106 and amended the recommendation. So, I'll move that amendment. >> Okay, we'll wait till the clerk puts it on the screen. >> Metro links Ontario Line long-term temporary road closures, temporary delegation of authority and update on Liberty New. >> Okay, let's just Okay, there we do have it on the screen. So, councelor Fletcher moving the amendment for T34106. >> Thank you. >> All in favor if any carried item is amended. All favor carried. >> Now, I'm going to do something very exciting today. I'm going to release CC 43.8 ward-based maintenance team pilot response to council direction. And councelor Perutza has a referral motion he's going to move. >> Which which item was that? CC 43.8 ward-based maintenance team pilot response to direction >> and council Peruta will move his referral. >> Okay. So let's put the motion on the screen to refer it. Okay. By so councelor Peruta is moving the referral. >> Yes. >> Okay. Moved by councelor Peruta. Okay, that's fine. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> On the item, all in favor carried. >> Oh, hold on. Counselor. Yes, councelor Fletcher. Yes. C uh EC 30.8, 8, which is an amendment, and then moving the supplemental, not an amendment, I'm just moving that we let the film industry know that Old City Hall is a great filming location for them. And then I'll move the supplemental report that staff brought forward on July 28th, EC 30.8, 8. The uh Old City Hall improving the usability of Old City Hall as a filming location. There's a motion. And then there's the motion. Tell the world pardon. Only family movies. I thought you were going to be starring in that council. >> Put it on the screen so we can vote on it. This would came to committee. It got referred here. Staff have a supplemental. This is just to make them aware. And then the supplemental is the staff report coming up after this. Sure. It's not a quick release if you have a question, but unless it's a fast question. >> It's a fast question. Speaker, we'll decide how fast it is when he has. >> Okay. On the motion by >> He has a fast question on the motion. Let's see how fast it is. >> Councelor Matlo, >> this going quick. I just want to understand, did I see correctly that Creio was struck >> because they look at the long term, not the leasing. >> They don't creme does the leasing. So there's >> Okay. But this doesn't conflict with >> doesn't conflict with the longer term. No, it's the immediate. See how fast that was? >> Okay. Fast >> on the item by councelor Fletcher. >> Okay. Let's put both motions on the screen. The first one by councelor Fletcher. 1A on favor. Pose if any carried. No, hold on. 1B by councelor Fletcher. All in favor post if any carried. Yes, that was both. Okay. Councelor Moyes, quick release. >> So, Madam Speaker, I need to reopen MM 43.83 and staff has the amendment. >> Motion to reopen. on favor carried and we'll put the amendment on the screen. This is dollar amount The amendments on the screen on favor. Post if any carried. Item is amended. All favor carried. Councelor Chang. and eyes are ready. I have >> Yes. Okay. So, NY 3416 there's an amendment and then moving staff recommendations along with my amendments. >> Okay. Can you put that put it on the screen? Okay. On the item. Sorry. Is this is this all the attachment because there was an I feel like there's something missing here. Okay, let's hold it down so we can get clarification. >> It's a draft two. I'm sorry. Okay, let's hold this and keep going. Sorry about that. Um, >> NY 3427. >> Yeah, I know. I'm trying to figure out what she's doing. >> Okay. What is it, Council Chang? >> No, I I'm asking if the motions are ready for NY 34.27. >> Okay. What happened to 16? >> She's standing it down. >> So, what's the other one? >> 27. >> Yeah. Do we have the motions for 27? Yes. Okay, let's put it on the screen. NY3427. All favor. Okay, there's two motions. 1 A and 1 B. On one A. All favor carried. on 1B. It's on the screen. On favor carried >> and then moving staff recommendation. Is that necessary with these motions plus staff because we moved it without wreck. So staff recommendation. >> Oh, they were part of my motion. Okay. Then the next one moving staff recommendation. The >> which which one? Which one? NY3 on 28. >> Yes, that's right. >> Okay. So, you're moving staff recommendation. Yeah, it's here without recommendation. Y >> Okay. Councelor Chang is moving the staff recommendation. On favor carried >> and then let's keep going. CC 43.24. I have a motion. >> This 3036 Henden Avenue. Yes, that's right. >> Okay, you have a motion. >> Yes, that's right. >> Okay, let's put the motion on the screen. Okay, there it is on the screen. Has everybody read the motion? Yeah. Okay. On on the motion on favor. Post if any carried. Item is amended. On favor carried. >> And then MM 43.74. I have an amendment. Okay. On 74, you have two motions. One A and one B. on one a. >> It's the fan club. They They're so excited. >> Okay, hold on. Hold on. 1 A on favor carried. 1B on favor carried. Item is amended. On favor carried. >> Dynamite. Thank you guys. Okay, just just one sec. Coun councilor Cole, you held down CC 432025 245 251 Marley. Are you ready to release that? What's the number? >> CC 4325 Marley Avenue. >> Yes. I just like to record a vote. >> No, I I have to move. >> Oh, yeah. You got the complimentary whatever it is. >> I got to move the supplement. >> Okay. It's not fast. Is it 13 or or 25? That >> Okay, we're at number 25 Marley Avenue. Yeah. Okay. So, for 25 Marley Avenue, Councelor Perks. >> Yes. I'd like to move the supplementary report. >> Okay. So, on 4325, Councelor Perks is moving the supplementary report. On favor, >> you want it recorded, Mike? >> Recorded. >> No, no, no, no. All favor carried. And councelor Cole, you held down CC 4313 1410 1416 Egllandon Avenue West. >> Uh staff has prepared a motion. What staff? >> Planning staff. >> Handy staff. >> Well, we don't The clerk doesn't have it. It's not ready. >> Okay, hold it. It's okay. >> Councelor Fletcher, you >> Oh, I just I just thought because there's we have all those new ones, Speaker 121 on that unless we can hold some, but staff that are waiting on those, if we went through them, then they could leave if they need to. Okay, we have we have three three we have three to add. God help me. God help me here. >> She's >> Okay, let's just add these three and then we'll go through the >> No, the these were received before 6:30. >> Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Okay. Give me the names. >> Come on. Okay. >> Okay. These me these these motions >> Yes. I'm just going to say that, Councelor Fletcher. >> Yeah. Okay. These three that we're introducing was was uh uh brought into the clerks before 6:30 and no, they hit the the deadline. So that's it. Okay. So let's introduce C3. Councelor Chang. >> Yes, it is. If you came to Young Street, you would know how urgent it is. >> Yes. Because they're not replanting the planters. And right now it's all weeds. All of Young Street is deplorable. So they're working on it. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. On favor. Carrie. This is going to help all of us. >> Councelor Fletcher. >> They have planters. >> They took all >> You have planters. Angley would like a couple of planters. >> They took all of ours. >> We have broken. >> You sending that. This is just to have access to the minutes of the parking authority should we wish to have it because we took all the counselors off the board. Thank you. >> All in favor? Carried. >> Councelor Pastneck. >> Well, this is extremely important. Uh we have a mural that's half done at Wilson Station and they need money to finish it. And this is section 37. >> So to art lovers is extremely urgent. >> All in favor? Carrie. >> Yeah. >> And can you do 21 mm 43121. Okay. So, we've already added this. Okay. So on MM4321 on favor it's on the screen carried mm 43122 section 37 money councelor Bravo on favor carried mm 431 123 Three local appeal um hearing. All in favor carried. Mm 43124 by councelor Thompson. On favor carried. Mm 43125 by councelor Fletcher. Loading zone. All in favor carry. Mm 43126 section 37 money on favor carried. Mm 43127 on favor carried. Mm 43128. Hold. Okay. Yeah. Councelor Councelor Holidayiday is holding MM43128. Mm 43129. On favor carried. MM43130. All favor carried. MM43131 section 37. All in favor carried. MM43132. Well, this is the one you just you just re you just handed it in and you want to >> councelor Kandal is holding it. MM43133 on favor carried. Mm 43134 on favor carried. So we have So we have three more that we just introduced. So that'll be a total of 137. Never mind. >> What? Go back to the mailboxes. I think Pastor Neck had a question on this one. Councelor Pastor Neack, go ahead. There we go. Thank you very much, speaker. Um, when it comes to um, locates, will that be the responsibility of the federal government before they uh, dig or will that onus be on us? through the chair. Uh Canada Post will come to transportation and take out a permit and we'll have to do all the required locates before they actually uh do any excavation or especially when they're putting in the concrete pad. >> Okay. So, the responsibility will be theirs. So, uh I thought I heard uh that um Canada Post will clean up litter around the boxes, but the report specifically says they will not. Could you just clarify that? through the chair. They will uh clear everything around uh the mailboxes. When they do make deliveries there, they'll monitor, they'll remove any discarded uh items that people tend to drop sometimes around these mailboxes, and they'll do everything else. We in transportation will on with our uh uh inspection staff will monitor these locations and see if there's any problems and we'll uh relate it or escalate it to Canada post >> because the common fear here is that people will open up their mailbox, see the various flyers for Walmart and Burger King and and Canadian Tire and just heave them. Um who's going to clean up that mess >> through the chair? uh if if if it's possible, we will clear that area, but we will request Canada Post to monitor those location and es escalate the cleanup around those boxes. I kind of live in Missaga. I'm exposed to this sort of stuff. There is a phone number that people can call. There's a website as well to just to let them know there's a problem in that area for them to deal with that. >> So, that was my next question. uh customer service intake. They will have a toll-free number where someone someone will somewhere in the country they will respond to that and there will be crews to to follow up on those concerns >> through the chair. That is correct. >> Okay. Now, some of these will be uh it's in the public right of way. So, I assume there could be a roadway. Will we have to make any traffic or parking changes for each of these boxes? No park. Let's say there's a no stopping, which is pretty tricky if you're trying to pick up your mail. Will we have to make amendments to any kind of street parking restrictions or stopping restrictions in front of these mailboxes? >> Through the chair, as they site these locations, they will take that into consideration and avoid where there's parking and and place them in areas they where parking is not allowed so that it doesn't obstruct others. Now, the super mail boxes that that I know uh also have the opportunity to mail letters. Will these all have that that option >> through the chair? That's correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Councelor Holiday. >> Anyone else? >> Thank you. I think it's quick. Is there any experience in dense urban centers with these mailboxes about different types of locations? Do we have any or is it mostly suburban and rural? >> Through the chair, uh through my own experience, it's it's in in suburban rural areas. >> Right. Um there's a little footnote on uh on the guidelines attachment that talks about community mailboxes on private property. >> Is there potential to see these things be installed >> in acceptable types of public property, excuse me, private property like >> places with high public access like a strip plaza, uh like a municipal building, something like that. Is there any is there any thought to going down that path >> through the chair? That is a possibility. >> What can we do as a council to help steer these things not to the most simple location which is to plunk it on the side of a road somewhere and into something that makes more sense uh like a place where people gather frequently because they do anyways. uh in like like a strip plaza or a place with a supermarket in it where there's lots of parking, lots of space. Is there something we can do to encourage that path >> through the chair? We can explore that with Canada Post and and recommend that if at all possible. >> Do you need any instruction from us or do you feel like there's a breadth of um freedom that you have to find the best solution with what you've got in front of us? we could take direction from council so that we can explore it further uh with Canada Post. >> Okay, thank you Chris Hant, you held the item down to speak. >> Uh yes, speaker. Thank you. And um as you can see the many of my colleagues have many questions about how this whole system is going to work in in a system that's getting currently home delivery. Um so Canada Post has a $10 million a day problem right now. They're losing $10 million a day. The atomical north is going to be sort of the pilot project that's going to uh sort of experiment on how the install in feds are coming and Canada Post is dropping hundreds of mailboxes everywhere. So that was I talk about being blindsided that was quite a shocker. My office has since then still to this day been extremely busy fielding calls, fielding uh all types of calls with a lot of good questions as to how this is going to uh you know turn out and a lot of the questions that were asked are the kind of questions we've been asking today. On April 22nd, after we got that notice, uh I put uh a letter out to Canada Post uh and I put a letter out or a motion that um was asking all the questions again solutions to all the questions that we were asking today as well and the kind of questions that people were asking when they come into my office. um particularly seniors. We've been getting a lot of seniors calling and asking you know uh do we have options to opt out? We heard that there are options to opt out but their concern is not so much that they could opt out is that what is the timing? Will they get accepted? What's the turnaround time? How complicated is it to fill out these forms? Well, we already know that anything you do with the federal government is not a simple one, two, three. very complicated to navigate through. So, um you know, and then there's of course people with disabilities and then there's of course the issue with uh our very hard and long winters. Uh we ask those questions as well and we have commitments that yes, they're going to be responsible to clean everything up. My experience has been for those communities that do have mailboxes. Um, a lot of the excess mail or the flyers or the uh those type of uh articles that are put in the mailbox, they just get thrown out and these uh community mailbox locations are never ever really completely clean. Uh so does that give us the opportunity to maybe enforce it? So if they drop 350 mailboxes in Tobokco North, uh maybe the following week, are we going to be issuing 350 order to comply? And can we issue orders to comply to Canada Post and insist that they clean it up and give them seven seven days to do it or 14 days? If they don't do it, we go in and do it and then we bill them. So there's a lot of unanswered questions here. We really don't know how this is going to come together in a way that will be um not impactful in a very negative way to residents in it took North. So speaker there isn't anything here that uh we're moving. This is receipt only. Um and um I I could just I could just say very clearly here publicly that my constituents can rest assured that I'll be watching this very very closely that my eyes are on Canada Post and that we're going to make sure that that transition of the installation of mailboxes is done in a professional responsible way and uh and I'll be watching them very closely. Thank you, Speaker. with councelor Croanti, Councelor Carol. Just briefly, Madam Speaker, Madam Speaker, uh uh Councelor Casanti is on the right track. We want to stay on the the track of we will be watching. We will be enforcing. We have bylaws about litter and waste. We will be watching. We will be enforcing. We will we will we heard from staff exactly what we have to do in our community. I would caution offering to do anymore. Uh right right now we're talking about them having to be on the public realm. If it's if it's our initiative to say no, we'd like to negotiate. We'd like you to negotiate to be on private property and be with this person and that person or this business or that business. Who then takes the leaseholder and managerial role over that? I think we want to stay where we are. We have bylaws to enforce litter. Uh we have a phone in our offices to answer questions. But in early discussions with the the federal government, the first time we went around with this in in 2015 2016 when they first started to discuss here's what we're doing now in the rest of the GTA. Perhaps you'd like to join us. As soon as we started into to creative discussions, we started to hear things from our our local MPs such as, "Why don't you tell us what you would like, maybe you would like to manage it, why don't you be in charge of this?" And that is something that they're not prepared to pay for. Uh, but abdicate their responsibility and have us managing the municipal and land use, please, because there are land use pieces here. There are neighborhoods where there aren't the proper boulevards to put these on, but we want to leave them having to be in the driver's seat because that leaves them having to be accountable by on pain of death. We must keep them accountable for their postal service or very quickly through scope creep as often happens at the municipal level. it becomes our postal service by virtue of the fact that we're maintaining uh the the boxes and where they go and the the litter and so on and so forth. We need to keep them accountable all the way through this process. Fortunately, nothing happens until after 2027. We heard that tonight. Uh we have a long way to go before we'll see the first one coming in. We have some in in brand new subdivisions, but those that are being those that are being installed in our long-standing or neighborhoods of 30 and 40 and 50 years, that's a long way off. Uh, and I just say don't step into the breach and become the postal service because we we actually don't see anybody offering us the funds to do such a thing. Thank you, >> Councelor Meyers. Thank you, speaker. I just I'm rising on behalf of my residents, uh, who have expressed a lot of concerns over this. Uh, Scarbor North is also home to the Albert Jackson processing facility, uh, which is one of the largest processing facilities for Canada Post in the GTA. Uh, we have a lot of Canada Post employees who live in the writing and they are obviously very worried about their jobs. Um, I've also heard a lot of concerns from seniors, uh, both as a local counselor and concerns as chair of the Toronto Accessibility Advisory Committee in terms of what this would mean for people's ability to receive their mail. Uh, there's just a lot of uncertainty and I I agree with councelor Carol assessment that we should be very very cautious about taking on any additional responsibilities for the implementation of this program. I think right now there's a lot of unknowns and everything sounds very good on paper. However, it's about the implementation that I think people are very worried about. Um, particularly seniors who are worried about how they're going to get their mail. What if it's slippery? What if it's not plowed? And uh, you know, sometimes this can contain uh time-sensitive documents that are quite important uh that you know they don't use internet or they and so you know they have to receive these documents through the mail. So there's a lot of concern both from a a joblessness perspective and just from a quality of life perspective in war 23 and I just want to echo those concerns and I think and I want to thank staff uh for working with Canada Post as much as possible to steer this in a in the right direction. Thank you very much. >> Councelor Holiday. >> So I uh I'll just make a couple of comments. It's the easiest thing to do. Um this uh the proposal by Canada Post has caused quite a bit of stress for a lot of people. Um there's everyone that just um is accustomed to receiving mail to their door and likes that. Um but I'm thinking a little bit from a municipal perspective and some of the issues that were raised by some of my colleagues about uh locating something on the road right of way. We've had plenty of experiences with utility companies um and what comes from that including litter and uh stopped cars, strange parking scenarios. So my preference is that they they look to other places for this first uh as opposed to the right of way which would be the last opportunity um or the the last place that they would go. Um, I think it would make more sense if uh I went to the grocery store once a week and that's where I picked up my mail. Um, that might make things just a little bit easier rather than having to see these community mailboxes. And by that, by no means is an endorsement of this change. is just practically thinking forward that if Canada Post moves forward with this, maybe there are more suitable locations that are more convenient for me and more convenient for uh the people that will inevitably get stuck beside living next to one of these mailboxes. Um so hopefully there can be some creative thinking going forward. Uh, and as um I I wish um I wish that this would work out in a better way because obviously we're all quite concerned about it. Thank you. On on the item on favor there there was no motions passed on this, right? Okay. Uh carried. Um, councelor Cole, you want to reopen CC 4325 Marley Avenue uh because you want to have a recorded vote on that. So, a motion to reopen carried. And so, we'll just put it on the screen and we'll have a recorded vote. >> Yeah. on councelor Perk's motion. >> Yeah. Okay. Recorded vote. Councelor Croanti, Councelor Thompson, and Councelor Mley, please. >> Councelor Perutza, please. Councelor Pritza. >> The motion is adopted. The vote is 20 to three. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, councelor Myers, are you ready with for CC 4323? Uh, I'm waiting for the clerks, but I am ready for MM43.58 and MM43.47. Those are ready. >> Mm. What is it? >> Mm43.58. The amendments are ready. And I've worked on uh councelor, it's councelor Sax's motion and she's fine with it. >> Okay. So, we'll we'll put the amendment on the screen. Mm 4358. Okay, there it is on the screen. On favor carried. Item is amended. On favor carried. >> And then the next one is MM43.47 pollinator guard. The pollinator garden. >> Uh MM 4347. >> Yes. >> You have an amendment on that one? >> Yes. We're replacing the language. >> Okay. It's on the screen. All in favor carried. Item is amended. On favor carried >> and then >> which one? >> Okay. Uh, councelor Myers CC 4323 is ready. >> Yeah, it's >> ready. If it's ready, I can do it if I can combine it with MM43.114 because there was an amendment to that. It's relating to the same development, Melvin Town Center. >> Okay. >> One at a time. >> Yeah. One at a time. Okay. On CC 4323, Councelor Meyers >> and those were pre-irculated. >> Has has the motion on the screen. All favor carried. Item is amended. On favor carried an MM43114. Councelor Myyers. >> I'd like to speak on that one though. >> Pardon? >> I'd like to speak on that one. >> So it's not a quick item. >> Okay. So that's fine. I'll hold that one. >> All right. All right. So our next item is Councelor Perk CC 4330. I'm just going to the top of the agenda right now. >> Um, sure. I'm happy to do that. I just also want to let you know that the mayor has told me we're ready to do uh CC 435, the delegated authority now. >> Okay. So, let's do the 4330 first. That's in your name, >> right? I have a >> Well, unless you want to do 435 first. >> Entirely up to you. >> It It doesn't matter. I mean, let's do 4330. That's what I said. So, let's >> I believe I have a motion on on this. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, uh, I'm moving to delete the recommendations in the report and, uh, replace it with refuse the proposal to, uh, construct a structure on the land subject to an encroachment agreement adjacent to two Whitney Avenue, etc., etc. >> Oh, okay. Yeah. Okay. So, we have Councelor Perks's motion on the screen. We'll have a recorded vote. >> Um, Madam Speaker. >> Oh, >> yes. >> I I would have liked to ask questions. I think my name was on the list for that. >> Okay. So, we'll hold the item down then. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> Questions? Okay. Yeah. Yes. Let's just Okay. So, now we'll go to CC 43.5. Councelor Perks. >> Yes. I have motions on this. >> This one is CC 435. Yeah. Okay. Councelor Perks. >> Thank you. I have two motions on this. Uh first that city council delegate authority to city manager or delegate who must be a deputy city manager or the chief financial officer and treasurer to provide city funding in amount satisfactory to the chief financial officer and treasurer to a not for to not forprofit and indigenous delivery partners provided that sufficient budgets and funds are available. And uh B, city council authorized the city clerk to take any action uh any required action under the funeral, burial, and cremation services act of 2002 that the city clerk determines is necessary and urgent as part of any obligation or requirement under the act. I've been waiting 20 years to move something on this piece of legislation. >> Okay. So, we'll put the first motion on the screen. There it is. 1 A. All on favor carried. 1B. All on favor carried. Item is amended. On favor carried. Thank you. Now, I understand now we're ready for councelor Chang for NY 3416. >> We're on the item. Oh, okay. Good. Yeah. So I have a motion. >> Okay. This is 765 steels, correct? >> That's right. >> Okay. So if you can introduce your motion. >> It's just an amendment. Everyone can look at attachment one that is to the motion and you can read on screen what the attachment is. So I want to just alert my fellow counselors to the difficulty in our city with getting daycarees. And the reason I'm bringing this up is because originally this development had a daycare as a section 37 agreement, but because of changing planning policy, the developer has said that they would go through a reapplication process that would save them up to $9 million value of a daycare. And because of the other things that they're putting on the table, including an over dedication of parkland and improvements on the adjacent development, these are things we're not willing to risk losing uh in order to try to fight for the daycare. We tried to do many things to get to a daycare. And it's very unfortunate because Willowdale is daycare deficient. We are actually red on the children's services map in terms of availability of daycare and we're actually short 496 spots according to a recent study that was done for the North York Center secondary plan. So the deficit of daycare is there and the change in planning policy means that all the section 37 negotiated daycarees are at risk. So this is a domino that is falling today and there will be dominoes that will come that will be following. I am sure of it because I have lost other daycarees where they didn't bother to negotiate and they did go through a reapplication process. There are currently 19 daycarees in the city of Toronto attached to section 37 agreements. And so all of my fellow counselors, I just alert you to look at what is on the horizon in your ward. And we should fight to try to keep whatever we can. Uh and I I I acknowledge that probably it will be larger projects, multi-tower projects where we could save them. But children's services, daycarees are not just a frivolous item. They are critical infrastructure for livability, for affordability, and if we have no funding tools, as we continue to add housing, which is really what we're fighting for right now, all the levels of government are saying housing, housing, housing. But I never hear about infrastructure, infrastructure, infrastructure. We can't build housing without a plan of how we're going to grow the many amenities that will make our city livable. Otherwise, we're on a trajectory of a decrease in quality of life. And that's already happening. When a ward is red in terms of child care, it means that sometimes women are making difficult decisions. that they can't find affordable daycare, can't easily find nearby daycare, they have to make employment choices sometimes in order to be able to take care of their children. So I am grateful uh that you know we did land on uh a negotiation that uh you know Starlight did try to get this daycare within what they could afford to put on the table but the city just does no money in their cap in our capital plan to be able to match that amount. So we were not able to proceed with a daycare and I grieve that loss for that community and for all the young families that will struggle because of it. So just again reminding you all there are 19 daycarees slated in our city attached to section 37 and I believe that they are all at risk because of the changing planning policies that are on the table because of the provincial government. So we should be fighting for the infrastructure investment that we need to build a livable city. We can't just focus on housing, housing, housing. We have to sing the infrastructure, infrastructure, infrastructure song alongside to build a livable city for the density that we will be welcoming. Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay. On the motion by councelor Chang on favor carried. Um, our next item is uh the mayor held it down CC 43.9 development charges reduction program. Councelor Perks. >> Councelor Perks. >> Yes. >> Yeah. I I believe that you're going to be moving the item. >> Uh the Yes. >> CC 439. >> 5 seconds. Yes. Yes. I'll move the item. >> On favor carried. >> Councelor Cole, we're at your item next. Egllandon Avenue. Uh the motion. Is it ready? >> It's not ready. >> Okay. So, we'll go back to CC 43302 Whitney Avenue. And I believe, excuse me, I I believe that councelor Bradford had questions. Councelor Bradford, do you have questions? >> I do. Yes. Thanks, Madam Speaker. >> Okay. If we can bring the staff forward. >> Okay. >> Go ahead. >> Sorry. Do you get feedback on your end or just on my end? >> No, we don't have feedback. Everything's fine. >> Okay. Um, so my questions are for Heritage Planning staff. Just let me know when they're ready. >> Yeah, they're ready. >> Maybe if you could just hold my time. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um, so to staff through you, Madam Speaker, in October of 2025, heritage planning staff recommended refusing a heritage permit for a wall at this property and council voted to adopt that recommendation, but now heritage planning staff are recommending approving the new proposal. So, I'm just wondering what has changed between the old proposal and the new proposal. >> Uh, thank you through the chair. Uh the primary change is the lowering of a significant portion of masonry wall which was the subject of the concern of the original application. Um there's a a corner condition where Glen Road hits Whitney and uh the masonry wall runs generally 1.2 mters around the perimeter of the property but at the corner the masonry rose to 2.2 2 m uh which was a very substantial wall closing off the corner. So the owner has and now applied to lower that to 1.2 m. Uh so the masonry wall will be a sort of continuous 1.2 around the perimeter of the property and above we'll install some uh metal grills which uh they were seeking some uh uh security protection. So that should provide the transparency that we were looking for and the protection that the owner was looking for. >> Okay. So if I understand it's your opinion that this is substantially different than the proposal that was originally submitted. And I think what I heard there is the wall at the corner is about half the height of the original proposal like a meter less and in line with the rest of the the wall height. Um, that's correct. And that was the primary point of contention and now it's lowered to a point where staff are uh uh recommending the approval of that. >> Okay. So, you couldn't support the old proposal, but you can support this proposal. >> That's correct. >> Okay. We've had this file in front of council several times over the last few years. uh council had previously signed off on the encroachment permit, but the major issue was that no heritage permit had been granted. Uh is that correct? >> Um it it's it's correct that no heritage permit had been granted. Yes. And that was the subject of concern for an encroachment agreement. >> So if council now grants the heritage permit, and I'm hearing from you today, Heritage is on board. Um that would be the end of this. >> Um it it would be from a heritage permit perspective. Yes. And that's >> and and the encroachment agreement. >> I I think I would have to let my colleagues in transportation services speak to that aspect of it. >> Well, let me let me just before Mary um you hear it hand it over to them. Um, there's also ongoing litigation tied to this file. We're not going to get into that because we're not going in camera, but did that factor into how heritage planning staff evaluated the proposal or do you look at it completely separate from any sort of litigation? >> What? >> Point of order. >> Yes, councelor Perks. >> I'm sorry. Staff cannot comment. in public on what may or may not be related to the litigation and the >> well that that would be an end camera item. Yes. >> Yeah. So staff cannot answer the question that councelor Bradford asked. >> Okay. >> Okay. We move on. >> So that >> um I I would I guess that the point I'm making is heritage planning. Mary, your your recommendation of the heritage permit is based on the application that's in front of you. >> Uh, entirely. Yes. >> Yeah. And you feel this fits within the North Rosedale Heritage Conservation District guidelines? >> Yes, we do. >> Okay. Transportation staff, uh, any concerns around transportation safety related to the proposal? Is this going to Brock any sightelines with the new height? >> Uh, through the chair, no. that we we've investigated ourselves and found that the the sight lines are are are fine. If vehicles stop at the at the actual corner of Whitney and Glenn, they'll stop. They'll edge a little bit into the intersection. They'll be able to see cars uh uh along Glenn and make a safe turn. >> Okay. And last question, then the staff recommendations that are in front of us here on this report would authorize the encroachment agreement. Is that correct? >> Through the chair, that's correct. Okay, those are all my questions. Thanks, Madam Speaker. >> Thank you. All right. So, oh, oh, Councelor Councelor Holidayiday has questions. >> I do. Uh, thank you. My my first question actually is to the clerk. Um, I'm looking at the materials that accompany the recommendations. This is a uh city council uh section item of the agenda. So this is a report directly from staff to us. There's recommendations from the chief planner that I presume actually I don't presume there's a report July 13th from the chief planner. There's also a July 21st report from the Senior Manager Heritage Planning and there's also a transmitt July 23rd from the Toronto Preservation Board which recommends something different. And I wondered if the clerk could explain the difference between these reports and their relationship to the recommendations that are before us and how council is supposed to weigh the different pieces of advice. >> Thank you. Madam Speaker, the main motion, the main recommendations that uh are before you are contained in the report dated July 13th. the um the things uh uh near the bottom uh the transmitt from the preservation board and the report the July 21st report from the senior manager is actually uh is actually their report to the preservation board. >> So that package of material from the preservation board is before you as supplementary. Uh those motions or recommendations have not been moved uh with the um uh with the adoption of the order paper. The recommendations before you at the moment are the ones in the main report dated July 13th. >> So why doesn't the recommendations before council reflect the transmitt from the Toronto Preservation Board if they were the last group to look at it? >> Because the preservation board's recommendations are supplementary. >> Okay. Um to staff I as I don't know we have somebody here from the Toronto Preservation Board. Can someone elaborate why the Toronto Preservation Board uh changed changed to to deny uh the heritage permit >> uh through the chair? Uh I can speak to that although as staff I don't represent the Toronto Preservation Board. >> Fair enough. But I can explain that the preservation board is there as the community voice. Okay? >> They are the municipal heritage committee. They consider a number of factors that may or may not be the same as the factors that uh the professional heritage staff consider. Uh they they provide a vital place for communities to express their concerns and their advice is required under the Ontario Heritage Act. So it comes as a a separate package. uh as the clerk explained. >> So, just so I've got it, your report went to the preservation uh board. They deliberated on this and they provided us um different advice as a supplemental to this. >> That's correct. >> All right. And yet the staff advice is what's before us, but we have to see the supplemental. And I'll just confirm because I I missed it from councelor Bradford to transportation. Is everything satisfactory from a technical standpoint with respect to safety sight lines etc that you would normally um uh consider with respect to encroachments >> to the chair that is correct. >> Okay. So the two authorities with jurisdiction on this is um heritage preservation services through the chief planner and transportation services and then we have uh preservation board to also consider. Do I have that right? Are there any other jurisdictions or subcomponents of the city that weigh in on this? Okay. Uh my last question is that in the materials somebody raised the the concern over a crest or a a symbol or a logo. I didn't quite understand. Is there now a signage component to this proposal in front of us? to the chair. I I'm not uh I I wouldn't know what the answer is to that particular question, but the crest it represents their it's their company crest. >> Their company crest. >> Yes. >> So, is there is a company crest allowed to be on a wall on I think the public right ofway? Is has that been dealt with by the right department? >> Um through the chair, I can give you uh background to that. >> Okay. um on the wall is to be placed a family crest uh that is for the owner. Uh the crest is also used uh in some ways with a business and my understanding is although again I'm not representing it as a staff member but I have the information my understanding is it is not triggering any additional sign requirements. >> Thank you councelor Perks. When the structure in question was was built, uh, did it have all the necessary permits? >> Uh, through the chair, it did not. >> So, it was built without necessary permits. All the necessary permits. >> That is correct. >> Okay. Um, is part of the structure on public land? >> Yes, it is. >> Okay. Those are the two things I most needed to know. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. So, there was a motion earlier that councelor Perks put up on the screen. >> Oh, just Yeah, I thought he did. >> Oh, okay. So, councelor Perks, do you want to move your motion and speak to it? >> Yes, please. >> Yeah, >> speaker. I move that city council refuse the proposal to construct a structure on the land subject to an encroachment agreement adjacent to two Whitney Avenue, a property within the north North Rosedale Heritage Conservation District in accordance with section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act as outlined in the applicants submission dated June 23, 2026 and received by Heritage Planning on July 2nd. Speaker, there's some very important principles at stake here. Do you believe a private individual should be able to construct a structure without all the necessary permits on partially on public land and in addition put a chill on the counselor representing the area with a lawsuit and that we should say well because the heritage permit is okay now we'll just turn a blind eye. My answer to that would be no. This is a very serious matter. The the the the I have seen too many instances of people going constructing something illegally, knowing it's illegal, getting a stop work order, ignoring it, and then trying to fix it after the fact. It is absolutely unacceptable. And we have to take a stand on issues like this and make it clear to members of the public. If you get a stop work order, you can't just send lawyers, guns, and money at it. You actually stop work. Thank you. >> Councelor Bradford to speak. >> Okay. Uh thanks, Madam Speaker. I'm going to be supporting the staff recommendations on this file and I have a motion to move those recommendations from the city solicitor's July 16th supplemental report. Uh there's nothing more than that, just what staff are recommending. You know, I I can appreciate that not everybody has followed this file over the years, but it's come back to council in my view far too many times. Heritage Planning has spent a lot of time and effort on this and I want to acknowledge the work of Mary and her team. Um they're satisfied with this latest proposal that has come forward and uh you know as you heard there were some pretty substantive changes to get them there. I think that's that's a positive thing. Um let's be clear about this. A portion of this wall is on public land that requires an encroachment agreement. and community council approved that encroachment agreement in May of 2024. So, you know, it it we haven't all been following this file, but there was a community council improvement on an encroachment agreement in May of 2024. It's it's not as it's being spun in the chamber there. They did not start building the wall until that permit was received. Yes, they ran into an issue with the heritage permit. This is a process that has been undertaken to rectify that as you heard from Mary and heritage staff that has been rectified. Um, and so adopting the city staff's recommendation here, I think, is the best course of action to put this to bed. Transportation staff are satisfied. Heritage planning is satisfied. There was an original um encroachment agreement back in May of 2024. They didn't start building until that permit was received. they missed the heritage piece and they've worked hard to come back to rectify it. So, you know, I it's not an ideological battle. It's it's not anything more elaborate than as I've just outlined and if you read the the supplemental from staff. I think you will see that. So, I would just ask like you know do the right thing uh support the staff reck vote against councelor Burk's motion and support the city sitter's recommendations in my motion here. Thank you. Councelor Bradford. >> Yeah, I can see how you'd confuse Councelor Bradford and me, speaker. Um, so >> same haircut. >> I um I think that there are important questions of principle here and whether you call it ideology or not. um doing the wrong thing when you have all the resources in the world to find out how to do them correctly uh to me is is problematic. um to assume or presume uh an entitlement over what is public land. Not go through the appropriate processes and then use legal tools and power, privilege, resources, money cannot hyper entitle you in front of this council. Uh furthermore, the local counselor is a representative of that community. that counselor should not be subjected to the chill of the use of a lawsuit uh to silence her. She's not in this chamber and she can't speak to what community conversations she's had. The the principal thing to is would have been to do it right right from the beginning. Um, and I think that if we support if we if we don't support councelor Perks and we support councelor Bradford, we are going down a very slippery slope where power and privilege gets you access that other people cannot have. This is a, you know, to me this is a slam dunk. The staff have have come forward with a way to regularize something, but I think we need to look at context here and what kind of precedent we're setting. on the motion. >> Yeah. >> Yes. Recorded vote. Councelor Kendville, please. Councelor Mantis. >> Councelor Chang, please. >> The motion carries. The vote is 20 to four. So, >> councelor Councelor Bradford's motion is redundant. >> I I said that. >> Can you ask >> councelor Perks? >> Yes. >> Can you move a procedure motion? I can move any anything you you want me to move. Speaker, >> I want to direct that the confidential attachment uh that confidential attachment one to the report July 16th, 2026 from the city solicitor is to remain confidential as it is about litigation or potential litigation that affects the city of Toronto and contains advice or communications that are subject to uh solicitor client privilege. This is the one where uh basically we're being instructed, don't put anything in the Toronto Star, people >> recorded vote. >> Councelor Myers, please. Councelor Peritza. Councelor Pastor Duck, please. >> The motion carries. The vote is unanimous. 23 in favor. >> Okay. Our next item is MM43.3. Council Saxs held it down. Heritage designation for sneaky dees. So, does anybody just want to move it? Council Oh, Mayor Chow would like to move it. All favor carried. The next item is MM4326 section 37 um for Region Park. Councelor Moyes, you going to move that? >> I want to speak to it. >> Okay, go ahead. We're at the item. >> Thank you, Madam Speaker. This is the accumulation of three and a half years of hard work with TCAC and the city staff and I could not be more proud to see the significant and much needed investment here before us today. In the last election, I heard it loud and clear from region park and Mos Park residents. They see the opportunities that the 519 community center afford the 2s LGBTQ community and want that for their communities. a community center that is managed by the community for the community. I committed to deliver on that promise and today we are delivering. I also want to express my deep appreciation to Mayor Ciao. Her direction to expand AOX across the city for the first time ever made this possible and her support in bringing this motion forward today speaks to their commitment to communities like Regent Park and Moss Park. Over the next few years, city staff will be consulting and working alongside the local community to develop operating framework, board composition, and design of the new AO. It is a long process ahead that will be community centered and my office will be there every step of the way. I'd like to conclude by thanking Daniel Bondi, Katherine Bailey, Will Menddees, Peter Zimmerman, Brian Sherwood, and Yousef aka the mayor of Regent Park for all their hard work on this file. Thank you, Madam Speaker. >> Thank you. on the item on favor carried. Councelor Saxs. >> Yeah. Sorry, I wasn't sure if you're coming back. So, the mayor moved your item 43.3. Did you want us to reopen it? And did you reopen it? >> Okay. Mayor Chow's moving to reopen it. So, councelor Saxs, did you want to speak on it? Yes, please. Okay, go ahead. Uh, yeah, just briefly. Um, one of the, you know, we all know that many members of the public are just in despair about the planning process. And one of the things that people are up in arms about has been our inability to protect cultural places, live music venues, which we keep losing. The sneaky D's. We We've had this enormous upsurge of public support, and we almost lost it in May. It would have passed in May if I hadn't insisted on hearing directly from George. And then during that recess, the activists got organized. Now that the application was withdrawn, we have a brief window to try to use the heritage act to protect it. It will be hard, but it may be possible. And we have the entire Sneaky Safe Sneaky Dees organization working right now to pull together history and stories and cultural links and celebrities and bands who were started there to try to put together the very best case we can for preservation of CKDs. And I have the commitment of Mary McDonald and her team, which I appreciate, to to really carefully review that doseier when they get it. They don't have the resources to create it themselves, but they will review it. If we are successful in using this tool to protect a venue like this, it will set an important precedent for Toronto. And in fact, I mean, as far as I know, all over Canada, a tool that might actually be able to be used for one of the places that make Toronto what it is. It's worth a try. It's not guaranteed to success, but it's worth a try. And if you have a story or a connection to something important that happened to CQDs, please add it. >> There was one. >> Thank you. On on the on the item on favor carried uh councelor posturac mm 4338. It's your item. Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Speaker. The um this is a revised wording the from the previous uh version. So, I'll just move the uh motion on the screen. >> It it was technically there were some technical amendments by staff. So, it it's simply an updated revised version of the earlier motion. Here it is here by P councelor Pastronac on the amendment. All in favor carried. Item is amended. On favor carried. MM4373. Councelor Matlo. >> You held the item down. >> Yeah. I'd like to um to speak to it uh for a moment, Madam Speaker. Um, so the Ontario Science Center is a building that has been >> it is he's speaking on his >> Oh, I have a motion. >> Yeah, >> I don't know what I what this one is. >> The Ontario So, I've moved the motion. Uh, the Ontario Science Center is a place that has been beloved by Ontarians since 1969 >> and it's a place that sparked >> our children's curiosity, love of science, love of nature and it's been a place that has brought two generations of us back to the love of education and learning. It's a place that my own daughter loved. And a couple years ago, the Ford government very abruptly closed it with a story about it having a roof that was imminently going to collapse. Well, we have had historic snowfalls here in Toronto, and that roof has proven itself to have more integrity than the story that the Ford government told. So since then I've been working with a group of dedicated activists, people who have stood up and worked really hard to initially save the sign center. And when it was very clear that the Ford government would not agree to reopen it, then we adapted our activism and our work together toward reimagining what it can be to bring it back to life to serve the public again along with its local community. And I want to acknowledge some of those people who I'm referring to. I'm very proud to have been working with Save the Ontario Science Center, including its leaders, Jason Ash, Floyd Ruskin, Jennifer Alexander, and Jeff Lumby, who are sitting here behind me. I know it's late and the applause was in spirit. These are these are the kind of citizens who just take a stand and work really hard for the places that we love and I just want to acknowledge them and I love them for it. I also want to acknowledge Marama Tashima architects who have been our partners through the process of coming up with our report that we've moved forward and also the local counselor John Burnside who's been a steadfast supporter of his community and a friend and a partner. The work that we've done has led to our report reimagining the future of the former Ontario Science Center which I hope each of you read. it's attached to the item. And this was done through consultation with both the greater Toronto community, but also directly with the local residents, including residents in Flemington Park and Thorncliffe Park in the Dawn Dawn Mills area in North York. And one of the, you know, the greatest things about this place has always been that it's not downtown. We've got a lot of wonderful places to go downtown along our waterfront, but we also need to have these wonderful cultural institutions in other parts of our city that are more accessible to more people within Toronto in our region. And that's why it's so important that we reimagine this this this Moryama masterpiece. We bring it back to life and once again to serve the public again. So the motion allows us to move forward with not just reimagining but also directly engaging the government and other stakeholders in doing that work and I look forward to continuing that path. >> We do have a question for you councelor Carol. >> Thanks Madam Speaker. I have to ask about the motion because >> uh it's quite different than than what is on the agenda which is to receive the report making it a matter of public record and putting it in our possession but this actually asked us to open discussions about the future of the Ontario Science Center at 77 770 Dawn Mills Road and I'm confused because I' I've uh I' I've seen motions and talk about putting housing there. We also have moved motions within this this very agenda that talk about um a uh cultural community center there. Uh and I think I saw something else about health and and dental. I can't even remember. I've seen the address 770 Don Mills on on multiple items. So does this contradict a decision already taken by council? >> No. No. It it complements anything that we have said or done. What what this does is it engages the province of Ontario uh the government of Canada all the all the stakeholders that you see here uh in a meaningful conversation about how to bring the buildings that are now sitting effectively just empty and derelictked back to life. It doesn't preclude anything. In fact, nothing's been done. One of the biggest challenges we face right now is that while it will be incredibly expensive to bring it back to life, it's also very expensive to do anything other than that, even to demolish it. We don't want to just see it uh essentially fall apart due to neglect. Um so we've been working very closely with the city manager's office, Creatio, and other uh uh uh uh parts of our city. Um, we've been meeting very regularly on this project and this is about engaging the province and others in in hopefully a very uh uh productive conversation about um opening those doors again. And by the way, it will it will be it won't be just one thing, you know, it most likely will be a combination of ideas that will come together to make it realistic. >> So, I do have one other question though. I'm wondering if well, it might be many things. Uh what I'm looking at right now is a website called our future home at Ontario Place. That is uh the page one of the Ontario Science Center uh website at the moment. And there's a picture of a fully fleshed out design drawing here. And this asks us now to get our city staff to pull together a group that includes the province of Ontario and to have them get together to discuss the future of the science center at 770 Dawn Mills. And as much as I loved it being there, lo those many years, I'm I'm now looking at a promise of the future home of Ontario Science Center and Ontario Place that claims to be ready uh to go if at all possible by the end of 2029. >> That was your last question. >> We uh we we recognize reality. We're all being very pragmatic about that. That's why we're talking about reimagining the site rather than trying to keep it exactly as it was. We recognize >> so there's reality and there's imagining. I thank you. >> Well, if you read the report, >> those are my questions. >> If you read the report, you'll understand exactly what I'm asking. >> Thank you, >> Councelor Churnis Lynn. Thank you. I just wanted to thank the movers of this uh and particularly uh the mover of this motion. I think that site has stood empty long enough and I think the limbo that everybody has been in needs a push to get going and I do think there is a place for imagination and I actually don't see it as contradictory to the motions that were moved earlier. It's a really large site and my understanding with the one about the school with create uh was that that would be at the very north end of the site in that furthest parking lot. This is a very very large property with a historic groundbreaking building uh that people for generations have ventured into, loved, adored, and want to see preserved into the future and re-imagined in potentially a new capacity that could offer us a really exciting vision for the future for decades and decades to come. That may include schools. It may include opportunities for young people uh for the Thorncliffe and Flemington communities. Uh my ward is adjacent to this. My ward runs through the valley right behind the science center. You go through there and you look up at it and you think what is it going to be next? And I do think that maybe the provincial government needs a bit of an offramp. And I'm someone who believes in collaboration. So, I really do think um what our residents who have worked so hard on uh and the vision that they've brought to the table should this should be championed by our council as a way forward. >> Thank you. Um we still have a few items left on the agenda here. >> Yeah. Okay. Are there any other speakers on this? Yes, we're speaking now. Councelor Carol. >> Madam Speaker, um I I rise as a person who uh grew up in Dawn Mills and I represent uh people in North York and uh and I I may get ridden out of town on a rail, but uh I'm looking at a website of where you can go to visit Ontario Center in Science Center in its alternate location. Um I'm looking at the plans for a building that's supposed to be completed in 2029. And then I say to myself, what what is going to happen on 770 Don Mills? And I would submit that if we are going to get on with some of the wonderful things that my colleague councelor Chernos Lynn just described, schools, children's facilities, health facilities, arts facilities, housing, housing, housing >> right beside the cross town. If we're going to commence that exciting discussion and have any vibrancy in it at all, with great with great uh uh uh trepidation, I say it out loud. Um the conversation that that is about the science center leaving its new home and coming back, that ship done sailed. And so I will be supporting staff's recommendation to have this lovely report uh as a matter of public record and receive it, but that I'm not going to be supporting councelor Matlo's motion because I think our staff, if they're going to be at a table, should be at a table that is about the future of 770 Dawn Mills for all of those things that we have moved motions about and described previously today. >> Thank you. Okay, we're ready to vote on Councelor Chang. Councelor Chang to speak. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I'm probably the last science center membership holder on council because I had one the year they closed and I'm still hurting about it. But I love that building. And what I believe is that North York still needs a destination. We need a place that people will come and visit that where children can learn and be inspired. It doesn't have to be a science center. It can be another destination. I love the Rochester Play Museum. We need a big vision and I hope that these conversations can lead us to a big vision. It was a visionary building when it was built uh back in the day and I think it's still a visionary building based on its architecture. I don't think that building is suitable for housing because it's on a ravine and you wouldn't be able to put housing there, but maybe you could have adjacent housing on the parking lot. There's many great ideas and I support further collaboration, further conversation. Let's dream big and make sure that North York gets another destination. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay, let's vote, please. Let's We have to get this agenda done. Please guys like okay on the motion on favor on favor on Matlo's motion on favor. Let's get it over with. Okay. All right. That's it right on that one. Okay. Come on guys. We still have some more. MM4375. Councelor Pandeel, what is it that you want to do with your motion? >> I'll speak. I got I've got an amendment. >> You held You held it down. >> I've got an amendment. I'm going to speak to it. >> Okay. Go ahead. >> Excellent. Uh, Madam Speaker, colleagues, uh, before I begin my remarks, I'd like to uh move an amendment that's asking and calling on the provincial government to establish a clear provincewide regulatory framework for AI data centers. The amendment asks the province to develop that framework by the end of 2026. Directly address environmental impacts. If you keep >> address noise from operations and backup systems, assess electricity demand and infrastructure capacity, meaningfully engage with the affected communities, the city of Toronto, relevant stakeholders, and all other municipalities. Speaker, colleagues, I'm moving MM4375 concerning the proposed expansion of the data center at 3650 Danforth Avenue. The data center is an American company owned by an American asset manager proposing to expand an existing data center into a campus with 56 megawws of capacity. This is a major piece of industrial and digital infrastructure over 19 acres beside beside established neighborhoods to the east, south, and west. The neighborhoods of Birchcliffe and Oakidge. A proposal of this size raises serious questions. How much electricity will it consume? Can the grid support it? How much water will be required for cooling? The impact on local water pressure. What are the environmental impacts? What noise will be produced by cooling equipment and diesel backup generators? Who will pay for any required infrastructure upgrades? How many permanent jobs will be actually be created for Canadians? What benefits will the neighborhood scar the city receive? And what protections are needed when critical computing infrastructure and potentially sensitive data are controlled by a foreignowned company? Foreign ownership, don't get me wrong, does not automatically mean that a project is inappropriate. But it does mean we should ask questions, serious questions about Canadian data sovereignty, control of critical digital infrastructure, where the benefits of this investment will flow, and whether Canadian public interests are being protected. Residents in my ward raised these concerns with our office in the city. We acted immediately. We contacted city staff. We organized a public meeting. We invited the company so residents could answer ask questions directly and seek answers. Unfortunately, they chose not to attend. More than 100 concerned residents came to the meeting, asked strong questions, and came with an open mind. And at this point, more than 4,800 people have signed the petition launched by my office calling for greater scrutiny, clearer answers, and real safeguards. I'd also like to recognize the work, the important work of two grassroots groups, including Ward 20 residents, Common Horizon Toronto and Climate Fast Action. They have generated thousands of submissions and petition signatures and are calling for a moratorium in AI data centers. My motion advances a response, but their advocacy demonstrates the depth and seriousness of public concern. The current process is not adequate for infrastructure of this scale. As we know, this authority has been delegated to city staff. This application is proceeding through delegated site plan approval. That means city council does not vote on the application. There's no required public meeting and the process did not generate any notification to the local community or counselor. Provincial law may limit council's formal authority, but it does not limit our responsibility to fight for our communities. What does this motion do? Within Toronto's existing authority, this motion takes practical action. And I want to thank the all members of Toronto city staff who worked on this and from all the divisions uh for their hard work in crafting this and advising that any other approach would face strong challenges. It asks the city to notify the local community and counselor when large-scale data center applications are being received. Align the review of this application with Toronto's emerging citywide work on data centers. ind independently peer review the noise study. This motion does not prejudge every technical answer. It requires the answers to be independently assessed, clearly explained and made public. That is due responsible diligence. Scarbor Southwest residents have done their part. They've raised concerns, attended the meeting, asked questions, organized. >> You've got >> almost >> You've got some questions coming. Thousand more have participated through grassroots campaign. >> Your time is up. >> Can I just get one 10 seconds? >> One. No, you've got two questions. We're late at night. I'm sure they'll ask you. You can answer the say that councelor Carol 3 minutes. >> Okay. >> Yeah, you do. >> Someone say I don't >> Okay, there you go. Uh just a question about the date in your additional motion because as you know I reviewed your earlier motion and and quite in favor but in your additional motion asking the province um I'm wondering if you want to consider uh the date because what you're asking you're asking us to request the province to establish a provincewide framework to address key concerns all the well all of the above uh by the end of 2026 with meaningful engagement community stakeholders and the city of Toronto, right? And by putting it into that time frame, you are eliminating yourself and all of your colleagues from from having any input into any of that. >> Okay. Is the concern the time? >> Yeah. We're we're about to uh on Sunday you're in blackout on Sunday. You can't take part in an engagement process. Fair enough. >> So if you I wonder if you want to make that at least the first quarter of 27. So that >> first of all, two points. It makes it look a little more like a legitimate request to the province, but it also allows them to seek our input. >> Fair enough. Fair enough. I I concur. >> Thank you, that change, counselor. And your >> clerks, how do we do that? >> Uh, they'll help you. Yeah, >> go ahead. Is that your last question? Councelor Carol to councelor Candel. >> Uh, councelor Candel is going to make one change in his motion. Uh, there was a another counselor who wanted to ask questions. No. Um perhaps while councelor Bravo is speaking you can work with the clerks councelor can lal to have that change. Okay, please. Thank you. Come on up, councelor Bravo. >> Who wants >> Well, I'm >> Thank you, Deputy Speaker. I have a motion. >> Yeah, go ahead. >> Um I advanced circulated the motion, but it has essentially uh two elements. The first is to request executive directors of development review and city planning in addition to the chief planner uh uh to ensure that all municipal approvals related to major digital infrastructure and artificial intelligence data centers be aligned to the work uh that was underway in uh uh MM39.47 47 which was moved by councelor Chernos Linn and also seconded by councelor Saxs. Uh and to advise uh that the local counselor of any applications for major digital infrastructure and a data centers upon receipt. And then to make sure in addition that we're aligning the timing of the current review of the site plan application um again for the data center expansion at 3650 Danforth Avenue with the city's ongoing work u and to add to the staff report um to the planning and housing committee in the first half of 2027 um as directed in the member motion 39.47 considerations of some of these questions. So I this is work that I've been doing in in my office and we know that comm community there's great community interest but I'm going to summarize the questions here. Um what is uh what's existing in the official plan policy zoning bylaw permissions and legal authorities for municipalities with respect to the this question uh what you know provide a summary a summary of existing regulations that could be applied and significantly the impact of this kind of major uh digital infrastructure and AI data centers on things like energy use and and the p and power grid pressures. What about electric electricity rates? um and operation, water usage and cost. The effect on the uh natural water bodies and wastewater systems and water sheds, noise impacts uh in the neighboring communities, heat impacts in the neighboring communities, other environmental impacts that are not limited to tree canopy, biodiversity, climate and community health. How many jobs are the corporations that own the data centers required to create on site to fulfill the employment use? How many current AI data center applications in in the Toronto area are from American corporations? Um, as a local counselor said in this case, what protections exist to ensure that Canadians data stored at these facilities will not be subject to US invocation of the cloud act or other violations of data privacy for Canadians is something we've been concerned about and voted on earlier, for example, with surveillance pricing. and what are current opportunities policies for public engagement um and participation and decision making. And finally um this is a request of the Ontario Minister of the Environ um environment of energy and mines um around the development of their framework for this kind of infrastructure. When will the protect um Ontario by securing affordable energy for uh generations act 2025? uh when will that kick in in with respect to the denial of access to the electricity grid requiring community benefits and protecting the job creation potential of employment lands? Yeah, there's a lot um uh councelor because this is a big a big piece of work. There's huge concern in my word alone. I've got about 600 petition signatures and I think everyone's received them. This is a live question in Canada, in Hamilton, in Missaga. In the United States, where uh states embraced this and and said, "Please install these centers here." Virginia, Georgia, and Oklahoma are now reconsidering their programs. There are 100 communities in the US that are in the process of u looking at ways to put a pause and 300 state data center bills were filed at the in the beginning of this year alone. um we there's significant concerns and I just want to uh end by saying the idea that economy environment are separate uh is is a fallacy. Right now we're contending with the impact of climate change and industry needs water, industry needs uh electricity. We want industry and employment lands to ensure that we're actually generating jobs and that's what's going to sustain uh the economy in in this city. So that's it. Thank you. Are there any questions of uh councelor Bravo? No. Thank you very much, councelor Moyes. >> Thank you, Madam Speaker. I pre-circulated my motion as well. I do have a motion and it's really uh talks about um requesting the chief planner exe executive director to com do a comprehensive review of city's planning uh policies, zoning regulations and so forth. It talks about site plan, standards, infrastructure, servicing, environmental, economic, public health, climate, national security, and so forth. It also talks about um a comprehensive public engagement, which is really important. And we've also request I'm also requesting that uh this motion be forwarded to AMO and FCM. Councelor Churnis Lynn. >> Thank you. Um I'm I'm really glad to see the o all these overall motions, many of which build on on what we started earlier this year. Um my my concern is just as staff reach out to the government, I just hope that it's clear that that we are not sort of asking to not have authority to make decisions on some of these or set some of the parameters or not have a say. I think it's really important that we still have a say or at least we are consulted on what they develop. I am particularly worried that this this provincial government may not care about the environmental impacts of the data centers. They may not care about the noise in a city. They may not care about all of the things that we are so worried about and we have seen over and over again where they've taken over planning matters and we no longer have a say. So, I I just want to make sure that as this communication goes out and city staff um are writing letters to the government on this that that spirit is still there. I mean, if if the government is making this framework, it's essential that we're consulted and that the things that are important to Torononians, particularly on this issue, are brought into are brought into the ultimate regulations. Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay, councelor Carol quick >> very quickly, Madam Speaker. I wanted I just wanted to to uh uh thank the the counselors because there there are lots of questions for me. But in working together, I think we're in a good place here. They have done a lot of work with staff and that is important and I'll tell you why. the work that staff are doing when they go out to discuss this with the industry is is how do we take this growing concern and and the actual environmental uh uh evidence that is there now of the damage that can be done if you don't get this right and it is there how do we take that and make Toronto a leader Toronto does have an ability to be a leader we are well on the way we have some facilities that that are not the large scale as you you see in the motion contemplated here that are not the large scale types of data centers and where they are um there is great work being done in our community to make them closed loop to mitigate the types of of of harm that we hear the activists very quite rightly making noise about uh that's a pun I suppose uh I shouldn't have said making noise because these things can be quite noisy but in fact uh uh we could be a leader this city could be a leader in how do you provide what needs to be provided provided in the way of data center infrastructure to a city of 3 million with the needs that it will have as it approaches 6 million uh for the the high demand in tech the the demands on power the demand on energy systems. How do you do a closed loop and how do you look back and be able to say we found a way to do it in a way that was green and compliant okay and people are able to live with it and so these motions are very important. I have great faith in staff. I want to allay uh councelor uh uh turnos lind because what we have seen is tech listening to economic development listening to hydro listening to systems in their conversations with each other. I have great faith in the advocacy they're going to do the other orders of government. >> Let's vote. Put the motions on the screen. Okay, come on. Let's rush. Let's get this council meeting over with. >> I don't think anybody's watching us on TV at home. So, don't worry. You don't need to do a lot of long speeches. Nobody's watching us. Okay. Motion by councelor Bravo. On favor carried. Councelor Candal on favor carried. Councelor Bravo on favor carried. We'll do at the end recorded. Is that it? Motion three. All in favor carried. Item is amended. Recorded vote. Councelor Chang, please. Deputy Mayor Malik. >> Councelor Fletcher, please. And councelor >> Peruta. Councelor Fletcher, >> councelor Brussa, how do you vote? The item is amended is adopted unanimously. 25 in favor. >> Okay. And uh members of council, we just have a few more items left over. But but but please no long speeches, please. Um but yes, now councelor um councelor Chang uh submitted a members motion yesterday. I had questions to staff on it because I wasn't sure of the motion and so we sent it to staff to comment and unfortunately I never came back to introduce. So it was an error that was made. So, if I can ask councelor Chang to um move the motion. >> I get to move the last member motion of this term. >> So, this Yeah. So, this is basically about a road that really needs to get built. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> On favor carried. So, we'll circulate it. Um, councelor councelor Cole, you finally have the motion on your item CC 4313 Egllandon Avenue. >> I finally have the motion. It only took uh three days, but anyways, in regards to uh 1410 1416 Egen Avenue West, uh those of you who know the u >> just introduce it. That's all. >> I'm introducing it. There it is. There. >> Okay. >> Uh, city council delete recommendations one and two in the report from city celeles. City council adopt the confidential instructions. City council authorized public release of confidential. City council amends section three. Anyways, uh what I'm asking really in short is to vote against this preposterous development uh which is one of 20 towers, never mind AI. I've got 20 towers going on a small street with daycarees. I don't have one daycare space, no public housing, no affordable housing, no sewers, no hydro. Please vote against this. Thank you. >> Okay. On the motion by councelor >> Cole. >> Recorded vote. Councelor Bravo, please. Councelor Aninsley, >> Councelor Cole, please. And councelor Croissanti. Councelor Thompson, please. >> Councelor Eninsley. Thank you. The motion is adopted. The vote is 23-3. Our next one is Our next one is MM43114. Councelor Myers, you held it down. Go ahead. You want to just move an amendment? >> Uh, yes. And I just want to speak very briefly on it. Oh, briefly, please. >> Uh, staff have the amendment. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, just to delete some language. Um, I just want to start by thanking a few people who helped us get here. Um, first from the legal staff, Daniel El Madani and Amanda Hill. From the planning staff, Samuel Baron and Christian Ventresca. uh from the community group my Malvin there was Kumsa Baker, Darnell and Hassan and as well as 25 residents who consistently >> yeah who consistently showed up at meetings to advocate for the community and I also want to show off this lovely artwork from my Malvin from the community meeting and it just really goes to show the heart and spirit of Malvin uh is really represented here and people take a lot of pride in their community. Uh the Malvin Mall redevelopment is a big development for the community. That is the only commercial space in all of Malvin essentially. Uh so this is going to have huge ramifications for the community for decades. Uh this is a place people got their first jobs. This is a place where the kids go to school um for their lunches. This is a place where the Malvin Mall walkers do their exercises uh every Monday, Wednesday and Friday. So this place has a very special heart in the place of the community. So whatever development happens, it has to be done carefully and in consultation with the community. Uh unfortunately a lot of the visions and the ideas the community has uh are hamstrung by changes in provincial law. Uh but through processes like Maui Malver and the community local association group, people have becoming more and more familiar with planning law and how they can effectively advocate through their community through the tools that are available. uh and with the help of the staff there are there has been some significant wins actually some firsts that haven't been achieved on any other planning uh file. So I do want to give my sincere thanks to the staff. Uh I also want to thank my colleague councelor Shen who's also been part of this journey has been out the meetings as well uh also advocating for the community. This property is right on the border of our wards. Uh so it's going to have huge implications for both of us and both of our communities. Uh, and I just want to say thank you to the community for putting your trust in the process, for showing up at the meetings, uh, and for really making sure your voice was heard and for organizing to affect some of these changes. And some of these wins, these are real wins that were achieved because the community was organized and really made sure that their voices were going to be heard in this process. Thank you. >> Uh, okay. Councelor Shan, you wanted to speak on this? >> Thank you, Madam Speaker. I just wanted to rise to uh thank councelor Myers for all the work he's done over the last four years in uh in championing the community voice in this matter. I uh I got back on council only a few months ago so I've been consistently on the file. uh Melvin uh mall, Melvin Town Center is the heart of that community and it is unfortunate uh that we've been consistently losing businesses in that area and now uh this whole um community hub if you may is under uh threat >> but having said that having said that I just 30 seconds madam speaker >> madam speaker it's 30 seconds and it's a community that has been warning us to voice their concerns so if you may I'll Just take two minutes max. Um so in just just wanted to thank all the community members have consistently shown up. Uh many of them have had much difficulty in in in making their way to these meetings with uh pressures in their life but have consistently shown up uh to these meetings to voice their concerns and have their community respected uh their their wishes respected. So, I'm glad that we were able to push for some vents, but I'm I'm sure that we will continue this fight to make sure that all of the possibilities of what can be achieved for Melvin community would be pushed through this development. Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. >> On the amendment by councelor Meyers on favor carried. Item is amended on favor carried. MM43115 partnership with Jay's Care Foundation. Councelor Perks, you held it down. Councelor Perks, you held the item down. MM43115, the Care Foundation. >> Yes. Yes. Um, uh, members, I encourage you to vote for what's here, but I wanted to give you an update on, uh, an important related matter. Some of you may have seen that the Jay's Care Foundation uh has been making grants to improve facilities and parks around the city. And they were saying they would only do that if uh a big bank could have their corporate logo on the facility. And as you may know, we have policy saying you can't just advertise corporate logos in our parks. And that is a policy that took us years to develop. what the world was like before we had that policy. Certain parks in the city, many of them waterfront parks, would be taken over by private events every good weekend. And what the deal was is they would bring in a charitable partner who might make $5,000 off it, but the big private companies would get their logos all over our park, get DJs, be advertising, effectively pushing the public out of our own parks. So many of us on this council fought for years to say no, you cannot privatize and corporatize public spaces this way and we developed a policy saying you can't just put a logo on in exchange for some money. I was asked by a community organization to make a deal like that in High Park and they said no, we have public policy on that. I don't move motions against city policy policies that this whole council has adopted. So I sent them to staff and I said tell staff ask staff what the rules are. The good news is I heard this morning that the Jay's Cares Foundation has learned their lesson and will be making the donation in High Park without the big bank logo. So the lesson here is hold your ground, keep public lands in public hands and you will win >> on the item. >> Okay. Recorded vote. Recorded vote. Councelor Cole, you you need to you want to speak on this? >> Yeah. >> Oh, okay. It's your motion. >> I just briefly uh I understand the concern about these logos. Uh but uh >> I just want to have uh the opportunity this comes up because as I said the other day, everything is going downtown and it's about time we had some investment in our parks uh north of Egun. >> God forbid we should Yeah. Willelf has got nothing. So it's about time we had You know, so it's about time we had fountain that we had. Don't get me started with parks. Fountains that work. God, if I like to get a drinking water fountain in one of our parks north of Egleton. >> I've been trying to get I've been trying to get this uh patches and uh potholes fixed on the uh >> councelor K. Can you speak on wolf for speak? >> Yeah, I'm speaking about this important investment in our parks by uh the Jay's. I want them to come north of Eglinton and not just downtown. So, please vote in favor of this motion >> on the on the item. On favor recorded vote. Councelor Matlo and Councelor Thompson, please. The item carries unanimously. 24 in favor. Next item is MM43128. Councelor Holidayiday, you held it down. Is for section 37 for fairy rides for kids and seniors. >> Yes. Question of the mover, please. >> Okay. >> Um, so I just wanted to make sure I understood. >> Uh, there is a question of the mover. Thank you. Um, I just want to understand who is being recognized in the tens of thousands of Torononians who made their voices heard. What does in recognition mean and who are those tens of thousands of Torononians? >> Mayor Cha. >> No, the mover. >> She moved it. >> Who moved it? >> There's no amendment. >> Deputy Mayor Osma. >> Oh. Sorry. >> Sorry. I've lost 25 seconds. >> Mayor Malik. Okay. Sorry. Go ahead. >> We're at 32 seconds. Speaker. >> Yeah. Thank you for the question. Um, tens of thousands of Torononians made their voices heard um in their protection of our waterfront um in standing with council and saying that decisions about the future of our waterfront need to be made with our voices and our priorities uh in view. the federal government made it very clear um that they were listening and they have said no to expansion. So the tens of thousands of Torononians are people from every community uh right across the the city who raised their voices. Yesterday we heard a number of them, residents associations, former mayors, um you know, uh folks who are have been leaders um when it comes to business and economic development all the way to local community groups, uh schools, young people, uh folks who have built this uh this city. And this is an opportunity uh to make sure that you know when we pro we raise our voices and we protect our waterfront that we are also able to continue to strengthen our connections to those places that we are fighting for. >> Those are the 87,000 uh people that completed the survey from the federal government. >> That's just one uh metric of who raised their voices. I know that our communities also had letters that from groups that represent hundreds of uh residents, local businesses. I my office and myself got thousands of communication conversations, advocacy groups. >> And so the win is the federal government withdrawing support, celebrating the win. That's in the title. >> The win is is protecting our waterfront in the way that city council made it its position. And yes, absolutely. And so the the the mechanism here is that there is a move to re to apply section 37 money to the uh fairy dock project and then that will in turn push money out to go into operating to pay for uh the fair concession. That's what's in front of us. you've uh you've described what has been laid out in the recommendation and I want to be able to also thank financial services staff uh and and >> not time for the speeches questions so thank you for answering them. Question for the solicitor. Could uh the solicitor tell us the limitations on I'm at 302. Um could the solicitor tell us the limitations on the application of section 37 funds? Madam Speaker, I'm going to suggest that the chief financial officer and treasurer answer this one that I want to know about section 37 funds. What what can they be used for? >> Uh to the speaker, section 37 funds actually in and in this case there is a negotiated benefit. The negotiated benefit in the section 37 funds that have been identified are restricted and specific to the use uh towards the Jack Leighton Ferry terminal redevelopment. >> In general, what is the use of section 37 funds? Uh, in general, >> I have five minutes. >> No, you don't. Three minutes. Five minutes only with the mayor. >> No. >> Thank you. >> So, I'm going to carry on with this. >> In general, the use would be for capital community type. >> Five minutes. It's three minutes. >> So, it has to be applied for capital. The general rule is that is applied for capital but more specifically it would be the negotiated benefit as part of the planning agreement. Right? So go back to the first principles of section 37 benefits. They were known as density benefits. They're they are to be applied to the community that has the density but more so they are for durable things that that help cope with the density as opposed to transitory things or operational things. That's the principle, is it not? And and as uh as the section 37 negotiations and agreements are defined, they would be for those purposes. >> Is a fair concession for a fixed period of time consistent with the requirements of applying money for a section 37 benefit? >> Uh to the speaker, I I would say that that is not consistent. However, what is in front of us is allocating the section 37 benefit to the capital. Thank you. I'll speak. >> Councelor Thompson. Um >> I was going three minutes for clarification. >> I understand speaker. No, I understand. It's been a long day and and it's been a long day. Thank you. And you've been doing a masterful job, speaker. So, thank you. >> Um through you to I'll start with the staff first. In the process of section 37 negotiation, you negotiate uh specific terms as part of the undertaking. Would I be correct with respect to that understanding >> uh to the speaker? So with section 37, you're generally negotiating a community benefit where there is a nexus to the development, the added heightened density and associated benefit that you would negotiate for. So the pro these particular funds that are being allocated for this um I guess win and celebration um at what point were these funds at $1.3 million negotiated? Because at apparently the win according to what's being described here recently occurred. So when was the uh $1.3 million um um acred or calculated or determined to be utilized as you determined for the Jack Leighton uh ferry capital? So these uh these benefits would have been negotiated I don't have the exact year but they would have been uh negotiated quite a while ago >> right >> uh with the defined benefit being >> got so in order to change with respect to the defined benefit because this doesn't describe to me as part of this motion that this is a a defined or described benefit in order to change that would you not have to go back to the source to start a new negotiation or get their permission in order to proceed in using the capital this way. >> Uh to the speaker, the defined benefit is not being changed. The section 37 funds are being applied against the capital project consistent with the defined benefit. The effect of that is funds are being freed up and reallocated to be able to wave fairy fees. So what is the capital consideration with respect to resources are being used essentially to pay for uh passengers fees and or fair to the ferry? What's the capital benefit there? >> Uh again to the speaker. So there are there are a couple of things happening as a result of this motion. So the first thing that is happening is there is a recommendation to apply section 37 funds to the defined benefit which is the capital project which is the redevelopment of the ferry terminal. 1 point nearly 1.4 million is being applied to that 1.4 million in otherwise debt/CFC funding is being removed from the capital budget. 900,000 of that CFC funding is being reallocated to the operating budget to support the waiver of the ferry fees. >> Gotcha. that to you. Um to the mover of the motion, may I ask um what um type of communications will take place in order to promote this as a opportunity and benefits for all let's say Torononians as opposed to th those in the downtown core. >> Thank you very much. Um this uh this motion was pulled together um in conversation and in consultation with city staff. Um and the uh as you will have uh noticed this year we had a tremendous amount of visitors to the city and have really um demonstrated uh the uh amazing communications channels that the city has through its own fair list through uh wide widespread communications through social email and earned media as well. So there is a an approach to making sure uh that this is shared um widely because >> the um the capability to access one of our biggest and most loved parks um is a benefit to our waterfront communities and our city uh you know um in every neighborhood. >> Fair enough. Just one other question through you speaker. Um so will this be expected to continue on an annual basis and um how will that actually be funded in terms of expectation because obviously we're setting some high expectations here and I understand about celebration but it would seems to me that every August we should have a celebration in terms of free fairy ride. Have you accounted for that? >> Yes. So, one of the things that's very clearly laid out in this motion is this is a one-time um uh you know occurrence. Um and uh in the previous uh council meeting, I worked with some of my colleagues, including uh the budget chief to put direction forward to city staff to look at um how uh fairs are collected and the use of the um the ferry ticketing service. So that in the report back next year on the on the you know the the new fairies and and our approach to that we're also reviewing um you know access to the island through our ferry service especially as we're getting new faster um higher capacity uh fairies that will be in operation next year. >> Thank you. >> Point of order. Councelor Holland. >> Uh speaker I'm going to ask you to rule on whether or not this motion is in order. uh because both in the title it says authorization to release section 37 funds for free August ferry rides and so on. And in the questioning I was able to demonstrate uh to council that there is a clear intent and a cause and effect of the application of section 37 funds through accounting mechanisms to produce an operating uh shortterm fair concession. And I believe that that is inconsistent with the requirements of section 37 money. And this is a very important precedent that is being said here. And I would ask you to consider that very carefully because the intent and the cause and effect of the motion is quite clear. I cast his question first. Councelor Pastronac question. >> Yeah. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Uh through you to the chief financial officer. Um I guess many of us have used section 37 funding in in the past. And oh um question for the CFO. >> Um so many of us have have used section 37 in the past mostly for recreation and and parks. Uh we've been told quite clearly that it cannot be used for state of good repair. Um the Jack Leighton terminal is going through what is partially state of good repair. Are these funds really eligible for that? um to the speaker. So there is the defined benefit of the redevelopment of the Jack Laden Ferry Terminal is is an approved an agreed upon and an eligible use of these funds. >> Sure. Um, >> so if we're doing a a recreational capital development in our project in our ward, section 37 can be used for new and enhanced and state of good repair on the same facility. So to the speaker uh there is a defined so with section 37 funds under the previous planning act again there is a change now where there community benefit charges it is a new regime but under the planning act there was eligible uses of those funds. There was also policies that were approved by council that determined what and how you would actually go about negotiating those funds for what purposes. the agreement or essentially the council policy was associated with negotiating those benefits consistent with community infrastructure to be able to support the added heightened density that you would see with those developments. What what is in front of us uh is a previously negotiated section 37 benefit for the redevelopment of the Jacklaton ferry terminal which includes being able to support increased usage, increased capacity which would be eligible and consistent with the policy. >> Okay, fair enough. I'm not sure uh whether this question goes to the mover or to staff. Uh but I understand with the ferry to the island you can pre purchase uh tickets. Uh those who have uh pre- purchased tickets at the regular price uh can they get a refund uh after August 1st? >> I don't know if fairy services is here >> to the chair. So the system is being updated such that all transactions starting on the 1st of August will be free. Um as to pre purchase tickets they will be valid till the end of the year and passengers can use till the end of the year. However for the free fairs it will be only effective on sales as of the 1 of August onwards. >> Now this um if this is adopted by council the free fairs start in just a couple of days. Have you got a program in place to let the general public know that these this is a available >> to the chair? Yes. So, we have started the process of ensuring that the point pay the payment systems are updated for the new fair structures as well. We're working with the communications department to ensure that we are communicating the changes through social media >> and people people obviously uh citywide and tourists are eligible. to to the chair. It is all passengers that would take the ferry services from the 1st till the 31st of August that are children, youth or seniors. Okay. Thank you. >> And now >> uh yeah. Yes, speaker. I so I just just wanted to be clear on on a on a couple of things. Uh I think it's it's great that we're giving seniors and and children the opportunity to to have these three fairs just for that one month it seems. But um in terms of the proper use of section 37 funds, does that mean that uh I I don't have much in terms of section 37 up in North. However, consistent to what we're doing right here in front of us right now, does that mean that I can use any section 37 funds that I currently have uh for potential free transit for seniors and apply it to that for a period of time? Can I do that uh given that will this setting a precedent? >> I would not consider that appropriate. However, in this instance, what we've heard is that the section 37 money is not being used to give the discounted ferry rides. It's in fact being used for capital improvements. And section 37 funds can be used for facilities, services, or matters in the community. >> Being used for capital improvements, then who's paying for the free rides? >> To the speaker. So again, there there are multiple recommendations included in this motion. One recommendation is to apply available eligible section 37 funds against their intended purpose, which is the ferry terminal. What that does is that frees up funding that otherwise would have would have been used towards the council approved project for the ferry terminal. Uh with roughly 1.4 4 million in section 37 funds being applied against the project. What is then being recommended is the capital plan be reduced by 450,000 in debt funding and 940,000 in otherwise capital from current funding that would have gone to the project is being reallocated to be able to permit uh the waiver of the ferry fees. >> Sounds like a very complicated accounting formula to arrive at some funds to be able to pay for some fairs. Uh it is it is a series of recommended adjustments to both the capital and operating budgets. >> Interesting. But we can't do it for free transit for seniors in in a similar fashion and come up with some creative way. >> Yeah. But where would they go on the transit? >> Like >> it's up to them. >> At least with the fairies, they're going to an island. >> Well, maybe maybe they want to get to the island. Sorry. Is there is >> uh to the speaker um >> any unallocated and available section 37 funds can be allocated to the capital program. In doing so, any funds that are freed up, we can have conversations in terms of what the appropriate use of those funds would be. >> So the expectation last question is that so this is not sustainable. This will not repeat itself next year. >> No, >> this is not sustainable. um which is part of the reason why section 37 funds are not used for operating and ongoing operating expenses. This is a one-time action. >> Okay. I don't think I've ever seen this type of anyway in the many years that I've been here. Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. So, I'm ruling the motion in order. The recommendations um are in order. Uh possibly maybe the title may not be but the recommendations in the motion is in order. >> The title is you know. Okay. So, the motion is in order. That's my ruling. Okay. Councelor Holiday, you want to speak? Okay. Deputy Mayor Matt, you don't need to speak. Deputy Mayor, let Councelor Holiday speak. >> Councelor Holiday. Councelor Perusa, please. >> Can you start my time, please? >> Yes. >> Restart. >> Okay. Go ahead. Sure. Look, I I I've raised my point with you. I have concerns about the mechanism, but I have larger concerns that I want to lay out. And if you read this motion and you read the context, which was what was said in the media, there's a million dollars of taxpayer resources that are being applied as a thank you to the people that civically participated in a process in a process to convince the federal government to change their position. The most upsetting part about it is to call it a win. And I want to make sure that I remind the council, I talked about cause and effect in the motion about the financial. Well, there's cause and effect in what is deemed a win. And I spoke about this already to council that if development of the Billy Bishop Toronto City Center airport is suppressed and the demand for air travel and cargo and all of the associated activities with it continues to rise, then logically this demand is going to be met by Pearson Airport and the runways and the flight pass of Pearson Airport fly over Atobbico Center. They fly over Atobbico North. They fly over Atobbico South. They fly over parts of North York and parts of Toronto. So the apparent win of some people that is being celebrated by a million dollars worth of concessions is the loss of other people in the city of Toronto. the loss of sleep, the increase in noise, the loss in property values, and all of the things that come out of it. And I'm not here to relitigate that argument. We had it. But it's very upsetting to see the characterization of this motion as a victory lap and a win and a reward to people that you know what got civically active in the federal government's consultation that led them to their decision. But just don't forget about the people that didn't get a win in the west end of the city. Thank you very much. Toronto Island Park is one of our most loved parks. Torononians demonstrated our love for our waterfront and the island and the work to protect it. We want them to be able to enjoy it even more. young people, seniors, and I glad that we can do that in a costneutral way um in a way uh that continues to strengthen our connections to what matters most to us in this city. Thank you so much. and recorded vote. Councelor Turnis Llin, councelor Croanti, Councelor Anley, please. Councelor Croanti and councelor Turnison, please. Councelor Saxs, are you present in the meeting? Affirmative. The motion carries or it is 15 to 5. >> Our next item is MM43132 section 37 money. Councelor Candala, you want to just release it? >> There's a a replacement motion. staff advised there needs to be a recipient for the mural and we've selected Mural Roots as the nonprofit organization. >> Do we have the replacement? >> Oh, yes. Before we before we do that, I forgot councelor Bravo. Uh I understand that you wanted to declare a conflict on the um MM43115, the Jay's Care uh foundation. Thank you, speaker. This was an motion without notice and I have submitted a written declaration to clerks. My son is a Jay's care camp um supervisor and I left the floor for the vote. Okay, thank you. Okay, councelor can do we have councelor Kandelle's motion? Okay, there's councelor Kandell's motion. Okay. Motion 1 A and 1 B on one A. All in favor carried on 1B carried. Item is amended. Carried. Councelor Chang, would you like to move your members motion 43135? Friendly trees. Just move it. You just have to move it. Okay. Mm43136. Councelor Fletcher. Councelor Fletcher. Pardon. Yeah, we just said on favor. Why did you want a recorded vote? >> Oh, I said all in favor. Mm43136. Councelor Fletcher. I'll move it. I second it. On favor carried. MM43137 section 37. Councelor Pastneck. You'll move it. >> Yes. I'll just move the item. >> Favor. Carrie. Mm. 43138. Um, councelor uh councelor chang your motion that you just introduced. I'd like to move it. >> Okay. On favor carried. That's it. Is that it? >> The mayor wants to say something. >> Okay. Just one just one sec. Mayor Cha, >> I just uh want to take this opportunity to uh present two things. One is to you madame chair. Thank you. Thank you very much. 452 items. 452 items. It's not even 10:00 yet. I have one more thing is a bottle of scotch for uh counselor Gord Perks. John John You didn't upstairs eating. Huh? >> We were upstairs eating. >> Where's Paula? We will We will boost her. >> Thank you very much. And let's just do the bills and then we can go upstairs, right? Pardon? >> Yes. Members, before I ask for a motion to enact the general bills, may I have a motion regarding the consideration of submissions on zoning bylaw official plan amendments? >> No way. >> No way. >> I thought that was good. >> Oh my life. >> No way. >> I thought I thought that was going to be the last one. Okay. All in favor post if any carried. >> No, we're going to record the last one. May May I have a motion to introduce? >> Oh, I did. I said councelor Thompson. Okay, >> I'm waiting for microphone. Oh, here we are. >> All right. Are you ready? >> Yes. >> All right, I'm ready. The committee and council considers submissions in making a decision on zoning bylaw and official planned amendments. >> All in favor? Post? No, we're doing the last one recorded. May May I have a motion? >> May I have a motion to introduce the general bills? Councelor Holidayiday, do you want to move that one? >> Certainly. That leave be granted to introduce bills 980 to 1211 and 1214 to 1270. >> Shall leave be granted to introduce these bills on favor. Oppose if any. Carry >> at the last the last one. >> No, the last one. Okay. Recorded vote. >> He can't. He has to be over there if he does a recorded vote. Councelor Peruta. You see, we wanted to do it at the end. >> Well, you should listen to me. Well, councelor Puce asked for a recorded vote. Recorded vote. Councelor Prudza, could you please enter your vote? Councelor Peruta, are you voting on the item? >> Perhaps you can enter your vote verbally. Uh, the vote carries. 22 in favor and none opposed. >> Sh. Okay. May I have a motion to introduce confirmatory bills? Mayor Cha, do you want to move that one? >> Sure. >> Can we get a record vote on that, too? >> We're We're going to do it at the end, please. Councelor Peruta, >> yeah, we're doing the confirmative. Okay, good job. Okay, >> I'm not in my chair. >> Shall these bills be be declared as bylaws and be passed subject to section 226.9 of city of Toronto act? All in favor? Post been carried. May I have a motion to introduce the confirmatory bills? Mayor Chow. >> Yes. that leave be granted to introduce bills to confirm to the point of the introduction of this motion the proceedings of city council meeting 43 on July 29th and 30th 2026 >> shall the uh shall he be granted to introduce these bills on favor post if any carried no >> will you be quiet hold on >> shel hold on there's one more vote Shall these bills be declared as bylaws and passed and be passed subject to section 2264.9 of City of Toronto Act 2006? Recorded vote. That's the last vote. Councelor Peruta, may we have your vote? >> Councelor Thompson, may we have your vote? Councelor Prutza, we still don't have your vote. >> Speaker, by a vote of 22 in favor and none opposed, the motion c passes. >> Okay, great. Now, >> I'm never leaving. >> I want to um thank our staff here, the clerk staff. Amazing job. They work. Thank I also want to thank all the staff here and thanks to all members of council. Thank you mayor child for the flowers and uh let's celebrate right. Thank you. Meeting is adjourned.