Transcript: Yacht Club Lease Debate Dominates - General Government Committee - March 9, 2026 | Summary 528

Yacht Club Lease Debate Dominates - General Government Committee - March 9, 2026

All right, girls. That's All right. Good morning everybody. I'm going to call this meeting to order. All right. Good morning. My name is Deputy Paul Deputy Mayor Paul Aninsley. I am the chair of the general government committee. We clerk has told me we have quorum. So I'm going to call meeting number 27 to order. Welcome everybody this morning to committee room number one. And we're being uh this meeting is being held by video conference and in person here in city hall in committee room number one. Uh this meeting is also being livereamed online at youtube.com/tronto city councsil live. Uh for the land acknowledgement, I would like to say on behalf of myself, my committee members, and all of our amazing staff that although we may be meeting in different locations today, the general government committee would like to acknowledge that the land we're meeting on is the traditional territory of many nations, including the Missagas of the Credit, the Ana Nashab, the Chipoa, the Honi, and the Wendette peoples, and is now home to many diverse First Nations, Inuit, and Matei people. We also would like to acknowledge that Toronto is covered by treaty number 13 with the Missosagas of the credit. For members of the public, just a reminder, if you're registered to speak at today's meeting, if you could please listen for me to call your name at the appropriate time, I will be calling speakers in the order that they appear on the speakers list. That list can be viewed online by visiting the general government committee on the toronto.ca/counsel ca/counsel website page and clicking the speakers box for today's meeting. For members of the committee, I just want to remind you the city clerk has provided all of the agenda materials on toronto.ca/counsel and on the clerk's meeting portal. Clerk's IT staff are available here in the room for members if you need help with your electronic devices. And a reminder to please submit and approve your notice, your motions by email. and staff are available at ggcrona.ca to help with those motions. At this point, I'm going to ask if there's any declarations of interest under the Ontario Municipal Conflict of Interest Act. Seeing none, can I have a motion to confirm our minutes from our last meeting on December 8th, 2025? Councelor Thompson. All in favor? That carries. Members, we have 19 items on today's agenda. So, I'm going to go through the review of those items and if you want to hold something, if you can please let me know as we're going through. So, our first item is uh time for 9:45 GG27.1 aortionment uh property taxes as of March 9th, 2026. This is a hearing, so I will hold that. Number two, GG27.2 cancellation reduction or refund of property taxes or payment in lie of taxes as of March 9th, 2026. That's a statutory meeting for 9:45. So, I'm going to hold that one in my name. Number three, GG27.3, amendment to purchase order 6052995 with Aquon Construction Company Limited for construction of the new Rouge Valley Community Recreation and Child Care Center and the Joyce Tremor Parks for Parks and Recreation. I have a mover. Councelor Thompson, do you want to move something for Scar Bro? Excellent. Councelor Thompson is moving number three. All in favor? That carries. GG 27.4 award of negotiated request for proposal document 517-9720264 to Aworth Incorporated and Standard Mechanical Systems Limited for the provision of heating, ventilation, air conditioning, maintenance and repair services at various city of Toronto locations. Moved by councelor Holiday. All in favor? That carries. Sorry, scrolling. I'm going to switch tabs, Matthew. Sorry if everybody gonna be patient with me for a moment. There we go. uh GG27.5 award of request for proposal document 5386487782 to claims Prolp for the provision of insurance adjusting services. Can I hold that please? Councelor Thompson is holding number five GG 26.6 Six. Purchase order for sorry purchase order amendment to accelerate the optional year funds for mini dump trucks for fleet services. Councelor Holidayiday is moving it. All in favor? That carries. GG 27.7. Amendment to blanket contract number 47023575 and 47020880 issued for claims pro LP for insurance adjusting services. Councelor Thompson is holding number seven. GG 27.8 is our next item. Amendment to purchase order 604-3796 with WSP Canada Incorporated and purchase order 6052068 with Maple Reindeers Construction Limited for sorry Randers Construction Limited for rehabilitation and upgrades of seven group six sewage pumping stations at various locations in W three and four. Move by councelor Holiday. All in favor that carries. GG27.9 award of document 534-938-6217 Dasco Construction Toronto Limited for the sledge sorry my apologies turn that off award of document 5349386217 to Asco Construction Limited for the sludge storage tank cleaning and BOF filter upgrades at the Highland Creek treatment plan. Councelor Thompson, another scar bro one. Councelor Thompson is moving. All in favor? That carries. GG 27.10 award of document 538159-6310 to the personal insurance company operating as the personal general insurance incorporated for a group home and auto insurance program. Councelor Tom Holidayiday. All in favor? That carries. GG 27.11 litigation arising from the construction of the St. Lawrence Market North. Moved by councelor Thompson. All in favor? That carries. GG 27.12 non-competitive contract with Grass Can Construction Limited for emergency sophet shoring repairs to the FG Gardener Expressway. Moved by councelor Holiday. All in favor? So carried. GG 27.13 non-competitive extension with the Carla construction and maintenance limited for trackless train service and high parks for park and recreation award 4. All good. Oh, sorry. There's a speaker on this. Is there not? We have a deputent on number 13. I will hold that. GG 27.14 renewal of various boat club leases and awards 3 4 10 14 19 20 and 25. We have speakers. I will hold that. GG 27.15 a portion of 550 Bay View Avenue Evergreen Brick Works Evergreen lease amendment and extension agreement move by councelor Thompson on favor. Oh, you want to hold it? Sorry. Uh GG 27.16, a promatic approach to delivering state of good repair, accessibility, and net zero programs at city hall and Metro Hall. Councelor Holidayiday. So moved. All in favor? That carries. GG 27.17 summary of open competitive awards made by the chief procurement officer from November 15, 2025 to February 13, 2026. By councelor Thompson. All in favor? That carries. Uh GG27.18 annual report on the city's fleet availability and utilization. Move by councelor Holiday. All in favor? That carries. Uh and our last item, GG 27.19, emergency non-competitive contract with Weber Infrastructure Management Canada Limited for snow removal services. Move held by councelor Holiday. Okay, we are going to go back to the top since it's 9:45. Exactly 9:45. We're just chugging right along on schedule. All right. I speaker on number two. Our first item is a statutory timed item. GG27.1 9:45 a.m. A portionment of property taxes March 9th, 2026. This is a public hearing. I believe we don't have any deputants. No amendment. One amendment. All right. Do I need to read it? Okay. So, I am moving that recommendation one be amended to read as follows. The general government committee approved the individual tax appeal applications made pursuant to section 322 of the city of Toronto Act 2006 aortionment of property of sorry aortionment of taxes identified in the detailed hearing report marked as appendix a report February 11th 2026 from the chief financial officer and treasurer finance and treasury services excluding the following applications. Ward number 12. The original role number is 1904-11-4- 040-450. Uh, property address known as 2100 Young Street for the tax year 2025. Any questions of the mover? Seeing none, all in favor of the amendment, all in favor of the item as amended, that carries. Our next item is GG27.2 2 9:45 statutory meeting uh cancellation reduction and refund of property taxes or payment in lie of taxes as of March 9th 2026. I have one registered speaker sorry uh Miss Julie Chan Julie Chan in the room or Good morning. Morning Miss Chan. I have five minutes to address the committee. Um after you've spoken to the committee, uh each member of the committee can ask you questions for up to five minutes. Uh after that, we bring it back into committee as we call it where each member of the committee can ask questions of staff for up to five minutes. And after that, they can speak to up to five minutes and then we'll vote on the item. So you have uh five minutes to start whenever you're ready. Uh good morning everybody. Um, my husband and I would just like to appeal the taxes because our home is not finished currently and we are asking if we can have our taxes reduced because the construction is not done. Um, we are hoping for it to be done within 1 month because we are following our um, building by code and we just changed the sliding on the house that the um, inspector asked for. So, we have not fully moved into the home yet, which is why we are asking for a reduction in taxes uh to help take some financial stress off of us. Thank you, everybody. Okay. Thank you, Miss Chan. Uh questions of the deput. Sorry, Miss Chan. How how many years are you looking for reduction? Are you looking for like the taxes to be waved completely for the taxation year or um I spoke to somebody from the city before um and she said that uh they cannot take away the taxes for everything even though we did not live there because they still have to tax the land value but they don't tax the they can wave the house value. So, we bought the house in um uh July of 2024. So, we are still um under construction because of uh the issues that came up and because of the last minute changes for approval. So, we haven't been able to move in for a year and a half so far. So, we would like to ask for a reduction. Um, it would help us a lot financially if we can get it all reduced, but we understand if that can't be the case. Okay. So, sorry, just to be clear, so you bought your house in 2024 and it's been under renovation since the day of purchase, and you haven't lived in it at all? No. Okay. I'm living with my mother-in-law and my grandma. Oh, okay. Uh, and how long do you think you'll be the construction's going to take? Um well the city said that we only have to switch the sliding. So what happened was it was supposed to be done but then they said one side of the house we needed to change it to aluminum sliding uh just in December or November but because of the weather they cannot safely do it and we had to special order the blue color. So we've waited until just this week where they were able to change the sliding because of the warmer weather. So there were some delays because of that. Okay. All right. Uh, other questions of the deputent? Seeing none, thank you, Mr. Chambers. We're going to move on to questions of staff, I believe. Questions of staff, councilors, councelor Thompson. Um, thank you very much, Mr. Chair, through you to staff. Um, could you perhaps help me to understand the rationale as to why we would actually give a tax break to this um, uh, speaker and her husband, I guess, who are the owners of this property. through the chair. Uh good morning. The taxpayer is paying for taxes for the vacant land portion of their assessment. The building has been demolished and has been reflective in their assessment. Okay. That's been confirmed by um the municipal property assessment corporation that is being valued as vacant land. So there's no physical structure in terms of a property on site to be taxed as such through the chair. That is correct. Right. So in order to if we were to allow that, this is not similar to where you have a structure and someone says we haven't moved into the homes yet. So we would like to have the taxes either deferred or wave altogether. In this case, there's really nothing to tax. It's just a land. And the land tax portion would be paid by the property owner through the chair. Yes, that is correct. Okay, great. That helps me with my understanding, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Thompson. Councelor Holidayiday, any questions of staff? No. Okay. Speakers, I would just You're moving a motion to grant it. Are are you doing that? Yes. Okay. Oh, actually I would support that then based on the information that we've garnered from staff and it makes so much sense quite frankly and it uh reduces the hardship on the property owner given the fact that they have been able to live in the home because there is no home to live in and in essence they're paying the the tax portion on the land which they're not asking for either deferral or elimination of and so on. So I would be in agreement with respect to your motion. Thank you. Okay. I mean, councelor Holidayiday speak. Nope. Okay. So, I have a recommendation to move as follows. And the deputants property is in this list. Sorry. The the deputent's property is it in this list through the chair. It's within the appendex of the report. It's within the amendment. within the appendex. Okay. All right. So, they're covered off. Yes. Okay. All right. Okay. Perfect. And I am going to and I move just move this as red. Otherwise, I'm going to lull the whole room to sleep. I'm going to remove the I'll read the first part. The general government committee approved the individual tax appeal applications made pursuant to section 323 of the city of Toronto Act 2006 resulting in tax reductions excluding phase in/capping amounts identified in the detailed hearing report marked as appendex A to the report February 11, 2026 from the chief financial officer and the Treasury Treasurer Finance and Treasury Services excluding the following applications and there are 1, two, three, 11 before us. Any questions of me as the mover? Seeing none, all in favor of the amendment item is amended. All in favor? That carries. Thank you. And we are on to item number 13 is our next item with registered deputants GG 27.13 non-competitive extension with Carla construction and maintenance limited for trackless train service in high park for parks and recreation. And I have two registered speakers. The first one is Marsh Marshall Lesley and the second one is George Regakos. We're coming back. I'm doing the deputants first. deput deputed items. First, Marshall Lesley in the room. Morning, Mr. Lesley. You have five minutes. Whenever you're ready. Sorry, sir. If you press the button at the bottom of the microphone to green, it'll turn your microphone on. Okay, there you go. Uh when I appeared uh nine months ago before the committee to speak to a similar motion, it was as a uh private individual, but I am here today representing High Park Access Now, which is a recently formed group of residents who oppose the High Park movement strategy. We have gathered 30,000 signatures online and through print petitions. Made several presentation to council members. Since then, held several information pickets at High Park's Blur Street entrance. launched 14 FOIs, two of which under appeal to the information privacy commissioner, that have now yielded over 10,000 pages of previously unreleased reports, recommendations of staff, consultants, and emails, and we will shortly launch our new website. My purpose here this morning is to discuss what has changed in the last nine months, what is still missing, what is wrong, and suggest some recommendations. So what has changed since May? The term of the proposal is now for two operating seasons instead of the five years with two options to extend to a total of 15 years. The contract is now for a fixed amount instead of in 15% gross royalty. It is no longer a people mover but is now a trackless train. There is no requirement for accessibility. It is not environmentally friendly. In other words, it's still diesel. It does not modernize customer service. Payment is still cash or e transfer. There is no daily shuttle service from April 1st to October 31st. There is no winter service pilot program. There is no references to electric service. It was to be fully electric by 2028. There's no authorization for the general manager to sign additional license agreements with Carla to expand the service to other parts of the city. And you'll recall that your motion to council, there is great discussion and optimism about Tommy Thompson in the spit. What is still missing? Well, the east side of the park. nothing for the Parkside entrance, the Howard Street uh street car loop spring road parking lot, the intersection closest to the Keel subway. There's no longer any commitment to electrification and the transform to net zero strategy. There is no consultation with community permit holders or stakeholders. There are no ridership estimates. There isn't even an estimate of the number of park visitors any longer. No performance bond, performance metrics, risk liability requirements, fair wage policy. There is no AODA compliance. There's no bike carriers on the device. There's no construction or presence of any shelters for any of the stops. There is no requirement to maintain the storage shed. There is no attention to the first and last mile of the route because there is no integration with either TTC or Wheel Trans. and the TTC 203 is still a seasonal service. So what is wrong here? Well, the report simply doesn't meet the May 2023 council resolution to implement a high park movement strategy. There's the entire value proposition. The cost of a family of four to make a lap around High Park is almost identical, literally within pennies of a family's round trip to Toronto Island. The parks division never informed council that Carla had a force measure to eliminate the previous contract. There is no pretense that the shuttle service is what parks described as a core component of maintaining accessibility. And there's no pretense anymore that this is an improvement and expanded people moving service. I'm quoting the people moving service allowing visitors to access key destinations within High Park without the use of personal vehicles. So what would I recommend? Send it back to parks division. Ask them how this is going to implement the high park movement strategy. Maybe shorten the term to a year and and ask them how they're going to make this AODDA compliant. how it will integrate with the TTC, how a private operator can operate on TTC property, whether this can be licensed by Service Ontario to cross Blur Street, or you simply turn the contract over to another division. And I would suggest economic development, transportation services, or purchasing. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Lesley. Questions of the deputent? Mr. holidays. Uh, thank you. I'm just dialing back to try to remember all the bits and pieces, but really there was a mixed re do I remember this correctly that there's a there's mixed receipt by the community of the changes to High Park. Is that is that a fair assessment? I think it's a fair assessment. Yes. Might even be an understatement. And so central to this uh and central to the high park movement strategy solution if I remember correctly was this last mile in order to achieve paracity into the park or uh good use of the park. People were looking for a way to get to the various pieces in the park. Is that correct? Yes. through an electrified people mover, uh, year- round TTC service, um, and a a whole variety of other things. So, the the crux of your concern or or deputation today is that there's a continuation of the existing trackless train, which is different than a people mover. Is that correct? And there are concerns with that. Well, as I recall expo back in ' 67, this diesel tractor doesn't resemble anything that we would call a people mover today. If people were if the city was to go and ask the community and the park users based on the experience from your group uh what they thought of the trackless train, what are the types of improvements you think they would ask for? Just even basic stuff. um sheltered cars uh from the rain and from the snow. Something that could climb the hills. It would be nice to have signage within the park directing people to the stops. It would be lovely to have a shelter at those stops, maybe a waste basket or something like that. Uh I think it would be a good idea to have other forms of payment. Um, the price is an awful lot. Like the value proposition compare taking your family to Toronto Islands and and doing a loop around High Park. I mean, literally it's pennies apart. Um, and if the city actually wants to, and there was an amendment at motion in May of last year. Councelor Fletcher spoke at great length about her hopes for Tommy Thompson on the Lesley Street spit. If indeed it was the intent and clearly that was the motion to expand this to other places, the spit, the island, Serena Gandhi, Centennial, then you should do something about it. So, I understand that the the group you're affiliated with has some policy disagreements with the way that city council proceeded on High Park, but the sense I get from your deputation today or the focus is that if the city is going to move forward at least on a short contract on a trackless train, you'd like to see some improvements and some questions answered. That's central to your message today. Yes. And this this actually goes beyond High Park. The whole notion of AODDA compliance has been kicked down the road by council in so many different areas. It's very saddening. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Holiday. Other questions of the deputent? Seeing none, thank you very much, sir. Thank you. And our next speaker is George Regigos. We have another deput. That's okay. I I I don't think he's going to He may not be. Sorry. The second speaker with Oh, sorry. The second speaker withdrew. We're on questions of staff. Council first, you get to go first. Questions of staff. Thank you. Um, first, uh, there's an appendix to this report about the introduction of new TTC service that has, uh, been agreed to by the TTC since uh, it became clear that this vendor couldn't commitments. Could you describe that service, please? through the chair. The service that has been agreed to is uh to have the TTC 203 bus uh leaving High Park Station, which is an accessible station, starting on March 15th of this year going until October 31st on 20 minutes service. Um with that service expanding to 7 days a week beginning May 5th and that was not uh available uh when the original contract was tendered. Is that correct? That's correct. It was uh not able for the TTC to fulfill that, but since that time they have adjusted their uh ability to meet that need through uh new operators and vehicles. And when we were when city staff were considering um uh strategies for providing transportation within High Park, the TTC was always the preferred choice. That's correct. and that was identified in IE3.7 the original report on the high park movement strategy. So, so effectively what this report does is tell us we've achieved uh the outcome that is better than what we were hoping for and in the meantime we'd like this side service to continue. That's correct. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Councelor Perks. I'll bring it back into committee. Questions of staff by committee members. Councelor Holidayiday. Um since TTC is available, can TTC describe the route through the park and the frequency? Sorry, is there TTC staff available? Okay. Can anyone answer that question about Thank you. Yes. Um through the chair. The service is 8 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on a 20 minute service leaving High Park station on the main loop within High Park. Can someone describe the main loop? Like is it a full rotation? The main loop through High Park through the chair is uh entering at Blure Street uh taking West Road southbound and turning north at Cobburn Lodge Drive, exiting the park at Blure Street and reconnecting with the DTC. So the West Road and then uh Cobburn Lodge. That's right. So that's up the center through the chair. That's correct. Okay. Uh and how how many months of the year does this operate? Yes, through the chair. The current agreement with the TTC is to start on March 15th this year and conclude on October 31st of this year. March to October. And uh if I wanted to access one of the eastern components of the park, what are my options? Let's say I wanted to go to the amphitheater. So, uh, through the chair, if you're referring to the, uh, amphitheater where the Dreamman High Park takes place, the closest route would actually be the 203, uh, entering from Kburn Lodge Drive. The east side of the park is serviced by the 506 street car as well as increased frequency of the 80 Queensway leading from leaving from the accessible Keel Street station. There's also a parking lot located on the east side of the park at Spring Road, which is available seven days a week. uh Spring Road that's at the corner of the Queensway and Parkside, is it not? It is north of uh Queensway between uh Queensway and High Park Boulevard, but it's it's close to Queensway, is it not? It's at the south end of the park. Yes. So, all of the east side amenities uh you'd have to walk from Coburn Lodge Drive. And sorry, what what services on Parkside? Parkside is served by the 80 Queensway bus departing from the accessible Keel Street subway station. That doesn't go into the park. No, that serves a number of stops on the east side of the park. And what stop amenities are available? Are there shelters? We heard today that that through the chair I can say that they are just uh pave. They're typically just paved pads uh on the east side of the park. They're paved. Okay. So, no roofs, no. Have they been upgraded for accessibility requirements according to what the bus asks for through the chair? I am not uh with the TTC. So, I'm just sharing with you my knowledge of the park layout right now and um TTC could be available if you have those questions. Is this a full-size bus that serves it? Do we know through the chair? Yes, it will be a full-size TTC bus. Okay. And uh is there any plan then to go forward with any other solution other than a trackless train into the future or is TTC going to be the answer? Because I think the council motion was to look at this type of service in other places through the chair. With respect to High Park, uh the TTC was always the preferred approach based on the affordability for riders and the connectivity with the larger network. The extension of the trackless train is time to enable the city to continue to review other people moving solutions that may require infrastructure upgrades to meet the vehicle requirements. I see. And is uh what happens during the winter uh outside of the October 31st season for the bus? So I see that the trackless train and the TTC service is coincident roughly through the chair. vehicle accesses uh through the park seven uh five days a week between the times of year when the other people moving services are not available and the park is closed to private vehicles on weekends during the season outside of that window. Yes, between October and middle of March it is closed to private vehicles on weekends. So there's no access for anyone if you need last mile transport during that off season. uh through the chair. No, that's not correct. TTC will always offer wheel trans accessibility into the park uh as needed. Okay. And what happens if you have a picnic basket or you know other nonqualifying uh wheel trans accessibility needs, sorry, not qualified for wheelr. In other words, you're you're able to take conventional TTC, but you've just got a lot of stuff to carry through the chair. you'd have to make arrangements to have the ability to carry those equipment or picnics in picnic baskets into the park. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Holiday. Other questions of staff? Seeing none, uh we'll move on to speakers. Councelor Perks to speak. Thanks very much. Um Mr. Chair, as a reminder, the thing that's in front of you, the only thing that's in front of you is a decision of whether or not to extend the non-competitive uh contract for the the the train that that that's been operating in High Park for years. Uh some people want to make this about more than that. That's I guess their business. Um but it is since the appendix is attached for your information, it's worth speaking about. Uh this having TTC service through the park is an improvement not only over where we are now but where we have ever been. It makes the park more accessible than it has been in my lifetime or yours. Uh while some members of council, you know, seem to want to pull on any thread they can imagine, uh you know, I I don't really understand why, uh making it difficult to carry a picnic basket into High Park two out of the seven days of the week in January, uh is the primary concern uh when we're considering a contract for a a ride for kids. But, you know, there you go. Uh, congratulations to city staff on getting uh an outcome that improves the circumstances of mobility uh beyond anything we've ever had before. Well done. Thank you, Councelor Perks. I'll bring it into committee for speakers. Councelor Holiday. Uh, I did have a motion. Hopefully the clerk can put that. Uh there's two parts to the motion. The first is look like let's continue with the trackless train. But I'm going to suggest instead of a two-year a one year and come back and check with the committee. Uh the overall total available numbers of years has not changed. It's simply a check-in. Uh and if they they can scroll down, the important part is of course the report back. Uh so parts two and three of this motion. Mr. Clerk. Uh and that asks for a lot of things. uh some information about uh what I heard from the speaker today uh about uh you know how these objectives will be met. Councelor Burks is right. Uh other people want to pick at this. Uh I've heard from countless constituents. Uh I've heard from people that live outside of the community even uh with complaints about what city council has decided with respect to this park. I think there's continues a lot of controversy about uh city council's decisions about access to the park. Um but I don't see any solution that satisfies everyone in sight. Uh so I just would like more information about how all of these objectives that the city seems to hold importantly are going to be met. I heard today that a 20-minute bus uh during the season during the peak season is the claim to solve this last mile problem. Um so I don't think this recommendation before the committee changes things a lot. Uh it just asks for a check-in um on the continued uh extension of this contract. Uh but more importantly, it asks for some information. It also asks for the city to take a look at this and figure out whether last mile solutions belong with parks or they belong with another department. Uh for instance, transportation. Um I wish we didn't have to argue about this. Uh but just so many people have come back to me and said, "Hey counselor, you know, we we love going to High Park, but we don't go there anymore because it has become so difficult uh for us to access." And uh for the city to turn around and say, "Well, you know, now you can just go take uh a um a wheel trans there or wait at the subway station for a bus every 20 minutes," I don't think was satisfactory to to people. And I just think that there's a better way to do this. And it's regrettable. Um I hope the motion passes because there's a piece in there that asks the city to go and talk to people about their experiences and do a bit of consultation. So hopefully that is an improvement to the process and tries to offer a little bit of uh confidence to folks out there that are dissatisfied with how things have proceeded. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Holiday. Uh questions of the mover. Sorry. Sure. Um just your timeline, Councelor Holiday, I'm wonder if we can maybe just put the motion back up. Uh yeah, I didn't I didn't give a specific month, but it would have to be before the secondyear renewal. So, I'm guessing, you know, a year from now. Uh, we don't have a date for those committees yet, but I would guess that in order to give the vendor notice for the second year of operations, they would want to let uh them like you'd want to have this report go through council so that council's updated on all this stuff. Um, but there isn't anything here that says don't renew. It just says come back and report to us. and the additional um elements that you're looking to have staff look at as part of improvement that has come through consultation and uh conversations you've had with um members of the public particularly the users in that area. I think I heard it from the deputation even today uh about some of these these questions about how this works and do you have with respect to link to the TTC? Yes. What's the issue there? I mean, we've heard that there is a link. Are there elements that you believe should could be beneficial? We heard that there is actual TTC service, but if you have a trackless train that is filling the last mile gap in a finer mesh than the TTC can provide, otherwise the question is why is it there? Um, I think it's to move people around. Um, we would want to see a a functional link to the public transit system. I mean, ideally, it would be something that gets somebody from um uh the Keel station or the High Park station ideally, but I, you know, I don't know how that could work right now. It's not linked to anything. And then with respect to G the consultation, are we opening this matter up again or is it simply limited in scope with respect to the ability to traverse the park and the service provider and or the service that's provided to take um park users through and about the park. I I think a lot of people would love us to reopen the item, but um I think this asks about the trackless train and uh what improvements might be desired. So, for instance, one of the things I heard today was that the stops aren't very fancy. Uh they don't have a roof. Uh they I think even the simple ask for garbage cans. So, it'd be great to ask people that use the trackless train what they think of it and if there's improvements that the city can provide. But just to be um affirmed um you're looking at limiting the scope with respect to simply focusing on feedback on the trackless trains and just the improvements around that. You're not looking at opening up the scope of this. As I said, I I'd love to but the that might start to get out of order with Sure. I just wanted to confirm. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Councelor Thompson. Um, councelor Holidayiday, can I just ask about the first mo motion? Sure. Can you explain your rationale for changing the options? If the motion can go back on the screen. Yeah. So, the existing recommendation before the committee is to provide a two-year contract with two one-year extensions, if I remember. Uh and this says come back and talk to us uh after the first year and before executing on three options to extend uh and this the report checkin would give some assurance to the committee that we're on the right track and I don't mean that tongue and cheek but you know this is proceeding the right way. Uh and getting some answers to those questions I think would help us uh make a more informed decision as a committee. Okay. So, when you're I guess you're concerned we're not going down the right pathway, lack, no pun intended, but um and a check-in in a year, right, from now, right? Um and I I don't mind working, but I'm just trying to understand like coming back a year from now, like the staff have do done all of their due diligence. Uh the local counselor's come in here uh and made his intentions clear as the the local counselor. Um, we've only had we had two deputants from one one canceled. They're both from the same organization. We didn't have a huge influx of users of the High Park. So, I'm just I don't understand I'm not comfortable changing the staff recommendations from what's in front of us. I'm okay with the second part. Okay. Uh, well, I mean, if it's an argument over one year or two years, I I still think it's safer to go one year. I take the point. I want to step back though. What this report is telling us is that the the people mover solution that was highlighted in all of this movement strategy fell apart. The procurement failed. It never went to where it was supposed to go. And so what we've come back or what the city has come back with and what we've got before us now is an extension of a trackless train which I think is deemed an amusement uh which has been running for decades in the park uh for another couple of years and I don't see those as equal things and that's the center of this report was the city was headed down this this path with electric vehicle all this great service, accessibility, all these improvements to make it better for people and then we end up with this. And so my my simple point to the committee is is why don't we check in in a year instead of two uh but still maintain the overall timing availability of the contract. I thought that was a fairly safe extension. Uh and I just think there's value in that reporting because of what I've heard from members of the community. Okay. All right. Thank you. I believe uh that's it for questions of staff and you want to separate the two. Yes, it's two separate motions. How did I lose my microphone? All right. So, we have the recommendation number one move by councelor Holiday. All in favor? Opposed? And that loses two to one. And then we have the second recommendation moved by councelor Holiday. All in favor? No. Nobody opposed. So that passes three to zero. Thank you. Item is amended. Item is amended. All in favor? And that carries three to zero. Thank you. And our next item is number 14. GG 27.14 renewal of various boat club leases and we have a couple of deputants. Our first speaker is Wilson Dilva. It's Wilson Dilva here. Morning Mr. Dilva. You have five minutes. Whenever you're ready, if you make sure the green button is on on the bottom of your microphone in front of you. Yep. You want the green button on? There you go. Perfect. All right, you have five minutes whenever you're ready. Good morning, counselors and city staff. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Wilson Dilva and I'm here representing the Toronto Humber Yach Club. We are here today to discuss a lease, but more importantly, we are here to discuss a 70-year partnership between the community of Stewarts and one of Toronto's most vital natural corridors, the Humber River. Our club's story begins in the 1920s as Hicksboat Club, a simple place where families rented canoes to explore the valley. Formalized as a club in 1956, we have spent seven decades on the west bank of the Humber River. Originally built on private property, the land was expropriated following Hurricane Hazel with the understanding that the club would continue to serve the community through long-term leases through floods, ice damage, and the evolution of our city. Our members have remained consistent. We have built we have a community built nonprofit organization. Our history includes members who have served in our country in World War II and generations of Torononians who have dedicated their lives in protecting the river. This isn't just a place to dock a boat. It is a repository of local history and environmental knowledge. For nearly 70 years, the club has been part of the Humber Valley. The Humber River itself is not just another waterway in Toronto. It is one of the most historically significant rivers in the region, part of a protected ecological corridor that supports wildlife, migratory birds, fish habitats, and recreational users. We are a small club in comparison with the others in in the GTA. Our location on the river, however, is not unique. Toronto alone has three yach clubs in multiple rivers which have hundreds of boats as club members. On a busy weekend, they can expect to have close to a thousand boats share the same river system that hosts many types of wildlife protected as the Dharmmer River. But despite that, there is a balance that is found with the wildlife protection and erosion. Our size and comparison is small. We have 30 boats and about 20 canoers as members. We also have implemented deliberate measures to minimize our impact on the river, which is in line with other clubs. Our environmental stewardship and commitment to the Humber River has always been our priority. Our club's sustainability plan addresses shoreline preservation, reduction and ecological impact and overall environmental sustainability by managing dock use, promoting responsible boating and carefully maintain the shoreline. We indirectly prevent erosion and protect habitats along the Humber River. Every aspect of our operation is designed to align with sustainable principles, reducing our impact and ensuring that the river remains healthy for wildlife and its future generations. But the people who use the river regularly often become the strongest advocates. Boating the boating community notices pollution, debris from storms, erosions along the banks, and hazards for wildlife. Stewardship works best when communities come together. As a nonprofit organization, we do not profit from community involvement. In fact, we consider ourselves an extension of the community's interest in preserving it. We gain nothing but the enjoyment of working with community members, residents, and officials to protect it. The club's presence on the river as a nonforprofit is a beneficial tool controlling how the river is used, cleaned, and maintained. A way forward would be to work with community institutions that already exist. When a community institution is removed, something more than in structures disappear. volunteers who maintain the river, people who organize cleanups and knowledge about a river's history is erased. However, the question before council is not whether the Humber River should be protected. It should be. The question before this council is why isn't the Toronto Humber yach club part of it. Why are we being erased? Why are why is 70 years of our history and tradition being ignored and discarded? Why hasn't there been real dialogue on a path forward with the city to improve, to evolve, and collaborate? Why are the voices of honest, hardworking members of the club and community who share this are not being heard? The Toronto Humber Yach Club has been part of the Humber River story, and it's part of its heritage. It has survived many challenges over the decades, and through all of that, one thing has remained consistent. A group of people who care deeply about the river, its wildlife, and its history. Why ignore us? Today's decisions is not simply about a lease renewal. It's about whether Toronto believes that community institutions, ones with decades of history and deep civic roots, deserve an opportunity to evolve and work with the city rather than just disappear. The Humber River belongs to everyone in the city and the best way to protect it is not by pushing communities away, by bringing them to work into protecting it by hearing our voices. I hope the city will choose partnership, dialogue, and stewardship as a path forward. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Dilva. Uh questions of the deputent. Councelor Holiday. Uh Mr. Dilva, thank you for uh speaking to us. I I just want to go back to the most basic points uh that you're talking to us about. This report uh recommends that the city make leases with uh a number of boating clubs across the city, but yours is not included. Correct. That's the crux of your deputation. Uh can you tell us how many members you have? We have uh currently 60 members. And does that include their families and others that would enjoy the club? Uh no, those are 60 members that we have which is uh part of the boating community and the canoeing community. Okay. And what um what social aspects are there to your club besides boating or are there social aspects? Well, there is the community clubhouse which um has a rich history with the social. It's a social club and many people run the community, generations of which still come there and they enjoy the Humber River, tell stories and and so on. We also have a relationship with the Toronto Boy Scouts where they come and they spend time looking at the river and we do food drives for local communities and and so on. So there's this big it's, you know, it says yacht club, but you know, do you have these giant massive yachts coming in there that you'd see in the movies, right? So So you do I understand this right? Your club is more about social. Some people have boats, but people spend time there and it's not just jump into a boat, drive out in the lake and come back. Is that correct? That's correct. We u most of our members most of the time socialize within the club grounds. um you know v various weeks especially on weekends we you know some members will take their boat out and go to Hansen's Point or Wards Island uh but simply put we just we just enjoy the river the how how far is it from the boat club to the to the lake on to Lake Ontario right it's on the river it's roughly about a kilometer kilometer and a half okay so other than coming to and from the clubhouse and the facilities people hang around on the river like They go out on the lake, do they not? Yeah, we do. So, um, we have various size boats and we do promote and encourage kayaking and canoeing and some of our members, even though they have boats there, they also have kayaks and they have canoes. Um, you're in uh Park Valley. Is are there boat launches besides yourself in the vicinity? Yes, there's a public boat launch at Kings Mill Park, which is right beside the yach club to the south. Are there any other boat launches or docks between you and the lake? Uh there is another boat launch down by South Kingsway close to the rivermouth uh just before the Queensway Bridge. Uh there's a boat launch there, a small public one that many Boers use as well. Are there any private docks or people that have access to boating besides yourself? There's several residences south of us along the river shoreline that own their own docks and their own boats on their own property and they're on the Humber. Yes. So you're not the only people that use the river? No, absolutely not. It is a very very popular b a popular stopping point for many people in in the city. And when we we talk about, you know, the the word yacht comes in the name. What are the boats like? Can you tell me the the type of things that your members have? What's the range of uh the biggest vehicles? I guess they are. The biggest boat the biggest boat on our club I think would be some 27 ft. Um they're not really yachts. I mean, it's a classification because anything over 24 ft, if it has a kitchen or you want to call it a kitchen or in a bathroom, it's considered technically a yacht. We're a boers club. We're a social club. Um, and we're one of Toronto's first yacht clubs. We call it a yacht club. That's the name that was given. We stuck we stuck to that name because of history. So, you know, you see in the movies these big uh what do they call them? Cigarette boats, Mr. Chair. Those things that they fly around on the ocean with. I mean, do people like line up on the river and put the throttle full blast and come flying out under the Humber Bay Bridge? I mean, it's like a shot from a movie, I guess. How do you how do you behave when you're moving from the club onto the lake? When we have um when you become a member of Toronto Humber Yach Club, there are bylaws and each member has to abide by them. They sign in. There's it's a no wake zone all the way up to the mouth of the of the lake. Um, we encourage, well, we don't encourage you, we instruct our members to stay in the center of the river, okay? And enjoy the wildlife, enjoy, enjoy what you see. Uh, and respect that now since CO has come around, uh, we've noticed the, um, kayaking population has increased by a factor of 10, uh, which we never saw before. Part of that is because we also encourage it. And up the river at the old mill, there's Toronto Island Adventures, which is a a rental. They rent out canoes and they store them at our yach club. We encourage that. We got that going. So, no, we don't go flying up and down the river. There's no races. There's no u we we instruct our members to respect the river and respect its users. Thank you. Thank you, councelor. Other questions, the deputent? Councelor Thompson. Uh yes, three, Mr. Chair. Uh Mrs. Dilva, good morning and thank you for being here. Thank you. Um it's been said that your lease is actually not being terminated, it is expiring. Correct. What's the difference between termination and expiring? Well, termination would be a violation of the lease terms and conditions in which case they have just pulled it. In our case, the decision was made not to renew. So, help me to unpack this. Has there been issues with respect to uh problems with your lease or problems with respect to the actions of your members at the yacht club? Well, with it, like expected with any 20-year lease, uh you're going to see a handover of of members come and go. And like any institution, um we're not perfect. We've had bad actors. So, tell me about that. Well, we've had some people that violate the rules that councelor Holiday was talking about. they would speed or not respect the wake zones. Uh they would not keep uh our club rules um like they wouldn't keep their spot organized. Uh quickly you you're given a three strike you're out policy. So you you're verbal once and then written up and then the third one you're terminating you're off. And then help me to understand the actions that you and other members of the uh board for the yacht club had taken in order to rectify those concerns. Well, so far as far as uh club members are concerned, I think we've only had three incidences where that's happened. Uh there have been other complaints from the city of violations of supposed trees and land encroachments which we have already uh discussed with the city and uh to our satisfaction and their satisfaction have been addressed. We didn't cut down any trees. So all the issues that have been raised as it relates to the lease and potential infractions you have and members have responded to to as you've described it to your satisfaction in that of the cities. Correct. Correct. We remedied every situation that came up um as you would expect to do and and improved. So with respect to complaints that you've received, have you received them directly from the city or have you also received from the TRCA or a combination of both? Uh predominantly it's from a city representative. Um I um in various cases they make reference to TC rules. Um but uh generally it's from parks. Gotcha. So can you help me to understand in the report it talks about the need to um restore talks about shoreline erosion talks about sustainability and so on so forth. With respect to your yacht club, would it be of interest to you to play a role in protecting the shoreline, ensuring the sustainability and ensuring that for example good stewardship would take place with respect to the river and its connection to the lake as such? Would that be of benefit to you any organization? it would be an absolute benefit. And what we have here is which we've shared with our members is our um Toronto Humber Yach Club sustainability agenda for 2026. Right. So if your you have a lease, your organization have a lease. So the leasey leaser relationship. So if they came to you and said um we need to work with you to collaborate to ensure that the concerns that the TRCA has a city and all the residents you would be amendable to working with them to rectify those concerns. Absolutely 100%. Right. Have you been given that opportunity as it relates to the recommendations that's actually before us today in essence to support the termination or the removal of the operation of the ONC club? No, there's been no dialogue with us. And if that were granted to you and your members, would you be interested? Would you want to facilitate and go through a process where you would be able to respond to the concerns that have been outlined in either a note letter or report that helps you to say, "Okay, these are the things that the city is asking for in collaboration with the TRCA and we would be more than delighted to work in collaboration." Would you be interested in that process? Wholeheartedly. And so why do you think this desire to not renew your lease or to terminate the lease, whichever one, because it it's a bit of semantics. Some say, well, your lease is not being terminated. It's being it's basically it's it's coming to uh an end, so they're not going to renew, but you're interested in renewing. So, why do you think this is? Well, goes back to my opening statement. Why? I don't know. We don't know why, and we've never given the opportunity or an explanation as to why. And so 70 years of history would just all be for not. And there is a real need. Members want to continue into sustain this operation of this yacht club, whatever that definition actually means, because you don't really have yachts. You have some boats. Ask a question, counselor. Yes. You have some boats that could be considered, I guess, technically poor man's yacht, I guess. Yeah, pretty much. Pretty much. We're just I don't mean to be negative. No, no, it's fine. We are a bluecollar club. We are a very small bluecollar club. Um, we our fees generally, you know, they they're capped at $5,000 a year for all year round as opposed to 10 to 20,000 anywhere else. We are a bluecollar club. Thank you very much, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Councelor Thompson. Sorry, Councelor Perks. My apologies. I know you're side counselor. Did you have questions of the deputent or not of the deputent? I'll have questions of staff when we get there. Okay. Thank you very much. Appreciate that. Um, Mr. Dilva, sorry. What's your role with the yacht with Humber Yacht Club? I am the vice commodor and I just wanted to ask so in our report it says uh there's a line the Toronto Humber Yacht Club will not have its lease renewed and will not be operating in the coming 2026 boat season following an an extensive evaluation by city staff and consultation with the Toronto Region Conservation Authority as the land owner. Do you have a report from them explaining what the issues are? No sir. That is this is the fundamental issue that we have here. We have not been given any room for real dialogue. We have been not we have not been provided any explanation as to what the really reason why our club is not being our lease is not being renewed. You haven't received any documentation at all from the city about We have received documentation to decommission that our lease is not going to be renewed and that we are to decommission the site immediately and signs were put up abruptly basically saying no boating in 2026. That was our that was our extent previous to that. We were in communication with Jennifer station that you received because this is an extens and it's an extensive evaluation. So when they're from your perspective, our staff and the Toronto Region Conservation Authority when they're doing that evaluation, you had no input in that evaluation. No sir, we were never to we were never we were never invited to uh walk with the TC up and down the shoreline to talk about the impact shoreline erosion. That has never happened. We have had inspections of our club where they looked at what's on our club. Any violations like there's a propane tank here from the barbecue. It shouldn't be left out. Okay. We clean that up right away. Little violations like that which we quickly remedy. But to be a part were we ever invited or asked to be a part of an extensive collaboration discussion about how we can better improve the shoreline? I wish we were because there I have two reports here from the city of Toronto about the Toronto Island Marina, two of them last year about shoreline erosion, about impact to wildlife and the reports are are are quite stunning because their conclusion is to work with the marinas there, three of them in collaboration. Now, sorry, can we go back to your marina if you don't mind? Sure. Yeah. So I'm just trying So in your opinion if you've had no input into the city or the TRCA in that evaluation. To my knowledge, no one including myself or no one on our board has ever been a part of that conversation. Okay. All right. And then earlier with regards to councelor Thompson's questions, you held up a document said was an ecological guidelines that the club is following. Yeah, this is our uh sustainability agenda which we drafted in 2025. Okay. Uh we were going to we were going to implement it and present it to uh our club members at the AGM in November of this of last year but it got postponed because we found out that our lease wasn't being renewed. So obviously we had more important not more important but we had our club members had other things in mind. So but it has been drafted and it's been here on the works. We've been working on this for two years. Okay. So, it's been drafted, but it hasn't been approved and put in place. Uh, it's been approved by our board. It hasn't been put to it hasn't put been put to the floor at the AGM for a vote. Okay. And so, the recommendations or what's in that report that you want to do to maintain the ecological sustainability of the Humber River? are is that work being done and you're just assumed that your membership's going to approve it or how is your club maintaining the ecological sustainability of the river? So what this does is it expands our existing one. It it takes it to a different level now because we're a nonforprofit profit profitability is not something that we have. So we have to work with our annual fees and work with our limited budget and we have done that. One major thing that we have implemented in the last two three years was previously our docks were uh wood docks and they they would be supported by driving the supports into the sediment of the river which we've had ongoing discussions about the environmental impact of that because it does two things. Number one stirs up sediment and the last thing that it does is when it does have heavy rainfall it creates turbulence. So, we've invested a substantial amount of money into putting floating docks which was part of our our environmental plan. Um, we had more uh information here which we were going to invest into seeing how what we can do about protecting wildlife. Now, we have a small program right now where we protect turtles and geese when they um um in the springtime when they lay their eggs. put little flags and little pictures and capturing where they're being nested and not to be disturbed. We wanted to expand that along the river. And we also wanted to expand our clean up the river uh campaign, which we do twice a year, which is a volunteer program. We wanted to expand that to four times a year and start from old mill all the way down to the to the lake rather than just from our club down halfway down. Okay. All right. And then in terms So your members pay a membership fee. Yes, sir. Sorry, I'm having trouble with my microphone buttons. They're new. I need I guess they get need to be worked in a little more. Um, so anyway, you're uh pay a membership fee and you operate as a nonforprofit. Yes, sir. A non for profofit organization. Okay. Because you're paying a members have a membership fee. There's no public access to your property. Uh the public does not have access to our property, but um there's a couple of reasons for that. We don't stop the public from coming in. They're welcome to come. We are forbidden on our lease to conduct business within a business. So, we cannot have like our bar is not open to anyone of the public unless you become a social member. And if you become a social member, then you're you're you can come in, enjoy it. However, that being the case, we do invite outside organizations like the Boy Scouts and and um other charities to come onto our our premises and enjoy the our facilities. And sorry, my time is almost up. I just want to go quickly back to you said you had a discussion about the docks not being embedded into the the sediment and floating docks. Who was that with city staff or TRCA? No, that was uh that was totally us. That was our decision that we made. This is part of our original environmental sustainability plan. We had no instruction from the city. We did that on our own. It was our own capital. It was our own decision. It's what we thought was best for the river. And it works because last year we had two major storms and two major floodings. A lot of marinas around the GTA lost a lot of docks, ended up in the lake. We did not lose one. Okay. All right. Thank you very much. I'm at the end of my time. Thank you for your time. Thank you. And our next speaker here. Just an appointment order visiting member or two visiting members of council who are here and they may want to ask this um speaker questions. Did you have questions of the deputent? Sorry, councelor. Uh thank you uh councelor Thompson for that. I did miss the original submission. Actually, councelor Sax and I were in a meeting together running over. So I will save my questions for staff uh and for future deputants. But I do appreciate the consideration. Thank you. Okay, thank you very much. Uh, our next deputent is Chris Windsor from the Council of Commodores. Morning, Mr. Windsor. You have five minutes whenever you're ready. Thank you. Thank you, Chair Ensley and counselors. Uh, yes. So, I'm the excuse me, I'm the chair of the Council of Commodores, and the council is a uh body made up of senior boat club leadership around the GTA, which meets regularly to address uh matters of common interest. uh a working group of the Council of Commodores has been working uh for the last two years with city staff to facilitate the renewal of the 24 voting clubs identified in appendix B of the accompanying staff report. I'm here today uh along with representatives uh from the Royal Yacht Club, the Island Yacht Club, the Mimiko Cruising Club, the Ash Bridges Bay Yacht Club, the Toronto Windsurfing Club, and Highland Yacht Club. uh to affirm that the 24 uh renewing clubs unanimously support the major terms and conditions for renewal as outlined in appendix A of the staff report. And I ask that the committee here move to delegate the appropriate authorities to renew these leases. As as Torononians, uh we are absolutely blessed to enjoy one of the great waterfront cities of the world. Uh over many decades, Toronto's not profit volunteer-run sailing, boing, boating, and rowing clubs have worked at no cost to the city to develop a diverse and thriving boating community, enabling direct access uh for Torononians to a wide variety of waterfront activities and programming. In addition, uh Toronto's voting clubs have made and continue to make significant investment in facilities and related infrastructure primarily sourced from Toronto businesses and service providers, which results in increased employment and significant economic impacts for our city. But I believe the real impact is measured in the many thousands of Torononians who participate in healthy low environmental impact on water activities. Whether it's taking learn to sail or learn to row or kaying, wind surfing, cruising, or competing in uh one of the many regatas hosted by our clubs. The onwater uh possibilities and availabilities for Torononians are vast. And while most of us Toronto non-boating clubs provide positive recreational and community experiences for a few especially uh talented young athletes, our clubs provide the facilities, resources and training for them to go on to compete at the highest of international levels. And uh in addition to the clubs I mentioned represented here, we have two such exceptional athletes in the gallery here today uh whose journeys began in programs offered by these clubs and I'd just like to acknowledge them here. Uh Mariah, thanks Mariah. Uh Mariah Milan was born and raised here on Toronto Island where she spent most of her summers learning to love sailing. Uh, Marise had many successful results on the world stage, including two second place finishes at the North Americans, fourth at the 2019 Pan-American Games, and she represented Canada at the Tokyo Summer Olympics. And seated next to her, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Councelor Thompson. Next to her, Clara uh Gravely. Clara started her career. Do you want to acknowledge? Thanks, Claire. Uh started her career at Ash Bridg's Bay uh in a learn to sail program and after winning a gold medal at the Canada Summer Games, she stepped onto the world stage at the 2017 World Youth Championships in China, finishing 14th. And Clara continues to compete internationally and trained towards a goal of bringing home an Olympic medal for Canada. So, thank thank you both for being here in support of this motion. Um, Mariah and Clara clearly benefited from the opportunities provided by their local boating clubs, which is exactly the way that it should be. Uh Toronto's boat clubs are committed to being inclusive, accessible communities who look to foster the next generation of sailing and rowing and kayaking and wind surfing talent and to provide a home uh for the rest of us uh passional recreational uh boers of all types. And I I just like to emphasize that the 24 renewing voting clubs are fundamentally aligned with the city in terms of the provisions of community benefits. It has always been in our interest to grow participation in our sports and in our organizations, to reach out to new publiclix, to lower barriers to entry, and to grow the overall Toronto voting community. and we will happily continue to do so. So again, on behalf of the 24 renewing clubs identified in appendix B, I ask that you move to delegate the appropriate authority to renew these leases. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Worer. Ladies, once again, thank you very much for being here this morning and everything you do on behalf of Canada. Thank you. Uh, councelor Perks, you have questions of the deput. Yes, I do. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and and thank you so much for that uh deputation, but also thank you for the work that you've done with City of Toronto staff to get us here. Um, I've been watching how this process goes and I know that uh there's been a really robust conversation about increasing public access and I know you guys have been quite helpful with that. One little thing that I noticed is in the uh appendix that details the kind of terms that city staff uh would be looking for in the lease. there's no uh real description of what public access means. Uh my intention through the chair is to move a motion to put in language which comes from city staff uh based on the conversations that um you guys have had with them. The reason I want to do that is I've had experience where these leases get 10 15 years old and nobody who was involved remembers what the details were. Would you object to us putting some of that those details into that appendix so that staff have something to refer to to capture the essence of the conversations they've had with you on public access? Uh no, as I said that uh you know and thank you for the um recognition of the work that our working group has done with staff. It has been a lengthy uh detailed process. I think it's been one that's uh ultimately netted out in a in a in a very mutually beneficial manner. It's a win-win for Torononians. Uh we're fundamentally aligned with the the three broad categories of community benefit that have been identified. Um and moreover we've also uh happily agreed to the reporting mechanisms that have been introduced by staff uh both in terms of the nature of those uh you know the nature of the method and the templates of reporting benefit and and also the frequency of the reporting in because uh as I said we uh you know we're proud of the work that we do and and how that extends in terms of outreach and other other aspects. Great. Thank you. And and again, thanks for being such good partners in this conversation. Thank you, Councelor Perks. Uh other questions for some outside members. Councelor Saxs, point of order. Councelor Holidayiday. Mr. Chair. Yeah, it just because it's timely, uh, I'd like to raise the point of order that, um, I to advise you that I would like to ask questions of Toronto water relating to their sewer and water infrastructure in the Humber Valley as it pertains to this report. And I understand they might not be in the room. Uh, so I just want to advise you, Mr. Chair, there's a a call could be made to have someone. They're not going to be super detailed, but there'll be some questions about their infrastructure. Okay. We can ask the clerk if we can get somebody to hear from Toronto Water. Councelor Saxs, questions of the deputent. Um, thank you first of all for your deputation and for all the work of the of the boat clubs along our waterfront. Um, the one of the proposed recommendations is there be no jet ski rentals. Um, are privatelyowned jet skis operated out of your members clubs and how many of them are there? Um, that's an excellent question. Thank you. Uh, I am only aware of one club environment in which there are uh less than 10 jet skis and they are not the primary uh watercraft. In fact, they're a tertiary one. They're called a second tender. In other words, the boat that is the primary boat for the membership is uh a normal boat and then you have what's called a tender which is an auxiliary craft and then some uh have the jet skis there but we don't the vast majority of clubs do not host and house and I would remind that of the 24 more than half are fully humanpowered boating clubs you know kayaks and canoes and wind surfers and rowing etc or or small small dingy knee sailing, what we call dry sailing, that you pull the boat in and out of the water every time you use it. Right. Um, you might have seen my letter that I'm I'm asking that we do a review next year about the jets, the the most highly polluting engines. Um, if first of all, if the city did adopt a policy, your members would comply with the policy, right? Yeah. 100%. Yeah. And would you anticipate that there would be a serious adverse effect on your members if we were to adopt such a policy? Yes, Grossamoto. They'd be a lot happier. They'd be happier. Okay. Um, great. Thank you very much. Thank you, Councelor Saxs. Councelor Morley, do you have questions to the deputent? Seeing none, we're going to bring it into committee. Councelor Holidayiday, thank you. Could I'm going to ask the most basic question. What's a Commodore? Uh, well, I often ask myself that. Um, uh, so Commodore B is an elected position. It's effectively the, if you will, it's the chair of the board of the of the yacht club of the boating club like the president or the correct of a it's a member, not a um an employee. No, no, it's these are all volunteerrun um groups and and so you're elected by your membership and uh and then you have governance and fiduciary responsibilities to the board. Okay. And um so you you're part of a group of commodors so you know club presidents essentially in sort of playing language. Um can you tell me terms like yacht club or boating club? You know it kind of projects this idea of elite or rich people flying around on big yachts and stuff. Is that is that a reality? I mean who are the people that use boating clubs in a in a general term boating club? But I know they go by various names. Yeah. And I I mean uh again and of the 24 that are renewing as identified in the appendix uh you know many of the boating clubs they're literally uh wind surfing clubs or their um their rowing clubs they're what I just called dryland sailing clubs meaning that these are small sailboats with no auxiliary forms of propulsion that you trailer in and rig and then pull them out when you're done. um clubs that are larger or have facilities to accommodate larger boats can I can speak to my own experience. Uh I'm uh at the Highland Yacht Club which is in the Bluffers Park, beautiful Bluffers Park basin. Um we the average age of our fleet is 30 years old. Uh the average value of that I mean you know fiberglass boats that are 30 years old are holes in the water where you throw money. Um, so effectively we're looking at sizes between 24 and 35 feet for a handful of those. Sorry, these microphones can be frustrating. Um, the the Yeah, there's if there's a an awkward pause, it's because the buttons don't activate quickly. Um, but boating is an achievable sport for most people. Is that a fair a fair assertation? not, you know, not everybody's going to boat. Uh there is some cost to it, but to get out on the water in one way or another, you know, it's most people can get to that. Even power boating, that's something that uh you know, an everyday person can do. Is that a fair I I I don't so I I I don't know. Yes. And and again and then I just keep referring to the the variety of voting clubs that we have been working uh on behalf of that are part of this renewal process. Um but every one of those clubs has some form of outreach and some form of low uh low barrier to entry. Again, speaking from my own experience, we have a crew membership, which means you can have access to boating without boat ownership, uh, which is less than $100 a year. Um, other clubs actually maintain fleets of boats for the similar purpose of having, uh, folks be able to access the water and access our boating um, without having to to even own a boat. So, there's a myriad. I I would say yes there's and I tried to uh emphasize earlier that it's in our interest we we are constantly trying to grow uh the base of active participants in water sports. So yeah and that the last word you said is key at sports. So is it a fair understanding in a game because I'm I'm not part of this but there's a very large social aspect to water sports. Um, some of the members have boats, some of them actively boat, some are crew, some don't even boat, but they're social members. So, these clubs provide um core fabric to our society. Is that a fair understanding? You know, they they they they serve a large segment of the population. Uh there it's not necessarily the rich and the elite. It's all sorts of people that are involved in water sports and they get a lot more out of these clubs than simply a place to drop a boat in the water and go. Yeah. Yeah. Just two things very briefly to that. Um I I didn't even uh speak to some of the philanthropic work that these groups do in terms of out outreach to various other communities and constituencies that don't have any experience of voting. uh that's there's an extensive amount of activity that goes on that way. Um but the the other thing is just around the the importance of the community aspect. One of the things we're seeing is there's a certain aging. I mean it's probably just the demographic bubble at large, but we're seeing a certain aging uh in the memberships right across the the waterfront. And one of the vital aspects that the clubs provide is as uh older uh Torononians maybe cease to be actively taking part in the onwater aspects they they change the into social or life members or other things and continue to be there for community and we know especially with those demographics the importance of community in terms of health outcome. Thank you councelor Holiday C. Thank you, Mr. Windsor. Appreciate your time this morning. Thank you. Our next deputent is Daniel Tate from Integrity Teal. You don't have to run, Daniel. Morning. You have five minutes. Whenever you're ready and make sure green button turns on your microphone. Okay. Okay. Thank you. And good morning. Uh, dear committee members, on behalf of the Integrity TTO citizen coalition, I'm writing to express serious concerns regarding the city's treatment of a long-standing uh, Toronto boating institution, the Toronto Humber Yacht Club. For nearly seven decades, this club has served generations of Torononians who share a love of boating, the outdoors, and community life on our waterfront. Founded in 1956, the Toronto Humber Yach Club has been a gathering place where neighbors connect, friendships are formed, and families pass down a tradition of boating from one generation to the next. Its clubhouse walls, lined with the names of past commodors, reflect a proud history of civic camaraderie and volunteer stewardship. It is therefore deeply troubling that the city appears to be prepared to abruptly terminate this 70-year tradition. The club has reportedly been given minimal notice to vacate its lease with vague environmental justifications and no clear report explaining why this specific club is being targeted. The Toronto Humber Yach Club is a nonprofit organization. Without the revenue from the 2026 boating season, it does not have the financial capacity to suddenly relocate or dismantle its facilities. Placing the club in this position is punitive. It's unfair and it raises serious concerns not only among the members but across Toronto's broader voting community. As we saw in the Weston Lions Arena saga, Torononians care deeply about tradition and community spaces. Institutions that have fostered recreation, volunteerism, and camaraderie over generations should not be util unilaterally dismantled without a transparent process, due diligence, and a fair opportunity to address concerns. At present, the city has not demonstrated good faith in two key respects. One, clearly articulating why this club, after nearly 70 years of operation, must suddenly cease operating at this location. And two, providing the club a fair opportunity to resolve or mitigate any issues raised by the city, the TRCA, or other stakeholders. If the concerns relate to jet skis, noise or environmental matters, then those issues should be addressed collaboratively through reasonable mitigation measures. Any rational observer would conclude that abruptly shutting down a long-standing community institution without meaningful consultation is both unfair, unnecessary, and sends a chilling message to all community clubs who lease land from the city. On behalf of the integrity to citizen coalition, we respectfully urge this committee to include the Toronto Humber Yach Club in the renewal framework contingent upon a mutually agreed path forward that addresses any legitimate concerns. Toronto has a proud and vibrant tradition of boating. If we value that tradition, we must ensure that historic community clubs like the Toronto Humber Yach Club are given a fair chance to continue serving the citizens of this city. And just as an aside, um, to demonstrate the incredible tradition and heritage of this boating club, I wanted to share with the members here this incredible frame. And what we see here is the list of all our World War II veterans who were avid mariners and Boers who helped build this club and were proud members of this club. Uh in fact, you can see on the bottom there's various different insignas representing different uh battalions or troops that members were a part of. So on the bottom left here we can see uh these members were in the Canadian Navy. You can see the Union Jack and and the boat and they were looking for Ubot uh on the seas. Um and then of course there were uh air airmen uh and women. Um and so I think this this is a powerful frame and it tells you the the history and the lineage and the tradition of this boat club. Um, and I think we need to be very careful, uh, as we've seen in many other stories in this city, that when we have such great traditions, we have to be super sensitive and careful on on how we approach them, uh, in situations like these. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Tate. Question, microphones, question of the deputy from outside members. Seeing none, we'll we will bring it into committee. Councelor Holiday. Yes. Yeah, I'm get I'm getting to you. Councelor Holiday, I was bringing it back into commit. Councelor Holiday. Thank you, Chair. Mr. Tate, I wondered if you would allow us to take a closer look at that frame if that's okay. That right now because there's a wall now between us. Sure. Um and just secondly, it's a it's a general question about your observation. Um, you cited some other decisions that council made and this is one that's before council. Are there concerns about public perception in decisionm as it as it uh as it pertains to services and amenities to the public? And how do you think the process could be better? Uh because the what I detect is is an erosion of confidence. So, how could we get people more confident in the decisions? And this is an example. Well, I think there just needs to be a lot more transparency and an understanding of the justification of why certain decisions are being made. And as was echoed by other deputants, uh it seems to be very opaque. Um why are particular boat clubs being singled out to be excluded from this uh renewal framework? And why are those justifications not backed with with powerful documentation? I mean, if if and this is a big if, but if there are ecological impacts uh of certain certain boating clubs, there should be a comprehensive scientifically backed environmental report saying as such and then that report should have mitigation measures and remediation measures that are clearly outlined. that is missing here and that is problematic. Thank you, chair. Thank you to the deputy. Thank you, councelor Holiday. Councelor Thompson. Nope. Thank you, Mr. Tate. Thank you. Uh we're have one more deputent on this item. Uh Tino Martin Tino Martin here. Yep. Good morning, committee chair. Everyone here, thank you for having me. Um, I've now been a member for the yach club. So, I'll be speaking to you um strictly as a member. Um, it's about about four years ago when I first stepped onto the uh onto the grounds of the yach club. And prior to that, I didn't have much uh comparison as to what it's supposed to be because I had just purchased my boat a year prior to this of in which I got to see what a marina was like. Um but the moment that I stepped on to the yach club, um I immediately noticed that there was something different from your standard marinas of your to the one that I had, which is the only one that I could speak of. Um, what I noticed that there was a a comm a a community within a community of itself. And right off the bat, it was something that enticed me to want to stay and actually be a part of. And one of those things were is that the club itself, um, which I later learned, which of course was a nonfor-profit organization, which they couldn't have employees and so on and so forth, that they kind of fend they fended for themselves. They made sure that the members were the ones that took care of the grounds. And what caught me was that it was a lot of the members that would be involved. It wasn't just one or two or three or four that were there. It was like a it was like a community of vinish that they would make sure the grounds were clean. They would make sure you know bathrooms are up to date. Um the garbage is getting picked up. And as I said earlier, the one thing that really caught me was the fact that they would not only do it for the club itself. It would also be for the grounds outside of the club. We're neighbored to a dog park. I think it's Kingsville Park that's beside us. Um of in which they would also clean that up, which I was like, "Wow, that that's amazing." Then we would get onto what we call our barge um and and actually clean garbage and tires out of the river itself. Now, as as fun as much fun as that is, I actually enjoyed it because it was the commodery of the people that were involved where we got to actually enjoy doing cleaning up the river and cleaning up the parks. Now, for myself, um, my family is here with me. Um, I've got children. One is Gabriel, who is who is 10, and Luca is five. Put your hands up, guys. Okay. These guys jump out and clean with us, right? So, they're also enjoying it. So for me, um it's tough because losing the club, um means a lot to them, right? My biggest concern about losing the club is that we lose what the club does for the community. Okay. We also police um a lot of the stuff that happens on the river. Now, naturally, we don't have cameras on the river. um we don't have, you know, post stations where we're watching people come up and down the river, but when we do see somebody doing something wrong on the river, we try to stop it as best as to to what we're capable of doing. Um when people are are speeding on on sidos, um it's us that are stopping them. Um we've got canoers and kayakers who flip over and it's us as the club like, "Oh my god, they're in trouble. Let's go get them." It's us that is that is doing that. um in respects to um in respects to the public um uh our vice commodor had said that you know that we're not open to the public and and as a he's correct as a nonforprofit we can't have the public come into the club and purchase stuff because it's non for profofit. However, we have children fishing off of our docks all the time. There are people that are coming in sometimes accidentally thinking that there was maybe the launch ramp. This is where it's at. Hey, listen. you want to launch your canoe, you know, go ahead. We've never really stopped anyone in the sense of, you know, you can't get to the water from here, you have to go somewhere else. We have had people come in who's accidentally like, "Oh, we don't know where we are." And yes, we've sent them on the way to where although the launch is on the other side or advised them that this is private property, you can't just kind of hang out here. If you want to use the river, go ahead. If you don't, then that's kind of where it is. So, no, we're not per se closed to the public as much as we are open to the public, if that makes any sense. Um, in my opinion, closing the club will hurt the river. We're not going to be there to police it. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Uh, questions of the deputent from outside committee members. Seeing none, inside committee members, councelor Holidayiday. Sir, thank you for speaking to us and I can tell that this is um very personal. Can you tell the committee members what the members of the club will face if it closes or even the very simple notion of u of prohibiting things like motorized watercraft because I think that's central to the club it has been traditionally. What does that mean for the members? What what do you face? Well, I I think I have to speak for myself um as a member. Um the Toronto Humber Yach Club has allowed me to be able to be a boater only because I can't afford $20,000 somewhere else, right? So, this has allowed me uh to have my family there to enjoy the social. I actually happen to be the the head of the social committee there where we do Friday night dinners, which is a potluck dinner that we all enjoy. Um, we did a north feed south where the north side of the club fed the south side of the club where you know and and vice versa on on another event. So losing losing the club in my situation would be that I I would have to sell my boat because I simply can't afford to bring it somewhere else. I'm assuming that for other members it may or may not be the same. So I can't speak for them on their behalf. But what I can say is that we'd definitely be losing not just the social, we'd be losing the family, my my kids. It's not in the report. In fact, the report before us is really short uh with its rationale on closing the club, but I can't help miss that in the media there's undertones of bad behavior, okay? and accusations that uh club members or at least boers on the river have behaved very poorly with other people in watercraft in the area. What what do what do what have you seen? Do you think there's merit to that? I and I mean you can be candid with the committee even if if it is cases of that, but what what would you tell us? What's your advice as somebody that spends time around there? Is that true? it well it it's true that there there has been conflicts between committee and voters um and the only thing that I can say to that is is that when the when the club was told about this um that there's been problems on the water via kayakers or maybe word tuffles between people or whatever the club has said well how do we fix this because we have a public launch ramp that's beside us we cannot say that maybe it was them maybe it was us so How can we fix this as a club so that we can identify who is actually doing whatever it is that the committee that the community is saying that we are? So, what the yach club has done is we've put flags on our boat uh representing our yach club so that if somebody from the community or from the bank or a fisherman or somebody was to say, "Hey, that was from the club." Why? Because we've put our flags and we made it mandatory so that we can say, "Hey, it wasn't us. It's got to be somebody else. So, I mean, yes, we're not perfect. We did, like uh our our vice commodor said, we did have people that, yeah, they were bad apples, but we weeded them out. Same thing with our with our jet skis. Um this is something that we've, you know, we've had a problem with the with the committee, with the community. They're saying that they're complaining that jet skiers are, you know, racing down the river. We tried to address that to the point where at this past AGM, um we decided to weed them out. So slowly we'll we're kind of getting them out of the club. There are no new jet skiers allowed out of our club. So if you're coming in as a new member and you have a jet ski, put it in your garage cuz it's not welcome in our club. So do you think the club has taken action and would in earnest probably try to take additional actions to deal with problems because you want to survive. You want to be able to stay more time after 70 years. But the the irony of of it all is is that we never said that we weren't going to. We've never actually given the chance to say, "Hey, listen. Can you guys do this and this and this?" We've taken it upon ourselves to be able to do this and this and this. Now, if the city or or if the anyone comes and says, "Hey, listen. Can can you guys try doing this and see if that works?" Yes, by all means, we will cuz we've taken our own measures to try to make things better. Not just for us, but for the community as well. And not to mention the environment of the actual river itself. Let's just set the club aside for a second. I'm assuming you have a boat. I do. You do. You have a boat. They're not you're not anonymous. The watercraft has identifiers. Just tell us because I I don't know this, but if you act irresponsibly, whether it's on the Humber River or on Lake Ontario or another place, you drive too fast close to somebody else, what whatever it is, right? You speed, maybe you can tell me what the rules are for the river. What happens to you? Can you can the people call the police on you? Can you lose your boater's license? Can you know are there implications for misbehaving that voters generally speaking are held to account for? Well, absolutely. A boating license is no different than a driver's license on the road. I mean, we do we are backed by a driver's license. So, now I'm glad that you mentioned that calling the police. We've done that numerous times from people that we've caught that we couldn't say to them, "Hey, hey, slow down. You know, there's kids, there's speed, there's wake, there's so on." So, we've had to call the police ourselves. Now whether or not something happens there after via the police or any that I don't know. I personally have never been caught speeding cuz I don't speed. So I wouldn't be able to say hey listen I I got caught speeding once and you either a get a ticket or get license suspended. That I don't know. So I can't speak to that. Um but we ourselves have called the police on people who have been doing it wrong. And I would only assume that others would call the police if they saw somebody doing something wrong. But in the fact I know that there is tickets for speeding. Uh you cannot be speeding within 100 meters of shore. Um of course being dangerous and reckless. No, there's there's tickets and possible losses of of license. Mr. Chair, if I could get an answer to the requirements that you have to follow in the river. Well, there's there's a it's a no wake zone. Um we have a rule of trying to stay into the middle for for many reasons. Um there's kayakers and canoers and and like um our uh our Commodore said that it's over the years it's gotten extremely extremely busy especially after co um so staying in the middle allows everybody to kind of enjoy the river. Um it's the depth of the river also as well. If we go too close to the shore we get our boat stuck and of course that becomes an environmental issue. Um but realistically our rules are the rules of of of boating. uh we're not allowed to do a certain amount of things, so therefore we don't do it based on holding our license. Um so even if we could speed down the river, uh we can't because the law itself says that we're not allowed to and we're law abiding uh for our boating license for that matter. Um this it goes no different with any other boating rules on on the lake. Thank you, Councelor Holiday. Thank you, Mr. Martin. Appreciate your time this morning. We're now going to bring it into committee. Thank you very much. So questions of staff now from SI committee members first. Councelor Mley to me. Thank you. No to staff. You're all good. Thanks for joining us. Tina really appreciate it. Um thank you Mr. Chair through you to uh staff. I have a few questions on this and uh I will be supportive of the staff recommendations overall. I want to narrow down and drill down to the Toronto Humber yacht club which was obviously a area of uh concern for some of the deputants here today and obviously falls in my ward. So I've been engaged on this file for some time. Um on the question of uh the overall recommendation not to renew here. Can you give us some highle color as to why that is the case through the chair? Um, Toronto H Toronto Humber Yach Club was assessed as part of the broader review of the city's boat club leases. In that review, we looked at a cross portfolio of the site conditions, lease history, planning, and environmental considerations and future land use context. Toronto Humber Yard Club is unique because it's the only club located on a river in a highly sensitive river valley setting. So following review and cons consultation, staff concluded that a less intrusive land use at this site would better support river valley health, ecological management, and long-term resilience to flooding and erosion. Thank you. Are we I'm not sure and forgive me. Um please advise, Mr. Chair, we're allowed to talk to um status of the lease and any contravention of the lease over the years in public forum. Thanks through the chair. Uh the lease is currently in overhold. Uh since 2018, there have been five default notices and more than 15 written communications between the city and the uh club around the concerns of operations. And so that's dating back to 2018. You mentioned that's correct. Thank you. Um there were claims today about the ch the club never been given the chance to correct some of those um challenges that were flagged and given in written notification from the city over the last number of years. Uh can you speak to whether or not the club has been given a chance to address the numerous concerns advised by the city? Thanks through the chair. As I mentioned, there have been more than 15 different written communications between both the city and the the club. The club had retained legal representation throughout this process. Um, and throughout since 2018, we have seen very little substantive change around the defaults that we have noticed on site. uh including the um construction of um non-permitted structures and the operations on the site. So this has been an ongoing dialogue since 2018. Thank you for that confirmation. With respect to the notification of members, um my office has been fielding quite a number of of calls. uh we do share the concerns of folks like Tino and his family who want to uh who deserve information in a timely manner so they can uh understand what's coming down and what why the city's made this decision but also what options are available to them. Can you speak to the responsibilities of the club for notification of their members versus the city for notification? Thanks. Uh through the chair, the city's relationship is with the club. they are the tenant and so it is up to the club to provide notice to their members. Uh we became aware that that communication may not be um uh be very clear as we as the city had received many questions ourselves. We originally notified THYC of the nonrenewal in June. Uh also recognizing that the season would be concluded and we would work collaboratively on what the windup would look like at the end of the 25 boating season. Um throughout 2025 following a site visit with TRCA city staff and the boat club in the summer of 25. city have heard very little engagement from the boat club and in January we made the uh decision to provide notice on the site to ensure members were made aware of the non-renewal. That's very helpful. Thank you. So outside of some of the uh interest in media, there's been a number of news reports and things of that nature. We haven't had much direct communication from the club itself to the appropriate staff through the chair. You are correct. Uh in after the site visit in the summer of 2025, we have as a staff level reached out repeatedly without any response. It wasn't until mid January. The club finally responded to letters from the city uh regarding discussions around uh moving to the next step the wind up what the future of the site would look like and what uh role the club could play in the future planning of the site. Uh since that time we have exchanged I think approximately four written communications uh none of which have been focused on the future or decommissioning. All of which have been focused on the non-renewal. Thank you. That's my time. Thanks, Mr. Chair. Okay. Thank you, council. Can I raise a point of order? Councilor Holidayiday. Point of order. Um there is significant new information in those questions and answers because the report uh cites um rationale. I'm going to just say within the umbrella of environmental concerns, can the committee have those 15 written communications? They were just they were just brought up. Can we have copies brought to the committee? Is that possible? Yep. I don't have a problem. I don't have any problem with that. I don't know if staff have problem with that legally. Mr. Chair, just just as an additional point with respect to Sorry, Councelor Thompson. Can I finish with this one first? My apologies. Yes, you can. Yeah, but it relates to that. Can they be provided or we can provide a summary of those uh those communications? I think we can add that to the report if it would be helpful. Okay. All right. Thank you. Councelor Thompson, you had a point. Yeah, just to add to that point, I mean, we're expected to read these reports, expected to make major decisions, yet this information is not contained in the report. It would have been really helpful, at least to me, to have had those details in this report. Perhaps I would have come to another conclusion. I am at a point now where the conclusion I've arrived at. I'm going to stick with it because I'm not sure what the secret is or what was the purpose of not providing that information in the report because it would have been extremely helpful. Is there a reason why it wasn't contained? Is it And now we are going to get at least um I guess some provision of the details, but why wasn't it incorporated in the report since we're being asked to make such an important decision? This is a club that has a 70-year history and yes, maybe there's bad behavior and so on so forth, but at least we as decision makers should have been informed of that. I don't have that and I don't think it's appropriate. I think it's absolutely ridiculous, unfair to us to make a decision that is so important. What is it that staff's hiding? Why staff? Can I ask you to comment on that? Why the information wasn't respon included? the chair. The primary reason that the club is not being renewed is fundamentally its location on the Humber River. Um, and that is the references that are in the report. Okay. Thank you. Sorry. I would also clarify that the nonrenewal is not a decision in front of of the committee. The report is focused on a recommendation of a suite of renewals. Uh and that was the distinction that we made. Uh we're happy to provide more information if that would be of assistance. Okay. All right. Thank you. A further point of order, Mr. Chair, if I Holiday, uh this may be for you or the clerk to determine. Um what I just heard was important and that is staff's comment that the non-renewal is not before the committee. I would put to you, Mr. chair that the non-renewal renewal of a boating club of which we do not have the council history of the decision of from 70 years ago is a significant public policy decision and so if it's not before the committee then where is it because I think that's what we're debating here and is that within the purview of this committee to determine and if it's not then what committee did it go through because I watched the council agendas You know, Mr. Chair, just with respect to the addition and add some additional comments here to this, I don't understand what staff means by the fact that the um the renewal of this lease is not in front of us. I mean quite frankly if it if it was simply to the to deal with the issue of sustainability, erosion and so on so forth, well that could have been done in a different context and we could then be also be talking about how this club could work with the city and the TRCA to ensure that their lease stays in place as well as responding to the issues with respect to sustainability, environmental issues, erosion and so on so forth. So I'm just I'm really confused now. I understand that there are issues relating to the complaint and so on. So we've now then distilled that and say that's not really important because we're not going to provide you with that information. What's important is really not renewing the lease and the basis of not renewing the lease is about environmental concern, erosional erosion concerns and sustainability and so on. Right? So I think those points were all outlined in the report. the meat of the concerns, the complaints were not provided. Yes. All right. So, it it Yeah, Mr. Chair, I don't know who's It's Gourd Perks. Sorry, councelor. You're not a member of the committee. No, I know. I just wanted to make sure that I got a chance to question staff. Okay. All right. Thank you. So, I don't know what the will of the committee is. We can defer this if you'd like more detailed information. I'd like a chance to question before there are any votes on the item. He's not a member of the committee. Sorry, counselor. We're we're brought this item into committee. I I I'm sorry. I I sent a text from Sorry. Point of order, Mr. Chair, if I may, I don't know if I can call that, but we were on outside questions and we hadn't concluded them. Councelor Saxs was next as an outside counselor order. Chair, councelor Holiday, I'm prepared to move a deferral at this point in time. And I'm prepar deferral during any course of the item. Um, no, you're questioning staff. So, I'm sorry, who's chairing? Um Ian, I just told you we're still we're so we're still questioning staff. You can move that at the appropriate time if you want. Mr. Chair, I believe it is the appropriate time and we we can seek the advice of the clerk, but I believe during any time during consideration the item a motion to defer uh can occur. I don't believe so. Mr. Chair, can we just listen to some questions? Is it such a big deal to hear people ask questions before we defer? I'm not sure what all the cloak and dagger is here and the maneuvering. I'd like to hear some questions and I have some myself before I'm will I'm prepared to vote on a deferral. Thank you, councelor Brun sites. We're going to go back to questions of staff. Councelor Saxs. Yes, thank you. Um my question is about the public consultation process that led up to this report. Um, f further to our discussion, Mr. Hannah, uh, in the report you recommend no rental provisions for jet skis, and you heard the commodor's comment. Did you conduct any public consultation on whether or not um we should put an additional condition relating to owned jet skis andor to either two-stroke engines or providing electrical supplies for engines? Did you do consultation on any of those things during this process uh through the chair? Um the recommendation before count before committee stipulates that we would not allow boat clubs the permission to do jet ski rentals which is longheld uh parks and wreck policy. um the the recommendation around or the the the finger around privatelyowned jet skis. There are as there are very very small number of privately owned jet I'm sorry you're not answering my question. My question is did you do a cons consultation on this issue? We have not done a consultation on private jet sketis at this time. I know that the city manager's office is leading a larger report on personal watercraft safety. Right. But my question is not about safety. Um, so you didn't do any consultation about about jet skis. Did you do any consultation about two-stroke engines that pump pollution into the water with every stroke? And did you do any consultation about providing electrical charging at these boat facilities? Uh, through the chair, we have not done any public consultation about two-stroke engines or or electrical charging. Thank you. Thank you, councelor Saxs. Sorry to councelor Perks. No, Councelor Perks. All right. Yes, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Sorry. I need you to turn your video on. I unfortunately I'm having connection issues. Uh I've had to leave my computer. I'm now connected by phone. If I connect by phone, then I drop. Okay. All right. Thank you. Go. You have five minutes. Go ahead. Thank you very much for your indulgence. Uh first, um uh during one of the deputations, I asked uh if the coalition of commodors would be comfortable about adding some language, making it more explicit what we mean by public access. I've worked with staff to draft a motion. Uh staff have made some edits to it. So, you're comfortable with the motion that I've submitted to councelor Aninsley? uh through the chair we are. Thank you. Um on to the issue of the ecological sensitivity at the mouth of the Humber among the concerns that have been raised with the Humber Yacht Club. Uh is it correct that they have encroached onto TRCA lands outside their leased area? Uh prove the chair that is correct. Is it correct that uh they have uh been storing fuel in a way that city staff are concerned about? Sorry, for the chair. Uh there are uh uh gas fueling stations on the site um that uh that there have been complaints and issues that city staff have uh have commented on. Is it the case that uh there have been bonfires uh on the site near the fuel storage uh through the chair? We have been made aware that there have been in fact bonfires and parties of sight uh on on the site. In terms of protecting the shoreline, one of the one of the things we try to do is to make sure that there aren't a lot of uh craft with very big wakes. There's an ecological reason for that. Uh have staff noted uh party party nights uh iron iron river raves things like this that could be creating wake that damage the shoreline through the chair. I can't comment on I I don't have information specifically around the name of fee knights or anything like that. I just aware that there have been issues around the overall management of the site and some of the activities that have taken place on the site um as as outlined through some of the uh some of the complaints that we've received. So in some the uh encroachment on ecologically sensitive TRCA lands uh concerns about storage of fuel, concerns about fires, concerns from complaints about wakes uh from power boats disturbing the banks. These are all ecological problems that have been raised with the boat club by city staff in the past. Is that correct? Uh, for the chair, that is correct. Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Uh, I won't be able to wave my hand, but I would like to speak. Sorry, Councelor Perks. I missed the last part. I I won't be able to wave my hand because I'm having camera problems, but I would like to speak to the item. All right. Thank you. All right. I believe that's all of the outside counselors. We're going to bring it into committee. Councelor Thompson, questions. Sorry, questions of staff. Um, I think I've got the answers already. Okay, though I didn't get the information. Councelor Holiday, questions of staff. Absolutely. So, um, what which public servant made the decision to not move forward on the lease and when? Uh, for the chair, the decision the decision reflected in this in the report is the city staff recommendation following extensive uh, cross divisional review of all boat club leases. The review was led by parks and recreation corporate real estate management. Parks and recreation is responsible for parkland management. Uh corporate real estate is responsible for the administration of city leases. Sorry. The the club has been for been informed that their lease has not been renewing. Yes or no? That is correct. Who made the decision to do that and when? So the recommendation was reviewed through the city's senior management process including at the time the general manager of parks and recreation. is now it's now being reflected in the committee report. If you're referring to when was the club uh told counselor, could you let him finish his answer? I'd like an answer to my question. It's important. Counselor, I'll hold your time. But he is trying to answer your question. I asked questionair if you could not interrupt him and let him finish his answer and then if you dispute his answer, you can ask another question. Thank you. The question is as to when did the club receive notice or a letter as to when they would not being renewed? It's June 2025. Which public servant made the decision not to renew the lease and when that led to that letter? So the the decision not to renew the lease was ultimately laid by made by parks and recreation. And it would have been at the senior management level at that time which would have been the general manager of parks and recreation would have been in in spring 2025. Spring 2025. It's about a year ago. Correct. What was the rationale for making that decision? The rationale for making that decision was the location of Toronto Humber Yach Club being within the Humber River and the environmental considerations related to uh that club in that location. Okay. And that's what the report says before us, right? Ecological erosion management, that sort of stuff. That's the rationale. So all anything else to do with behaviors and leases and notices that we were provided before didn't go into that decision. Yes or no? The major the the big no. The biggest reason why the club is not being renewed because of its location. Uh I want to ask the we have general manager of water here or somebody. Thank you, Luke. right behind you. Um, the assertation is that this has to do with power boating on on the water. That's a federal jurisdiction, is it not? I don't know if you can answer that. Yes. Bo uh boating safety and and on Lake Ontario in particular is tied to federal government. Okay. Uh but the river itself that is Toronto jurisdiction because you have lots of infrastructure there or is a TRCA? Uh the jurisdiction for the river, the watershed and the lands is TRCA. Okay. Except for those locations where we do have infrastructure, right? Infrastructure. We approved some today. Sewage pumping stations. Are there there's certainly storm sewer outfalls up the river? Uh is there combined sewer overflows? Uh not in the immediate vicinity of this boating club, but up upstream there are. Yeah, for sure. The Humber River, the sewer pumps right into there in bad storms, does it not? like raw sewage. Uh that's correct. There's a few outfalls on Black Creek that work its way into the Humber River just to the south. There's a massive sewage treatment plant that has its output and when things get real bad, sometimes it has to release uh partially or untreated sewage, does it not? Um it it does have that, but we we have our bypass that goes into Lake Ontario, not into Humber River. Okay. So the operative piece here is power boats. Power boats have a propeller or they have a channelized propulsion system in the case of a jet ski. In your experience, Mr. general manager. Uh, knowing the size of the water course, what's in it, knowing the millions of liters of of untreated water that flows into that river during a rainstorm, what effect could that possibly be on motorized props on the integrity of that river system one kilometer up from the shore knowing that there's no restriction, it's a federal man matter on boats. Do do in your expertise do you see any thread that ties this together? The way I describe that with the the magnitude of the storms that we see uh coming down the Humber River and and the force of flow that's coming down the Humber River that is the primary impact of erosion, right? Um that that we see at our level at Toronto water level, right? So a little boat puttering up and down the river at how many kilometers an hour is not eroding the side of the bank. it it whatever it does pales in comparison to the millions of liters of untreated water that goes into that water course during a storm surge. Those are the big issues that the TRCA handles. Last question counselor to you, Mr. Chair. That's correct. We're looking at things on a watershed basis particularly though the TA TRCA may have sight specific concerns when you have users of which Toronto Water wouldn't be directly involved in. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Holidayiday. Councelor Burnside, do you have any questions as to staff? Yeah, I sure do. Thank you. So, um probably someone on the uh on the park side of things, but why do they have a a no wake policy for boats on rivers in general? Can you stop my time, please? Sorry, Mr. Chair. Um, waterways are regulated by the federal government, so we're not really in a position to answer as to no wakes. Um, well, and I'm not trying to be argumentative and I'm actually trying to understand, but if you have a pol if you don't want to renew a lease based on power boats, would you not know? I'm not trying to be I'm seriously not trying to be argumentative, but would you not know the rationale to that? the the policy rationale that we relied on for for this uh for the decision around Toronto Humber Club really relies on the city of Toronto official plan around natural natural heritage system policies as well as uh watershed and valley valley corridor policy framework all which point towards protecting and enhancing natural features and functions shoreline stability and ecological restoration within river valleys. Okay. So then what's the impact of a a motorboat on those? And if and if you don't know the answer, no problem. That's probably why I'll vote for a deferral because I I really need to understand this. I'm having a hard time um getting my head around. If if no one has the answer to that, that can be an answer. That's okay. Okay. Let me So let me go to my next question then. I think that's my answer. Um, so in terms of Burnside, I think we have an answer for you. Oh. Oh, cool. Thanks. Through the chair. So, the TRCA is the owner of the property and TRCA's primary concerns are with the land uses on land and those and how those land uses impact natural heritage and ecology, um, river health, erosion impacts, etc. Um, we do not regulate use of boats on the water. Our concern is primarily with the land use on the property that we own. So then the motorboats or powered watercraft aren't actually the issue then is what you're saying from TRCA's perspective. That's correct. We are primarily concerned with the uh the property and the land uses that are required to uh support a motorized club of this size. Okay. Okay. So from a city perspective then is like I thought this was all about motorboats but if it's land use is kind of different. Do is it about motorboats? Uh to the chair uh the city of Toronto does not have authority over the waterway. So we can't we cannot control which boats go up and down the river. uh what we can control uh through through partnership with the TRCA is what activities take place on land. Okay. So having a a motor craft, how how does that how does it uh negatively impact the land? Could you help me understand that as opposed to a sailboat? uh to the chair. So again, the while we don't control the the um the types of vehicles that go up and down the river, um the the issuance of motorboats on the river is what we're trying to dissuade through uh what we do have authority on which is the land use. But you no one's able to tell me and the TRCA is not wasn't able to say what the problem of that boat on the river is. You know what? I'm going to move on because honestly that's the most convoluted answer I've heard in a long time and I'm sure there was no intent there. Let me let me just ask you this. Um or ask staff this. There's the environmental aspect of this. There's also a uh I'll say a behavioral aspect. forget the environmental. Would the behavioral um aspect be enough to cancel the lease or not? Or it's not even I don't think you're even cancelling. I think you're not renewing and I think there is a distinction there. Correct. Thanks counselor. Through the chair uh because we are not talking about a termination. The behavior, the historic behavior was a consideration in the decision but was not determinative. The determination around what the next steps on the site was influenced by TRCA and parks uh position around the sensitivity of the land use and the impact of future boat club activities uh within the river valley. the I if we were discussing a termination, historic behavior would definitely influence that decision. But given the lease is naturally at its end and we're talking about uh what is coming in the future, um I would suggest that it was just a consideration. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the opportunity. Thank you, Councelor Burnside. Councelor Thompson, you're good. All right. Can I get my round in first? That's okay. Um, so I just want to start by asking staff. So in the Sorry, I got to I wanted to ask staff by starting. So in the summary of the report and I I mentioned this earlier um to the first depident, it said uh the 2026 voting season So it's not being renewed following an extensive evaluation by city staff and consultation with the Toronto region and conservation authorities of land owner. So I want to ask both city staff and TRCA staff because the first deputent that said they were I believe the vice president of the Humber Yacht Club, they said they'd hardly had any communi well no communication from either party. And I'd like both of you to comment on that because there was a comment about a number of issues over the years um that you provided the yacht club with notice that their lease wasn't being renewed. But what happened prior to that? What happened that extensive evaluation like what happened there for for you to reach this decision? But the the vice chair or vice president of the Humber Club said they've had no interaction. So I'm trying to understand. Thanks. Uh through through how we got here through you. Uh, as I had mentioned, there has been an ongoing dialogue uh with the yacht club uh since 2018 around actions on the site, the city's concerns around uh both their operational management and some of the sensitivities on the land. TRCA has been a part of those conversations at various points. After the termination or the non-renewal was wassued, there was a site visit uh that TRCA uh participated in to walk through some of the considerations that led up to that decision with the boat club. I'll pass it over to see if TRC had anything to add uh through the chair. So TRCA participated in the process by assisting the city with technical data and review of the site. We have not as the city has as the um holds the lease with the clubs and they have led all communications with the lease holder and we have participated by supporting them with a review of not only this site but all 24 uh boat club sites. Okay. And then through the chair just through the chair if I could just add uh at that site and and I want to go back because it was a question raised by other members of outside but also uh in this committee it is in a floodprone vulnerable ecologically sensitive area of the Humber River Valley. And so, you know, the continued use, any continued risk in this area, any continued use entails risk and uh and I just wanted to uh put that forward as well from a hazard perspective as well, continued uh and and that's why originally these lands were uh post hazel acquired by uh public bodies. Thank you. Okay. And could somebody from the TRCA speak a bit about so in the summary I'd said um so the TRCA is a land owner determining a less intensive land use would better support ecological management objectives and could you speak about about what those e ecological uh management objectives are and I guess also in light of what Mr. De Gonimo was saying earlier about affluence the right word. The question was primarily about large storm events and erosion that we have sites. Um the from a standpoint of outfalls not a major concern because they're storm related and the plant discharges to the lake. So it's not it's not right in that same area. Okay. So could you talk a could the TRCA talk a little bit about what they're looking for around ecological management objectives and it says improving the river health and resilience to flooding. So I know you mentioned Mr. McKenzie mentioned a bit about a flood plane. Yeah. Yes. So through the chair, this uh this area is regulated um and any future use there would require permits under the conservation authorities act, but also we would be looking and working with the city of Toronto to identify um and pursue habitat enhancement opportunities, restoration opportunities. Um so this includes things like reducing the amount of hard surfaces, um increasing biod diversity and um permeable surfaces and just making that shoreline more resistant to those um increasingly severe weather events that we are experiencing that cause flooding and erosion. Okay. And sorry, the the yacht club's on a flood plane. It is correct. Okay. So 2026, like I've been on the TRCA for a number of years now. We just don't build on flood planes. We don't allow would in 2026 would we allow a yacht club on this flood plane? So any new uses on the site would have to go through our permitting process under the Conservation Authorities Act. And so there's very limited um uses that would be applicable in this this type of area, new types of uses. Okay. All right. Thank you. Councelor Thompson, you have a question. Yes. Thank you through you, Mr. Chair. Um, prior to 2018, what were the concerns that the city had and the TRCA had with respect to the yacht club and the Humber River? And sorry counselor through the chair prior to 2018. That is my question. That's part of the question. Yes. Prior to 2018, it seems that part of your response to many of the questions you have used 2018, I would just use the term as a baseline. I'm just curious as to prior to 2018, what were the concerns? Did you have dialogue with respect to the yacht club about concern about ecological concern? um biodiversity concern, all the concerns that you're bringing forward now, what were your concerns prior to 2018? Thank you. uh through the chair. From a lease management uh perspective, our files uh show that the operational considerations and operational concerns uh peaked in 2018 when we saw potentially a significant change in the management such that that's when our dialogue started to uh go around how the site was being managed. Pre 2018 we don't have anything on file that said we had concerns on the management. Right. So you have now just provided us with information that there were behavioral issues that has basically brought this into your purview. Is that what you just basically intimated? Thanks through the chair. I would suggest prior to 2018 we did not have any documented concerns on the operations. I would say we did not start our review of the uh boat club portfolio and our renewal strategy until I suggest maybe in 2022 or 2023 when we started to look at renewal of the overall boat club portfolio. All right. Um a good portion of my ward is in what's considered the flood plane. We have I we have a bank. We have a complete plaza. We have a number of um apartment buildings or condos. Uh 1470 Midland, 2500 Lawrence Avenue. Would you prescribe some type of um measures to ask that we remove all those tenants from those buildings and properties and relocate them because they're in a flood plane? Would you do that today knowing what you know now through the chair? Maybe I'll start on this and yes I'm very and he's from Scarro and and yes through the chair. Yes, I am. And I'm familiar with the IM view flood plane and another of the special policy areas and flood vulnerable areas that you speak to. Uh there are policies recognizing historical development. And so we do do that. Uh in this case, uh where we have um you know, this this site in particular that we're speaking of today, um there was high lake and flood inundation issues in 2017 and 2019 with the high lake levels that impacted this club. Um and uh it is something that you know obviously with our mandate of hazards we're concerned about uh additional impacts coming in the future but definitely uh we have special policies for those parts of Scar Bro and other parts of the city that um you know take into account that historical development and try to do the best efforts uh from that point onward to mitigate flood risk. Thank you. And I appreciate your answer Mr. McKenzie. And so is it not possible to utilize some of those same characteristics and or measures to ensure that the yacht club can sustain or could sustain its presence at this location in collaboration with the TRCA in the city to address all those concerns that are now uh evident in post 2018. So through the chair uh because uh at this point in time um it is not I guess deemed to be a a permanent use. We haven't been looking at that with city staff as yet. Thank you, Mr. McKenzie. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Councelor Thompson. I believe that is everybody in the committee. Councelor Holidayiday, you requested a second round. Uh yes. Thank you, Chair. A point of order. May I request a second round? Okay. Sorry. Second round. I'd like to ask questions, too. It's councelor Perks. Councelor Perks, you beat me to it. I was Go ahead, Councelor Perks. Thank you. Um, and and I want to thank staff for some of the answers they've given. They've really clarified the issue. So, this club was established uh I've heard 70 years ago. Uh, that would have been before Hurricane Hazel, right? uh to the chair. Uh that's correct. Okay. And since Hurricane Hazel happened, we've gone back and uh really changed the regulatory environment for these lands. Uh and as we just heard in a in a recent answer, uh flooding continues to be a problem on this site. Uh also, uh is that correct? uh to the chair that's correct. Okay. Also, uh there's been considerable considerably more work done through our official plan and uh through the the TRCA trying to do renaturalization of river mouths. Uh we've also put billions of dollars into uh renewing the mouth of the dawn. So this this is common work that we're doing where rivers meet the lake. Is that correct? Through through the chair. That's correct. Okay. And the presence of a boat club, particularly a boat club which has begun encroaching outside their lease area on desensitive lands and into a city park, isn't something that you would recommend we continue with? I lose you through the chair. That's correct. Thank you. Thank you, councelor Perks. Councelor Mley, you're good. Coun, sorry, councelor Holiday, you asked for a second round. Thank you, Chair. I I I'm sorry there's a lot today. So, I just got to circle back to something I heard. I did I hear correctly that the the issue that has contributed to the decision of the non-renewal has to do with the land use of the club in the river valley. Uh to the chair, the decision not the the decision not to renew the club has to deal with the location of the club on the Humber River Valley and not the land use. The decision the decision is due to the fact that the club has motorized boats. Okay. Yeah. Back to the motorized. So if the club did not have motorized boats, then there's no longer a consideration. Is that right? Like I got to follow the logic here. This is problematic. So to the chair, that's correct. So to stay consistent, the issue is is that the it's a motorized boat club on the Humber River. All right. So, in terms of back to what we just heard from the TRCA, this is down on a flood plane. There's erosion. There's all sorts of stuff going on that causes concern over the renewal of this lease. What does that have to do with the motorization of the boats that are floating on the water? Like, tie that together for me. Can anybody tie it together? It's a little prop spinning in the water. Is there anything else about the boats that causes it to be a conflict or a problem of renewing the lease in the valley? Like there's the old mill up the river. There's Oh my goodness. We talked about it today. The Western Lions Arena. It's that's on the flood val the Evergreen Brick Works. We renewed that lease, didn't we? We just did to the chair. So there's it's a motorized boat club. There's there's gas tanks on the land. There's a fuel recharging for the boats on the land. So all of this is all of this is linked together. Um, so fuel fuel is the issue in the flood plane. There's there's environmental considerations both from from how from the fact that it's a motorized boat and that there's there's motorized boat club and that there's motorized boats and also that there are fuel things such as fuel tanks and other things that that contribute to that. What other things? Well, it's fuel tanks and fuel pumps. fuel tanks and Okay, so now we're down to fuel tanks and fuel pumps existing on the on on the plane of the river. Okay. Uh are there cars down there? Is there a road? Uh to the chair, there is there is there's a All right. So, can can can technology mitigate the issue with fuel being down on the river valley? Is there a way? What I'm putting to you is there's a cancellation of a 70-year lease and we're down to fuel tanks. Can that be mitigated? Is that a possibility? Did anyone have that conversation? So to the chair. So we've been trying to communicate or have been communicating with the club since June 2025, but the decision was before that. Sorry counselor. If we can sorry I know some of us it's an emotional item but if we could refrain from yelling at staff. Thank you. I I didn't even I apologize. Apologize to me. No no I I I apologize to staff I for being u so communication prior to the notice to terminate excuse me not terminate to non-renew we get the language correct. Thanks through the chair. Uh there has been extensive communication with the club around their operations on the site compliance with the lease and a decision was made around non-renewal. After the non-renewal, there was extensive efforts by staff to sit and discuss with a club around what decommissioning could look like and about the city's plans for the next step on the site. The club has not engaged in those communications to date without a discussion on renewal. We are more than happy to sit with a club to talk about what the site looks like going into the future. Thank you, councelor. Other questions from committee members? I have a question, Mr. Chair. Councelor Burnside. Yeah, just uh two questions actually. Thank you very much. Um, so is this the only club we're talking about in terms of leases, in terms of not renewing? Like are all the other clubs good through the chair? Yes, this is the only club that is not being renewed. Okay. Um, and just back to councelor Pur's question about Hurricane Hazel, was that before or after the club was established? What was the answer? I can tell you it was after. Apologies. I do not know when Hurricane Hazel was 1956. Well, no, but somebody No, but it's important because like details are important. I understand. And what and staff answered a question from counselor Perks. I just want to make sure that the answer was a correct answer. He asked about uh when the club was established visav hurricane Hazel. Maybe the staff member that answered could say what they said. So the the club was established 70 years ago. Counselor, um I believe the hurricane Hazel was in the early 1950s. No, no, but I want to know what the answer was to councelor Perk's question. I thought I heard that the that the the it was said the club was established before Hurricane Hazel. I could be wrong. I just want to know what the answer was. And if I'm wrong, I'm wrong. John McKenzie, what year was Hurricane Hazel through the chair? 1954. What year was the club established? 1936. Thank you. 56. Is that good, John? Sorry, Councelor Burnside. No, respectfully, Mr. Chair, I understand. I looked it up. I understand the dates. Councelor Perks asked the question of staff whether this I want to know what staff answered because I just want to make sure the accuracy of the answers were getting. That's all I'm asking, not for a history lesson necessarily, respectfully. So, to the chair, sorry, I may I may have misspoke. And the the club was was established in 1956. Hurricane Hazel was before that time. And my impression was that the answer was that the club was from from staff was that the answer was that Hurricane Hazel uh that the club was established before Hurricane Hazel. Yeah. If if I to the to the chair if I misspoke, I apologize. Thank you. Thank you, Burns. Councelor Burnside. And just on a point of order, I want to clarify I was not alive when Hurricane Hazel happened. Okay. I believe that is all of our You didn't stick your hand up. Would you like to ask her? Councelor Thompson. Thank you. Um through you um Mr. Chair to staff. You mentioning you mentioned on numerous occasion about decommissioning this site and so on and uh efforts were made to have dialogue with the club. Was there any effort made to um speak to the club about relocation and have had you taken a look at potential site where this the club could be could have been relocated uh through the chair. Our discussions with the club to date have um stayed focused mainly on an opportunity around renewal. We think that uh we have been more than willing to engage in discussions around the future of the club. Uh we have not had specific conversations about relocation. Um I just want to make sure I'm hearing you correctly. Your discussion was around renewal. Renewal of what? The club or renewal of the site? Renewal around ecology, renewal around working with respect to erosion. What is the renewal that you're talking about it through the chair? It is around the nonrenewal and the notice the club received. Since that point, all of the communications from the club have been focused on disputing the nonrenewal as opposed to uh focusing on discussions around next steps. All right. So, again, I'm really confused because I thought I heard renewal, not non-renewal. No, I'm hearing non-renewal relating to the club. But with respect to the club itself, it has a history of 70 years. Um, we have people who are users of the facilities of the clubs with gentleman came and talked about himself and his family and his kids who are here because March break and so I'm glad that they're here. Um, did you take into consideration the actual impact on the members of the club irrespective of you know some of the behavioral issues that was been raised? Uh, had there been any consideration about potentially relocating the club elsewhere and of course putting in place um, uh, sort of measures to mitigate the issues or concerns that came through the complaints as relating from the community? Was there any efforts made to relocate the club given the fact that you want to do all of this work around sustainability, ecological concern, the erosion concerns? Did you have any consideration for the continuence of the club maybe elsewhere or was that not part of your responsibility? Thanks, counselor. through the chair. We recognize the non-renewal is very impactful to just the club and the members using the club. Uh since early this year, we understood that the communications with the membership was not clear. The city has since set up a website to support users uh at the club in identifying other relocation sites to relocate. uh the other boat clubs have stepped up and we know that there is a lot of conversation around ensuring all of the current users have space for their boats into the upcoming boat season. We have also communicated uh a willingness to talk about the future of the boat club uh and next steps around um uh around the site with the boat club. We have communicated that several times. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Okay. Thank you, Councelor Thompson. And just before we proceed any further on this, I need to move a So, sorry, just the members of the committee. Uh, we're supposed to have a break at 12:30. Uh, I'm going to move a motion to continue to finish the agenda. All in favor? And that carries. Oh, there's the motion. Thank you, Matthew. All right. So, we have finished uh questions of staff. Uh, so we're now moving on to speakers. uh outside counselors first. I saw councelor Mley and I as I I believe councelor Perks, you're still online. Yes, I am. Thank you. Okay. So, councelor Mley and then councelor Perks. Councelor Mley. Thanks, Mr. Chair. Um this is uh been a tough tough one uh for me, but something certainly my office has been engaged in for quite some time in Atobbico Lake. We're very lucky to host four uh yacht clubs. We've got the Lakes Shore Yacht Club, the Humber Bay, of course, the Toronto, um, sorry, the Humber Bay Yacht Club, as well as the Mimico Yacht Club, um, and others. And so I've been on site to every single one, including the Toronto Humber Yacht Club, uh, this past summer. Staff referenced the meeting with TRCA, park staff, and my office. We met at that time with the Commodore to have a discussion about the news that had been shared regarding non-renewal. And again, there are a lot of I think really sound and important reasons and rationale uh within this report that talk about the ecological environmental sensitivity and the unique nature of the Toronto Humber Yacht Club on the river. It is the only one of its type in a watershed in a sensitive ecological area which is also a flood plane. Um that in and of itself I think as we do 25 year reviews we've learned a lot. We're in the midst of a climate crisis. We've got um you know extreme weather continuing to impact our communities. Flooding is a real thing that happens in our ward and affects many of our residents. So, as a city, I think we've really been focused on our climate uh and environmental goals and the necessary work required for us to get to better outcomes for Torononians and to futureproof our city from environmental impacts. I think that in and of itself is a a clear and strong rationale for the recommendations here today. Um, as well as we heard a little bit about and I do regret it wasn't further articulated for transparency for members of the public for uh members of the club and certainly club leadership uh as to the challenges with um collaboration with the city over the years. We heard about five default notices that have been given over the last eight years to this club and 15 written correspondences around compliance and opportunities to collaborate with the city and be in good standing as a lee. Um that has not happened. uh those opportunities have not been uh taken advantage of and unfortunately we haven't seen a level of confidence that with the existing significant concerns related to the uses on this club that there is a collaborative partner on site. So for those reasons I am supportive of the the staff recommendations. Uh again, this has been a long-standing conversation that's been um ongoing for some time and we've also spoken understanding the impact to members there. We've spoken with the commodors uh from other clubs, the other three clubs on the waterfront in our ward to ensure that they have an opportunity to warmly receive potential members who want to relocate and continue to recreate in our community in a good way. Um we understand that some members have um been absorbed and have been able to you know avail themselves of those opportunities with other clubs on the waterfront. We're really glad to hear that. We hope more will come uh or more to come on that. Um but again there are a number of uh issues here that are very clear to me as the local counselor uh that really affirm uh and validate the staff's recommendations here. And I although I'm not a member voting member of this committee uh will be supporting at council and uh I'll leave it there as I never usually take my five minutes but uh I do think that this is an important one and I'm glad I could join the committee to uh share my voice as the local counselor. Thank you so much. Thank you councelor Mley Councelor Perks. Thank you Mr. Chair. Um I want to begin uh by reminding members of the committee that in questions of the deputants and staff I highlighted that uh uh there's a motion which you Mr. Chair will be moving that just makes it a little bit more explicit in the appendix uh what the city means when we say public access. Uh I will tell you uh having dealt with uh waterfront clubs, it's usually wonderful. Uh but from time to time we've run into problems because leases that were signed 20 and 30 years ago, nobody can really remember what the intention was. So I think if we put uh that more explicit language in, it will be helpful in the decade and or two to come to make sure everyone understands. Uh, next I I want to congratulate councelor Burnside on his detective work. Uh, I really should have asked a more precise question which is when did the regulations that resulted from Hurricane Hazel come into effect? And the answer to that would have been the TRCA was created in 1957 after this boat club. And further that the regulatory environment of trying to remove uh uh potentially hazardous or risky uses from watersheds has been evolving ever since. And you know, I've I have quite a bit of experience with this dealing with stuff up and down the Humber uh for years and years and and other members of council will have that experience too. Staff were absolutely correct in saying in today's regulatory environment, we would never site uh a place with a clubhouse boat launches uh on a site like this. We would be even more leerary of doing it given the Buck Club's recent history of constructing structures outside their leased lands on sensitive areas. This is something they've done despite city staff telling them no. Before I go on with that, uh I want to address councelor Holidayiday's suggestion you should defer the item. If you defer the item, you're essentially leaving the 24 clubs who are in good standing hanging. We have been through a lengthy consultation with them. And if they don't have their lease renewal, the consequence is very simple. They cannot go to a bank and get a get a loan to upgrade and maintain their book clubs. they will they because they can't demonstrate that they have a long-term lease. You're effectively condemning those good faith clubs, those good actors to paralysis and to having their uh facilities deteriorate because they can't do anything to make them better. So, if you have concerns about getting further information on the Humber Yacht Club, please find a different mechanism and don't defer an item that deals with all of these 24. Now, in conclusion, I wanted to return to that deputation we had with the vice commodor. It's really important that we have partners who are operating in good faith. The vice commodor made two claims that are quite astonishing to me. One is that he had no communication from the city about this issue. City staff have demonstrated very clearly that they have had repeated attempts to enter into conversations with this club and that the club only very recently accepted that invitation. I think it's bad to have a partner who makes claims that are false like this. Secondly, the uh vice commodor talked about their ecological plan. A plan that hasn't been adopted by their members, a plan that hasn't been shared with the city, a plan quite frankly that wouldn't meet the regulatory requirements that the TRCA puts in. So again, kind of a bad faith answer on their part. I'm I'm disappointed that that happened, but I guess that's part of the the course in dealing uh with these public lands. And I want to stress that these are public lands. They are not lands owned by the Humber Yach Club. Okay. Thank you, Councelor Perks. We're going to bring it into committee speakers. Councelor Thompson. Uh yes, thank you Mr. Chair. Um I I wanted just before I spoke, Mr. Chair, there was a gentleman here earlier and I don't see now, but he is a former uh Olympian actually um a bronze medalist uh in the 1984 summer Olympics and also he participated in the 1976 uh Olympics as well and finished fifth place and that was Phil Monton. he was here earlier and uh so he's no longer here. He's gone. I I'm sorry that he is not here, but I also wanted to recognize him because he has such a tremendous um uh history and he's contributed so much to uh rowing and so on in uh in Canada and globally. So, I just wanted to acknowledge that. Uh Mr. Chair, um if I knew more, I probably would be doing something different. I don't know more and even the more that I know I'm confused. Right. Councelor, do you have a motion? I do not. No problem. Because I was going to Mine's all rolled up into what's been working on. Okay. All right. Thank you. Sorry to interrupt. Well, no problem. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um I did have a motion which would be to ask for basically continuence and to have a um an opportunity to defer and to work through with city staff. that's what I was going to move, but it's now rolled into what you are going to move. And I'm happy with respect to that. It's And again, I I want to say to our staff, this is not your final hour, unfortunately. Um, with the exception of Mr. McKenzie, u, Mr. McKenzie, you are always terrific and and thank you for your leadership and so on. I could say more with respect to staff, but I I won't. I would just say that it's just not your finest hour and I would hope that going forward we will have brighter um elements of reports with respect to more details that helps us to at least formulate sorry counselor just on I'm sorry I'm going to on a point of privilege. Sure. Um making comments about staff that have no avenue to defend what they've done in a public forum. I'd ask you to withdraw that comment. So I won't withdraw, Mr. Chair. I will just tell you that having sat here today, having the information that staff has provided, additionally with respect to the in information that staff have provided to my staff has been very perplexing. I have chosen not to basically um highlight any of the details other than what we've heard here today. I don't believe I owe staff an apology. I don't believe quite frankly I have in inferred anything derogatory to the staff. In fact, I've been very kind and charitable as I always am with staff. But I can tell you based on the information that I've received here today and the answers, it's been very difficult for me to formulate a real constructive opinion and decision based on the information. So I will not withdraw it because I don't think it's improperly in front of us, Mr. Chair. Okay, if you want to continue. Thank you. Yes, thank you. I will. Lovely to do so. And so I'm very concerned about the types of information that we're receiving. The local council has spoken and I I I have just great respect for her and so on. And as I said earlier, had I had different information, I probably would be siding with her today. I can't because I didn't formulate my opinion based on the information that's been conveyed. Lots of information has been conveyed to us here today. It's perplexing. Information I've received from the yacht club is also perplexing and it's very difficult for me to actually arrive at a decision. I would like to ensure through the motion that you're bringing forward, Mr. share and some of the elements that I had in my motion it's incorporated to ensure that maybe staff can go back and come back and bring us a report that we as members of council would well receive and would would not uh if you will negate some of the elements of our decisions based on the fact of the information that we're receiving which basically I mean if I had the right information I'd write make the right decision I don't have the right information to make the right decision. And so for that, I'm going to lean on giving staff more time to come back with information that helps us to formulate and make a decision. My decision may change with that detailed information coming forward. It may not, but I would simply say this, this is not one of our finest hours. We have an organization uh not for profit that's been around for 70 years. I do think that's worth our consideration in terms of their operation. We've heard from staff that there was no attempt made to ensure that this club and the Scott club could continue. Basically, they've said, "Well, we've made arrangements, so if their members wanted to join other clubs and and and organizations, they could do so and so on." Well, that's not good enough for me. I'm all in favor of supporting the ecological needs of the city, the erosion issues. I've have erosion issues in my ward. I have issues around flood planes and Mr. McKenzie is absolutely right because we work with him and the TRCA to address these things. But what I have in front of me today does not give me comfort to say that I have had the best information today from our professional staff. I'm not sure what happened, but something happened that we didn't get the information that I needed. I am being asked in essence to deal with the lease although I said I'm not being asked I'm just being asked deal with the environmental concerns and so on but it also suggests to me that something happened after 2018 and obviously the staff had made a decision to obviously not proceed with respect to renewing the lease and they've arrived at that but I'm very very concerned about the information that we've had to make a decision on today so for that reason I will actually support your motion and ask and and with respect to the deferral and to bring this matter back and perhaps further discussions can be had with the odd club and its members and perhaps we may make another decision or we will continue as staff was hoping that we would arrive at this decision today. Thank you Mr. Chair and then just finally I will not withdraw my comments. Thank you, Councelor Thompson. Councelor Holiday to speak, Councelor Burnside. I'm good, thanks. Councelor Holiday, I'm the last speaker. I'm the chair. Yes, I do. Yes. And the committee. So if you like to speak, go ahead. I'm not aware. That was my understanding. If I'm wrong, I'm more than happy to is never had anybody ask me before. So, okay. Sorry. So, the clerk says I'm in charge of the speakers list at the committee. So, if you'd like to speak, go ahead. So, so on a point of order, I have not added myself to the speakers list. I'm not aware of a rule that the chair can deny somebody to add themselves to the speaker's list at any point. So I just nor the advice of the clerk that I just had I'm the chair is in charge of the speaker list. I've decided to speak last. So if you would like to speak, you have the floor. If that's your ruling, Mr. Chair, I will then take the opportunity to speak and I will ask the clerk to present the motion. Um, and that is the one with the extra wording in section one. And I explain why it's important. Um, Mr. Clerk, do are do you need a moment? I'd like Should we stand it down, Mr. Chair? I'm sorry. It's quite unexpected and it's important. Okay. Okay. May May I proceed, Mr. Chair? So, the the motion there has two operative parts to it. Uh the first is it allows the club to remain open on a month-to-month overhold basis for the 2026 season and asks for more information to come back to the committee. Uh I I'm aware that another motion was coming but the operative part of this is to allow the club to remain open and the reason for that is to continue in any pattern otherwise is the cons is the constructive destruction of the club. If they're member-based and there is no opportunity for the members to pay dues and the club falls apart because of uncertainty and the uncertainty that has progressed over the last number of months, then there is no club and it's a moot point and the city has destroyed them. And so I believe that that is an absolutely critical part of this. Let's all take a deep breath. Let's allow them to operate in an overhold. This doesn't give a 20-year lease. and let's have the conversation that is needed to be had. Mr. Chair, the my general comments to the committee are as follows. This is a club that has existed for 70 years. It is a lot longer than me, but I remember it as a boy. I remember going by on my bike, riding through the river valley. I also remember it because my grandfather was a member. He was a retired naval veteran. He joined that as a social club. It brought him much joy. He had many friends there. He spent time there. He played music there. That is what we're talking about is a club that has social elements to it. It is the fabric on which our society is built. It is the heavy hand, the fist of the government that is crushing that. And when I look at the report, the rationale is as thin as the edge of this paper. And I apologize that I was curt in my questions because in earnest I have tried and tried to figure out why they've done this and I keep getting conflicting information back. It keeps going to ecology and erosion control in the questions I got down to fuel tanks. Fuel tanks at the river level. Are we talking about an issue with motorboats or are we talking an issue with the existence of a building and people gathering in the valley? And if it's the latter, because that's where this was left off as, we got some serious issues with things we approved today, like the evergreen brick works in the Dawn Valley. There is the hockey rink up the street in Weston. There are golf courses. There's the old mill. There's tennis courts. There's all kinds of things that have existed for decades in these valleys. There's things in Ward 2 on the Humber Valley, structures, community centers. Can we at least give the people a chance to have the convers and I resent the comments by one of my colleagues? A decision was made by a public servant sometime in the spring of 2025 not to renew the lease. A public servant. I am not aware of any public process that went into that. I'm not aware of any stakeholder consultation that went into that decision. I understand some of the answers to questions I didn't ask that popped up about the lack of communication since then. I'd be angry, too, if I was a club member and told you're out. What chance have they been given to mitigate any alleged problems? I'm sure they're well motivated to change things to make things better, but it's let let's at least have a transparent process and some rationale on the table so that it can be criticized because that is the job of the committee. If it's about props spinning in the riverbed, then so be it. Let's understand what that means for erosion. Is there a problem that needs to be so let's get to the problem that needs to be resolved. I cannot support a process which the public does not have confidence in and I find it extremely frustrating to have the answers that I got today that that didn't align with each other from start to end of the question period and pieces of information that I didn't need because it all came down to the decision that was made in the spring of 2025 and some stuff to talk about since then but it's that to that decision point that we don't have line of sight into. I think these people should be given a chance at least for a little while to continue to exist until we sort that out. And if we have to come back to that in in uh a couple of months, so be it. But this is what proper government does after 70 years. Thank you, Councelor Holiday. Any questions in the mover? point of uh pre just confirming I'm not allowed to ask questions as a non-member. Right. Okay. Just making sure. Thanks. Committee members ask questions of the mover. No questions. Okay. Thank you. Sorry. I have a question. Sorry. Councelor Burnside. Go ahead. Yeah. Um, councelor Holidayiday, you mentioned that uh the uh yacht club folks didn't have an opportunity to converse with staff. Didn't weren't they warned 15 times about various behavior in the last eight years? Was that not an opportunity? So that that's the lack of clarity because my understanding is that the decision not to renew after 70 years was not necessarily based on um behaviors of the clubs or alleged violations. It had to do with the land use in the valley and that's something different and so they were talked to about the land use. Okay, I appreciate that clarification. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, councelor Burnside. Other questions of the mover? Seeing none, councelor Burnside, did you want to speak? I asked you earlier, but we didn't. No, I'm good. Thanks. But thanks for the opportunity. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So, uh, Matthew, I have two motions. I'm going to move. Yep. Yep. So, this is the first motion that I'm moving that general government committee amend the community benefits access row in appendix A titled major terms and conditions of the lease renewal agreement to the report as of February 23rd, 2026 from the executive director corporate real estate and the general manager of parks and recreation to read as follows. I'll just let you scroll. I'm moving this on behalf of Kelser Perks. Yep, that's the first one. And then the second one I'm moving. So next second one moving the general government committee recommends the city council request the general manager parks forest and recreation sorry parks and recreation and the executive director of corporate real estate management report to the June 2nd 26 meeting of the general government committee on the Humber River Yacht Club including a a detailed analysis and explanation of the concerns relating to river health ecological management objectives of long-term flood and erosion resilience opportunities to correct river health and ecological management objectives and long-term flood and erosion issues. Consideration of the closing of the river to all motorized boats. D. Uh public and stakeholder public consultation on closing the river to motorized boats. Ecological management objectives and long-term flood erosion resilience and e opportunities for the club to mitigate any outstanding issues. So, uh, what this would do would, uh, bring staff back to answer a number of these objectives, uh, to our June 2nd meeting, uh, work with the Humber River Yacht Club, uh, but would pass and approve all of the other leases, uh, for the clubs so that things can move forward. And I want to staff, thank staff for all of their work. I'm going to differentiate from councelor Holiday a bit. Um, I've been on the board of directors of the Toronto region and conservation authority. Uh, I guess I'm well verssed in flood planes and erosion control and the issues uh around them. Uh, there was comments made that the public needed to be engaged more around the Humber River Yacht Club. Um they are a membershiponly club uh that I understand staff have tried to reach out to on numerous occasions uh to deal with the issues on the property how it is impacting the river the Humber River. Um there has been a lack of communication back from the club that I understand and so I'm putting forward uh this motion to see how we can move this situation forward. Thank you. Councelor Thompson. Question. Right. You moved two motions. One on behalf of councelor Perks. Can you explain exactly what that means? The one from council perks. The entire thing. So So he's looking for clarity around uh rules and guidelines that staff are going to implement around public access at the clubs across our waterfront. Good. I mean I understood that. I just need you to explain. There are people watching so they may not know. Um the other part is that uh councelor Holiday has moved a motion and you've moved a motion. There are similarities between the two. I think save and accept the continuity with respect to the monthtomonth. Um because of what the council has stated ensuring that members could pay their dues etc etc should the continuence take place. Um I'm asking you but maybe the clerk needs to answer. We could actually vote vote to support both and they're not in contravention. Would that be your sense as to my understanding is council holidays the reports back is coming next year and I'm asking for a report back in June. Okay. Gotcha. Gotcha. That's it. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Okay. Yep. Stephen, are you okay? You can make a friendly amendment. Okay. I think things have something we're having conversation on the floor with respect to council holidays. What were you saying? See, um Mr. Chair, a point of order, uh to allow them to stand together. I'm happy to amend the timing of my motion because of the messiness of this process. You know, that's uh a detail uh that's come out. And I also did want to ask a question of the mover on the first motion. Okay. So on your first point um you can amend yours if you want or withdraw it and it' be cleaner in my opinion and then the second your question about public access. Could I have the motion displayed? Yeah. So, so the the the thing that I can amend is instead of reporting back in first quarter 2027, it's simply to report to the June 2nd um committee meeting to keep the overhold until then. So, I believe yeah, that that would be allow identical then. Well, but they're not there's a very operative difference between my motion and yours, Mr. chair in that my motion includes the words to allow the club to remain in operation. Yours does not. They're two dis two different things. So I'm fine if you want to amend mine to say that so it's clear that the club remain in operation until that the review June 2nd 2026. That was my intention, Mr. Chair. Um but I couldn't speak last. So the the second uh Hold on. Let's clear up the first one first. And are you okay with that? Okay, good. Yep. Now, you had a public access question. I did. Um, I appreciate the utility of the the amendment suggested by councelor Perks to you. What I don't understand is whether or not the various clubs that are impacted by this have been consulted on the language and I know that you may or may not have the answer to that. My understanding from councelor Perks was the he had made some consultations to every club. I don't know. Do we know if the clubs are in agreement to this? It it is significant. My understanding from council perks was the clubs were in agreement. The clubs were in agreement. So they Okay. Unfortunately, we can't ask staff and maybe I'll have to wait till council. Okay. But your your sense is is that this is not controversial that this is generally supported by the people that are affected by these leases. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Sorry. Other questions of me? Seeing none. Okay. So, we have Yes. So, councelor Holiday, we're moving my motion with a friendly amendment from you. Can Can we see it? Yes. Well, that would take the fun out of it. Yep. Okay. should be June 2nd. And Mr. Chair, for clarity as well on your motion, the last one, opportunities for the club to mitigate any outstanding issues. Those issues are the ones that we heard about um not having to do with the windup of the club, but the issues to do with concerns of staff over the operation, the fuel tanks, whatever, whatever it was that there's there's enough is your understanding, Mr. Chair, there's enough breadth in that to cover the array of issues. Thank you. It's identical. So, I need you to withdraw your motion, Council Holiday. So, Chair, based on the amendments to your motion, I'm satisfied to withdraw uh my motion. Okay. Believe they're the same, and mine would otherwise be redundant. That's right. All in favor of councelor Holidayiday withdrawing his motion. That carries public access. Yep. So we have my motion on public access. So just again just confirm this point of order. So the public access will take care of the approvals the lease approvals that we want to approve. Correct. Yes. So there will be no delays with respect to those. And then the Hamburg Yacht Club, we will be bringing that back June the second. Yes. Correct. Okay. Okay. All in favor? That carries. And then motion B. All in favor? That carries. Item is amended. All in favor? And that carries. Thank you. We are on to sorry we're going back to item number five which is held by Senate Porter. I thought we were going to have a break. No, we moved to finish the agenda. Oh, I didn't hear that. I have a 1:00 meeting with um Metroinks which I have to attend to. Um Okay. Councelor Burnside, can you stay? I wouldn't miss it. Mr. Chair, thank you, Mr. Chair. Just Just Sorry, I had a couple of items which were the claims pro items. Yep. We were just We're going to get to those now. Yes. Item number five we're doing now. Yeah. Um Okay, I'll stay for that. I I'll get to the metro links a little later. I'll just get my staff to start that and I'll get there. I'll be brief with those if you we're there now. I'll have questions. Okay. Um, so we're on uh, just so everybody's knowledge, we're on GG 27.5, award of request for a proposal document 5386487782 to claims PROLLP for the provision of insurance adjusting services by councelor Thompson. Councelor Thompson question. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and and thank you to staff for this report. I wanted to understand, so the city is self assured insured. Is that correct? through the chair. We do have a large self-insured retention for which insurance sits above and beyond that. Sorry, I missed that part. So, above our self-insured retention, we do have insurance policies. Okay. And the report in front of us here, is it dealing with insurance policy or is it dealing with our insured aspect? So it would be relating to all claims within our self-insured retentions. Ah okay, gotcha. And with respect to claims pro, do they have a group of individuals who are solely looking after the city's uh I'll use the term city's business as it relates to this uh contract through the chair. Yes, the claims projusters are exclusive to the city of Toronto. Okay, that's very helpful. Thank you. because I was never sure of that quite frankly. Um may I then ask you um if someone is driving on a roadway and hits a pothole, there's a lot of requirements for them if they make a claim. Would that be correct through the chair? Um yes. And in fact, we we have a website about making a claim against the city which sets out the the procedures, the steps to follow for a for a constituent to make a claim. Right. Most constituents are not even aware of the website. Would you agree? I I wouldn't know. I seem to they have to use the website to submit a claim. So I suggest maybe they do know at some point um because after they've made the claim, they're told a series of things. So for example, when you make a claim with respect to a pothole, is it your understanding that the claimant has to provide the measurement of the pothole, the depth of the potholes, and those details? Are you aware of that? It's it's helpful if they do, but sometimes I understand it's not possible because the location of the pothole. Okay. Because I was going to go there like would you expect them to measure the dis depth when traffic is going speedily by? Are you aware that that's an issue for some residents as such because the respondent at claims pro will ask for that detail. Are you aware of that? There is uh uh questions that the the adjuster will ask. Yeah. Um and and ideally the answers are as complete as possible. uh but uh we also rely on reports from transportation as well. So it's not uh absolutely imperative. The more information the more helpful it is. So I gather what you just stated that information from transportation could be utilized to support a claimant's claim. Yes. Okay. Because many of my residents have not had that feature benefit at all. So that's very helpful. Um, I wonder is there a way that the process could actually be made easier from a time perspective and just the process? So, it takes I don't know what the average is, but some of my residents have waited over almost 9 months and some over a year to get a response back from claim pro. Is there a way that we could shorten that time period through the chair? Um it it it all has to do with u the volume of claims. Um the adjusters um do have to receive a report from transportation. Um to determine whether minimum maintenance standards were followed that kind of thing and depending on the volume uh uh it can take several months unfortunately. Gotcha. Thank you. Through this process you've used a fair fairness monitor. Was that you? And can I ask why? I I think it I think that we use a fairness monitor whenever um you know we're choosing one proponent. Um and we've done that for over a decade. But in this case, were we choosing one proponent or did you have more than one? You took you selected one. Sorry, Mrs. Shery. Uh through the chair. Uh so fairness monitors as you know are used in delicate instances and we felt that this would be one of those instances because it does it is risk to the city. So we have to provide that extra layer of comfort. Okay. Thank you. Those are my questions. Thank you councelor Thompson. Other questions of staff on this item? Seeing none. I had one I wanted to ask about. So, with regards to I'm pretty sure it's claims pro. I've had residents, they hit a they hit a pothole and they file a claim and it's denied. And when and they've reached out to my office and said it's been denied because our staff have either put an orange ring around a pothole or you know our staff put a pylon on a pothole in the middle of a road and then you know driving the speed limit. You don't see the orange ring around a pothole. kids move the pylons off the road and then their claim is denied and I don't understand the rationale for that. I've been told I've been my residents have said they've been told by our insurance company that it was reported and city have identified it. So we're no longer negligent or we're not we're not responsible for it because it was filed with the city and they've gone out and looked at it. I don't understand how that works and I don't think my residents understand through the chair. Um, as I mentioned, our website does in great detail explain the pothole process and explains how the provincial minimum maintenance standards uh part sort of the the guideline which we must follow in making decisions about deny or approve. Uh so the city has to uh demonstrate they've patrolled the roadway uh a certain number of times depending on the the classification of the roadway and it also dictates uh if if once a pothole is reported or discovered how quickly it has to be repaired. Um so it it it's all based on the provincial minimum maintenance standards and whether or not the city has adhered to them. So those sorry the minimum maintenance standards are they're created by the province and we adhere to them. How often do we give feedback to the province about you know this is what's going on you need to change them or review them. How often do we do that? Do we ever do it? I I don't recall ever being consulted. No. No. So if you so myself as a counselor, I'm bringing this forward to you that it's a concern for a lot of my residents who on the staff side gathers my input and then contacts the province and says, you know, this is an issue that we're having residents in Toronto are having with the minimum maintenance standard. It maybe the province should consider reviewing it. Is that done or is that something I have to literally put a motion forward to direct you to do? Like do they ever ask for feedback through the chair? There is a an association called the Good Roads Association. Yep. I'm on the board of directors. You're on the board. Well, that association uh from time to time will review the regulations and make recommendations to the province. Yeah. But that's the answer. But even for myself sitting on that board, my residents aren't calling me because I'm on the board of directors of Good Roads. They're calling me because they hit a pothole and then staff tell me, "Well, we're not responsible for that the damage to their car because we put an orange circle around the pothole until it gets repaired." Or, you know, I had I had a pothole in my street the other day. I drove around the corner. It had four orange pylons in it that kids were in the process of taking out of the side street roadway it was on because it was a fun thing to do for kids. So when they call me and I say that and then I call you like who gathers that? So when I say I have an issue like I'm telling you this issue now, nobody on your side of the table is going to contact the province and say, you know, this is what's happening with the minimum standards. Maybe they need to be reviewed. It could be. So counselor, I I may jump in really quickly because I think we're crossing over into a couple of different things. I think one thing is we do have capital asset management plan. Well, no, sorry, Mr. Confory. what I'm saying. We're going to approve a process for claims that I have a lot of issues with and I think every counselor around this table would agree with me that they have the same issues with their residents. And so there's a glaring issue and we're about to approve an you know an insurance adjusting service to deal with an issue that I don't I would like to know how that discrepancies get dealt with and I'm not just going to approve something and when my residents have their axle fall out of their like their car has $5,000 of damage because they hit a pothole and when they go to the claims adjuster and the claims adjuster said, "Well, we can't help you because that was reported last week. Staff put an orange circle around it or or a hole over it." And then my staffer, my residents are going to come to me, really like I just outlined all of that to you and then two weeks later you approved an adjusting service that's just going to continue that. So I'm trying to understand if I'm having those issues, my colleagues are having those issues, how does it get brought to the proper authorities's attention? Yeah. And if it doesn't, I would like to understand how we do that because otherwise we're just going in circles. Yeah. So happy to. So maybe we can chat further. I guess the point I was looking to raise is there's minimum standards that are brought forward by the province. The challenge that we face and some of the information that we collect through this process is around the condition of the roads and the efforts that we're taking to manage that. If your concern is really around the the approach provided to our adjusters in terms of when they're looking at those claims, happy to take the feedback and look at our program and how we may be able to incorporate that in the direction we give our claim adjuster as they're as they're reviewing. But I guess Mr. 40. What I agree with that, but what I just heard from our staff when I outlined what my concern is and they pointed to minimum maintenance standards that are run by the province. So we have no authority to change that minimum maintenance standard because they're mandated by the province. Chair chair. Um, as I said, the minimum maintenance standards uh are are reviewed by the Good Roads Association and they make recommendations to the province. Uh, the I understand that, but my residents aren't calling the Good Roads Association. They're calling me, right? And if I said to my residents, I'm really sorry you have $5,000 damage to your car. I'm gonna call the Good Roads Association and ask them to call the province. I know where that's going. Tony, we're we're going in circles. I'm over my time. Thank you. Uh sorry, other question. Sorry, speakers on this. Councelor Thompson. Well, Mr. Chair, thank you. And I think you've, you know, hit some of the points there. And let me just thank the staff for this report or both reports. There's uh 5 and 720 GG275 and 277. Um the reason why I asked questions about this matter wasn't so much about the actual contractual uh engagement and to continue with claims pro but it is with um the issues that uh many many of my residents have faced and uh unfortunat unfortunately for me I also faced it a couple of years ago as well. I was actually asked to go and measure the depth of the uh pothole, measure the um distance from the curb to where it was. I literally went with the tape measure, did it myself. I can't imagine some of the residents in my ward having to do that. And I appreciate the fact that there's information on on the website and so on. And maybe us as counselors, we need to do more as well to inform our residents. And because I've been trying to do that since that particular experience, but unless you've had that experience, what the average um uh residents have, you don't really understand the challenges that they face and so on. Some of them are not as computer savvy, for example. You have to upload, you have to provide all this details to claim and clearly not their fault. They're an entity that's providing a service to the city. There's a fee for service that we provide to them and so on. Um I I just think that perhaps we could do a better job and also the time that it takes to get a claim um approved actually in in my case and I just that process it took over nine months and um it also took um I think one to at least two two staff changes at claims pro. So one person left another person took the files. yet to almost go through not completely almost go through the same process again. I just really wanted to bring that forward. Um I don't have a motion at this time, but I'm going to think about what I could do bringing this to council and then maybe asking our staff to kind of look at how we can work with claims. As I said, it isn't their fault. Obviously, they're relying on us to ensure that we can provide them with information to help them to be able to um you know to to deal with the time response and or to deal with the process much smoother and so on. So, I think that there's more work to be done there given the fact that we've had numerous situations where residents have had lost their axles and yes, it is $5,000 to do the repair and they're have to come up with that money out of pocket before they can actually get uh a refund from claims pro and so on so forth. So, I just think it really um it it's incumbent on us to ensure that we increase or accelerate the the the timeline and decrease the delay and so on. Um I I've looked at the numbers. I don't have a problem. I don't know firsthand whether or not an annual amount of $6 million, it's $32 million that was actually here. There was um a a a an issue that I had noticed and maybe it's just an issue around language in the report itself where in one case it speaks to an up to limit of I believe it was $32 million and the other case it it had an amount. So there are two different things which is up to and specific amount. So I wondered why that was written in the report in the manner that it was done because I think it would have been better to at least clearly stating what the cost would be. So for example on page um uh 205 here it talks about the potential costs to the city as estimated at 30.461 million. And then in the previous page to that, it had it talks about the um from the dates April 1st, 2026 to March 31st, 3031. And you're talking about a contract in the amount of 30 million, but yet um on the other page it says the potential cost is estimated at. So which is it? Is it an estimate or is it an exact amount? So I just I mean maybe it's a language thing but that for me doesn't help me because are we paying the 30 million or are we paying up to it or is it even higher than that? Now obviously it's a contract so typically it wouldn't be higher than that unless you came back to us for an amendment at some point but again it's just perhaps the language and what's written here how it's stated be more helpful to us. Uh this is just a point. I'm just not castigating you, just simply saying maybe it could be a little clearer for us because we're reading these things. I know Mr. Sure, we'll wrap up and say we're reading these things whether or not it's on the weekend or late night and so when you see this it's like you can't call you at that point say hey can you clarify this for me so I just wanted to bring that to your attention and again claim pro claim pro as an organization I have nothing critical no no negative any any comments about them they do their job but I think perhaps we need to have an opportunity where we can make it a lot easier for them which would then effectively be easier for our own constituents and make it easier for them to make claims which we know they're going to make. Those are my comments and I can move both the items, Mr. Chair. Okay. Thank you, Councelor Thompson. Other speakers on this item. Seeing you're hearing none. Uh so I'm going to speak last. Uh I'm actually going to ask for a recorded vote on this item. Uh I'm not comfortable voting for it. Uh I don't have any issues, as councelor Thompson was just saying in a similar vein. I don't have any issues with uh claims pro um per se. Um, I have a lot of issues around this whole insurance process around potholes and damage to cars gets done. As I elaborated earlier, you know, if I hit a pothole and I notify 311 and they issue an SRO number, somebody, and I've raised this before with transportation services, uh, you know, somebody from the staff either goes out and paints an orange cone, paints an orange circle around the pothole or, you know, I have a side street in my ward the other night. They put four orange cones in a pothole and it was a large pothole and the kids were the kids were pulling it out after an afterchool event and I was like chasing the kids trying to get the cones back to put them on the pothole cuz I knew exactly what was going to happen. Somebody was going to hit that pothole and it was a large one. Four four traffic cones in it in a school zone. I know for dollars to donuts lot there's going to be people hitting that pothole filing a claim and then our insurance adjusters are going to say well that was filed already counselor aign serves so we're going to deny your claim and then they're going to call me and I'm going to have the conversation about minimum monthly standards that are set by the province and they don't get reviewed they don't get changed and I've had instances of residents on Kingston Road where the speed limit's 60 kilometers and they hit a pothole and my staff have sent me pictures. Staff have sent me a picture and said like after I asked why was the claim denied and staff sent me a picture they're like well there's an orange ring around the pothole. Your resident driving 60 kilometers in a 50 zone should have seen the orange ring around the pothole. So that's why the claim was denied. So, you know, I understand the language in the recommendation here, you know, in the amount of $30 million. My residents when they see that it's not going to be, you know, up to $30 million. It's like it's a $30 million contract and I just had $10,000 damage done to my car because it hit a pothole and it was denied because there an orange circle painted around it. And I'm not alone. I don't, you know, right across the city. I've talked with my colleagues about it. Uh, you know, I can go to the Good Roads Association. I appreciate the advice. Uh, I know what I'm going to hear. I'm going to hear, "Oh, big bad Toronto has an issue." So, for that reason, I'm not prepared to vote for this. So, thank you. So, we have the recommendations before. So, moved by Councelor Thompson. So, I have a recorded vote. All in favor? Councelor Holiday, Councelor Thompson, councelor Burnside opposed. Councelor Aninsley and that item passes. All right. So, we are on to item number seven, which was held by councelor Thompson. Sorry. Okay. Sorry, I put my microphone. I can just move uh number seven. All right. You're moving the recommendations in GG 27.7 amendment to blanket contract number 47023 575 and 4720880 issued to claims pro insurance for adjusting services. Any questions of staff on this item? Seeing none speakers moved by councelor Thompson. All in favor that carries. Our next item is number 15, GG 27.15, a portion of 550 Bay View Avenue known as the Evergreen Brick Works, Evergreen Lease Amendment and Extension Agreement held by Councelor Thompson. Councelor Thompson, questions of staff. Uh, yes, Mr. Chair, through you to staff. Um, we're looking at a 20-year lease with respect to this property in a flood plane. Is that correct? Thought I'd add that in there, the flood plane piece. and the TRCA's hearing. Yeah. Through the chair. That is correct. All right. Great. Is there any concern about uh shore in uh erosion and or anything like that at that location through the chair? Yes, we're working with Evergreen Brick Works and the city uh right now to address some of that that came about from even the July floods last year and uh uh we're working on that and there's some uh there's a program to address erosion there. Oh, fantastic. Thank you, Mr. McKenzie. Um, there is a 20 mill sorry, a 20-year uh term that has a um a $32 million opportunity cost to the city. That's about uh uh 20 years. That's about $1.6 6 million a year in revenue that we're forgoing in terms of the opportunity opportunity costs. Um would that be correct Mr. Meso? To you, Mr. Chair? Uh that is correct. And can you help us to understand um what are the benefits that will acrue to the city as it relates to Evergreen, what they do there? give us maybe an overview of um some of the overall benefits that comes as a result of forgiving this and then maybe also if you could just speak to the policy of this um process of forgiving um revenues so there's an opportunity cost or loss to the city to you Mr. Chair, first uh Evergreen, uh first I'll start in terms of the capital investment they've made as as a as a mature public steward of of Evergreen. To date, they've invested 75 million and are undertaking to invest another 16 million. In order to do that, we need to give them enough runway uh today to secure that funding. So again, um they've the it's Evergreen as a as a public steward that have made the investment in in the renewal of of the Evergreen site. Um they run a variety of different programs. Um they've run 450 annual events. They've had overund sorry over half a million visitors. They run Toronto's largest uh yearround farmers market. They do year-round recreation opportunities, youth summer camps, climate and nature uh based programs, art and car sorry Alton art and culture and heritage activation exhibits. I could go on and on and on but they do a lot. So um you would say that this is as it relates in the report it's it speaks to opportunity cost but it's an opportunity benefit based on the fact that this entity has not only sort of revitalized this area but there's a rejuvenation that has taken place that has pot that has huge impact on the overall city and those who are obviously connected to the um to this location to you. Mr. Chair, that is correct. Right. So, um the city is not simply allowing funds to be um lost as it relates in there in the report the opportunity cost. There's an opportunity there's a benefit that's acrewing to us. You Mr. Chair, that is correct. the the benefit of the capital investment and the benefit of all the the wonderful programs that they run for on behalf of the city and I would imagine as well if they have a long-term agreement with the city would help them with respect to their ability to fund raise you Mr. Chair that is correct all right and so this um amount of funds would be considered an investment that has huge benefits to the city of Toronto you Mr. Chair, that is correct. Okay, those are all my questions, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Councelor Thompson. Other questions? Councelor Saxs. Sorry, outside members. Councelor Saxs. Yeah, thank you. Um, thank you for your questions, Councelor Thompson. Um, um, back to Mr. Mtoso. Now the in the previous lease the city agreed to provide some services snow clearing bathroom cleaning and uh and so on um which you're now proposing to withdraw in the new lease. Correct. Thanks counselor. Through the chair uh the renewed agreement is modernizing various agreements between the city and uh Evergreen Brick Works. one of which is a consolidation of operations. This is at the agreement of both the city and uh Evergreen. And so yes, uh Evergreen will now be performing some of the duties and and work that the city had under the old agreement. Now when Evergreen protested this, I understand um Creme told them to go and apply for operating funding as other charitable organizations do across the city. was sympically to COOP, but COOP isn't accepting any applications. So, in other words, at a time when it's harder and harder for charities to raise money and given all of the benefits that Evergreen provides to the city, you're proposing to reduce the amount of support that Evergreen gets from the city in this lease. Correct? Through the chair, I I wouldn't characterize it in that way. Uh this lease simplifies and ensures uh in agreement with both parties uh who is doing what on the site. Uh this lease does not address the operating funding that uh Evergreen has and and the different granting programs uh that Evergreen has with the city. I will, as we have discussed, note that the city will continue to fund city work that is performed through the lease. Um, including shoveling or maintenance requirements that happen on city operated lands as opposed to evergreen operated lands. Okay. But the net result is the same, right? You said go get operating funding, but the city isn't offering any operating funding. And these changes increase their operating costs. I mean, let me put it this way. You saw what happened to Artscape. Would it be good for the city for that to happen to Evergreen through the chair? Again, I would clarify that the conversations that are going on between Evergreen and the city is right now focused on who is performing the work, not who is responsible for the work. The city has acknowledged and has confirmed with Evergreen, regardless of who is doing it, the city is responsible for it. So either either they will perform or they will fund the performance of that work and that is through the lease uh and that is based on who is responsible for the work. Okay. So then for clarity you'd support an a an amendment that clearly says that the city will continue to pay for the services such as snow clearing and bathroom cleaning that were its responsibility under the previous lease. Is that correct? Uh through the chair we are comfortable with that technical clarification. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Saxs. Other questions of staff? Councelor Holiday. Thank you, Chair. Um, I saw in the report, I think it's a $55 million investment was used to create what we have for the Evergreen Brick Works, but that was outdoor and indoor type work. Does anyone know the value of the hard infrastructure there, the buildings? even approximately as a proportion of the 55 million. T Mr. Chair, we'd have to get back to you on that. Councelor Holiday, would it be safe to say it's multiple millions of dollars though? Like it is quite a bit of work happened there. Um just based on investment, yes, I would say yes. Who put the money into it? uh through the chair. The original contribution from the city was just the the lease agreement, right? Uh with the significant amount of capital contribution being through various levels of government and fundraising. Fundraising is it not a not for-p profofit that runs the the brick works? That is correct. Okay. And just generally speaking, it it's lots of visitors a year come there, right, to enjoy the buildings and the lands. Could you just give a quick overview of how many people come and what they do there and what the types of events are uh through the chair there's about 500,000 people that go through there and they take through uh um as as we said farmers markets youth programming summer camps some educational programs there's a variety of different uh uh community programs that take place there and and that's right at the the level of the Dawn River right because this was an old clay brick quarry beautiful yellow clay Okay. So that that's down in the river valley, right? Like right right at zero level at the river. Is that right? Roughly it's not up the hill. Does anyone know through the chair? Yes. Uh to councelor Holiday. Absolutely. It's in the Dawn Valley and uh it is in the riverine in the flood plane and it it's supported and fully aligned with the river valley strategies. I forgot the name of the official document or is it not? So there's been special permissions that are um part of this and that are referenced in the existing lease and or that's proposed to be updated and uh that is uh that those directly relate to flood protection and mitigation that have been uh that have been uh at work for uh the time that the lease has been. So the the TRCA's general approach, if I can make it as simple as pro, you know, is to naturalize the river valleys because of the flooding and the trees slow down the current. They hold all the banks in place. That's the general idea of of these plans. Is that is that fair? Is simple, you know, maybe it's oversimplified, but is it fair through the chair? There's a number of heritage attributes here too that have to be taken into account. So there has been work on the ponds that uh I think a lot of people visit in the trails around the ponds that are well loved and visited along with the parking lot. But a lot of that has been done with the uh intent of protecting the investments and making sure that the site is futurep proofed and that uh flooding risks are minimized to the extent possible. I'm sorry the last part the flooding risks that flooding risks are minimized to the extent possible. It will still under uh high conditions flood, but it has been deliberately designed any new elements of it have been designed to be resilient to that. There's wash out protocols and uh uh there's uh protocols to make sure that there's nothing that is um uh well as as much as can be impacted on those lower levels of the building. But the yeah, what I mean by that the risks are to them to their facility. It's not a risk to the general environment of flooding. I I think what I understood is we could have a major rain event. The Dawn River rises as one would expect. Um but the flooding risk you're talking about is to to the facility itself, which is clearly a loss, but there's not a a risk to the city of Toronto downstream from that, is there? Uh it's there's there's always some minor risk, but but on erosion and flooding, we've been uh working very closely with Evergreen and the city and and parks and recreation to make sure that risk is minimized. And and lastly, like some carveouts have been provided. I think you just said there was an exception and if I do recall, there's a a deep guru uh geothermal field here uh because of the systems that are supporting. So drilled down into the ground really deep. I remember that. that's come to council a couple of times. So, there's a fair amount of infrastructure here. Yes, that's right. And I think that's uh part of this is looking and making sure all of that is recognized in an updated U agreement. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Holiday. Any other questions of staff? Seeing none, speakers, councelor Saxs, outside members. Yes. Thank you very much. Um further to my letter and thank thank you to staff. I will be I can't make a motion here, but I will do it at council. Um asking that we clarify that the city will continue to pay for what it was supposed to be paying for under the existing lease so that we're not reducing our support to Evergreen. This is an um as Mr. Mossa indicated an incredibly important organization doing great things for the city. Um and they they're not getting any granting support from the city. um they were directed to go and apply for a program that was already closed. So at least we should be not reducing the support they're already getting and looking for ways to continue to support them. And again I mean I referred to Artscape on purpose. Artscape the loss of Artscape has been devastating and losing Evergreen would be as bad and I don't want to see that happen. Thank you. Thank you councelor Saxs. Councelor Thompson. Uh yes. Thank you very much uh Mr. Chair. Um I want to thank staff for this report and Mr. Matso and staff are responding to my question. Mr. Chair, um I was here um at the outset when uh the intention and desire to start something good at this location. I was the chair of economic development at the time and uh they came in and asked questions and I think at the outset we didn't understand it quite frankly. we didn't understand the overall benefits that would occur and so on. But over time, we were able to get it and and it's I think we're going back at least 15 years ago, if not maybe I'm maybe a little less, but it's it's quite some time ago. And what we have seen is a magnificent uh facility that has huge benefits for um Torononians and others and visitors who come. Um, we know that it was an investment of about $55 million and we know all the things that have accured annually to this um particular site and the work that they're doing, the investment that they're putting in, $16 million um into improve accessibility, amenities and flood resilience and progress towards zero net zero operations and so on. These are all like important things to our city. But in addition to that, all the young people that visit as students, there's about 132 um uh schools that visit, some 9,000 plus uh young students are actually there to visit and learn about local ecology, nature, and the environment. And um you know, conser conservative the the conservative uh conservation aspect that goes through these programs are extremely important. I think that's important as well that the work that's being done with respect to our ravine strategy and so on and the trails that are around. It's really cool on a Saturday or a Sunday morning to go down there and you see all the amazing people enjoying the space which otherwise had this opportunity didn't come forward some years ago, it would just be a sort of a blight on the city. And we have also seen the improvements that have been made through the donations and the fundraising that takes place and so on. So I think it's really important. I think it's important to also understand by forgiving uh the you know the the $30 million or $32 million that the city is is is forgoing here. This is an investment actually. This is a benefit. It's about $1.6 million annually. And so we can sort of, you know, quarrel about additional elements of amounts of monies that the city can contribute and funding for other uh services and so on, but I think we should not forget that we are contri contributing significantly uh to the uh development and the ongoing maintenance and um and and operation of the Evergreen uh brick works. So that's really important. I wanted just to I guess deviate a little bit from my colleague councelor Saxs and and with great respect um I think when we compare um sort of entities to to to to the evergreen um I think one was a real estate play. This is an environmental play stewardship and so on so forth. And so when we look at um what has happened uh with respect to uh the entity that was a real estate play um there were huge risk and in fact the city was responsible for backstopping a lot of their mortgages and so on that we actually did here and of course we know what has transpired and so on and I know great efforts were being made to tr try to figure out how to save it and we were not successful per se but I think here with respect back to the brick works. I think we can do more and I do don't disagree with you quite frankly. Um but I also think it's really important for us to point out that we are doing significant uh amount in terms of our contribution and uh for giving the uh the you know the $30 million um over the 20-year period. That's a huge benefit and it also helps this entity to raise funds as well uh to invest in its operation. And so, um, I'm happy the report's here. I'm happy that the lease is being extended. And I'm also happy that, uh, the city is making a contribution by foregoing and the opportunity cost of, um, the 1.6 million annually and so on. So, with that, Mr. Chair, I'll I'll move the uh the item. Thank you, Councelor Thompson. Uh, other speakers on this item? Councelor Holiday. No. All right. I don't see councelor Burnside. Um, so I'm going to take So I'm very happy to support this. Uh, once again, in similar vein, councelor Thompson, I remember voting on the first lease uh 20 years ago, 2007. Um, I have a technical amendment that I need to move and I'm going to put it on the screen. The the clerk actually just handed it to me. I said, "I have a technical amendment for you." And I said, "More than happy to move it." I said, "Maybe I'll just sneak in 50-year lease instead of 20-year lease." As a technical amendment, maybe nobody will notice over on the the staff side. But the clerk said I couldn't do that. It was beyond technical. Um, you know, I'm very uh proud, very happy of all the work that happens at the at the brick works. I always encourage everybody uh evergreen.ca is an amazing website. It talks about everything that happens at the brick works, all of uh their activities that they do year round, uh 365 days a year. Uh I like the the kind of clause in it where it says Toronto's biggest patio. Um but you know, there's so much going on in the brick works each and every day of the year. Um I was actually uh just talking about the brick works last week. I was in uh Washington DC as part of an environmental economic group called the Great Lakes St. Lawrence Cities Initiative and the I was talking with the mayor of Cleveland, Ohio and um we were having coffee with a bunch of America mayors and uh he was raving about our waterfront and he said you know there was a brick factory in the middle of Toronto. He goes, "It operated 150 years ago." And then he went on all about the brick works and everything that that happened. It was great to see that we're getting, you know, North Americanwide attention, probably international wide attention for everything that happens at the brick work. So, I'm very happy to support it and uh looking forward to their continued work. Thank you. So, we have a an amendment before us. All in favor? Item is amended. All in favor? That carries. And then we're on to our last item of the day, which ironically has to do with snow. GG 27.19 emergency non-competitive contract with Weber Infrastructure Management Canada Limited for snow removal services held by councelor Holiday. Councelor, question to staff. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. The snow removal, I think it was, I think, is still relatively new for us. And I wanted to know exactly what the physical work was that the contractor performed through you, chair. Um, so it was removal of snow along the curb lines of the G Valley Parkway and the Gardener Expressway. They used a series of different pieces of equipment, primarily being a large snow blower, which they would blow into dump trucks, but they also had front end loaders and skid steers, as well as the appropriate traffic safety control vehicles. Okay, that's helpful. So, this is only expressway clearing. Is that right? Uh they did a little bit on College Avenue as well to uh expedite the removal to ensure that street cars weren't going to be obstructed. Okay. So the physical work was the loading of snow into the back of dump trucks. Can you tell me uh I mean roughly like what are the the pieces that add up to the 959? Is it is it equipment or is it done by the the linear meter? H how is this tallied up? How do you know that this is the right price? It's an hourly rate per the various pieces of equipment. So an hourly rate for each piece and how are the number of pieces determined? Uh through you chair. Uh we have uh done that removal previously. So we have history on what would make up a snow removal team and that would have been what we asked them to bid on. So it would be I I take it I heard a big snowb blower, some front end loaders, a collection of dump trucks, a collection of trucks. You don't go into the numbers of staff. You just you just say I want this this grouping of equipment and away they go. That's correct. Most of the equipment comes with an operator. Um there was a supervisor as well as part of the team. uh more generally uh this is an area of high traffic are these are our expressways at least I mean I don't know how the upload factors into this but for the time being these are places where the piled up snow is an issue right so why why is the piled snow an issue why did you choose snow removal here through the chair the the snow itself acts as a bit of a ramp excuse me oh yeah and could if a vehicle for whatever reason went up that ramp, they could find themselves falling over the the guide rope, which actually happened in Kitner on December on January 26. Uh, an occupant died in a similar crash as a result of this type of snow ramp. Pretty sure it happened in Tobico, too. Um, okay. Uh, and so that was the purpose of this. Why Why is this new? Like why is it before us then as an un uh sorry I get the right words here an emergency non-competitive like I would have thought this would be basic stuff that we do all the time or is it not all the time and and why now why trigger now um it's snow removal is through the chair is is done periodically um depends on the amount of snow this past season we had two significant events totaling approximately 90 cm of snow so it was much more in accumulation that we've had recently. But when we do see those amounts of snow, we do removal on the the gardener and the VP to prevent that hazard from existing. Uh basic questions again, back to our snow, I'm guessing going to call them snow contracts. Did we ever have provisions for any snow removal capacity? And how does that relate to removal in these locations? And why and why back to emergency non-competitive uh through the chair? There's there is some snow removal in our existing contracts as well as in-house staff that uh do snow removal. Uh in the case this year, it was the sheer volume and the necessity to um remove the snow as as quickly as possible. Um, as part of our recently approved major snow event response plan, one of the uh recommendations is to consider additional resources or surge equipment or surge staff. Um, and we we looked at the MCR and we deemed that that this was an approvement case to do that. Okay. We're not going to answer this today, but how would you propose that myself and members of the public? Really get a good understanding of what snow removal means, where it occurs, why it occurs, what the trigger is to make it occur, and then how we value figure out the value of all of this extra work. Because right now it's it's kind of like emergency, mushy, reactive. But if this is something that's going to be committed to at this level because I know this is just a slice of it, how would you propose I get my head wrapped around it so that I'm comfortable or not uh with what the city is doing? Um through through the chair I I think the first thing to do is is the new uh major snow event response plan. It does provide uh an overview of snow removal and the triggers associated with um implementing snow removal across the city which is basically we start to monitor it at when the forecast is about 25 cm or greater. Um we know at that point particularly if we've had previous snowfalls that we'll probably lose capacity of our roads and therefore need to commence snow removal. Thank you. Councelor Holidayiday, Councelor Thompson, questions. Uh yes, thank you uh Mr. Chair through you to staff non-competitive contract with Weber. So was it an issue of timing as to why it couldn't be competitive simply? So through the chair, um because of the amount of snow that we'd seen over that condensed period of time, we needed some additional capacity to be able to free up and do snow removal. So what we did was we took the opportunity to we do have a just to be clear on on council holiday's questions, we do have a sorting and plowing a winter services contract which services the DVP and the gardener. Uh we have our own contract for that. What this enabled us to do was by essentially using one of MTO's contractors who deals with the 400 series highway, we brought them in to deal with the expressway clearance which enabled us to free up our own contractor to go and work on local streets. So, it enabled us to speed up the whole snow removal operations. Well, thank you because that's where I was going to get to because in my own ward, for example, you've uh cleaned up Elmere where we have the bridge or we you've done uh Lawrence Avenue and other areas in the ward which facilitated that. So, this is part of that process, but it doesn't really explain that in the report, does it? No, no, you don't have to look now. It's just But it's a more rhetorical question. I again I just want to make sure that we we we really you look this is a good thing quite frankly and I think you need to shine the light on this good thing because it it saved a lot of people aggravation move the snow getting out of the way people are able to walk traverse and so on so forth. I just hope that we can really highlight these things in a much more uh in a fashion that really demonstrates our awareness and our responsiveness because that's part of the issue. Um the question though that I have when you remove the snow you take it to a place to deposit to store it. How do you make that decision? And the reason why I asked the question because I'm assuming it will melt. It will run off somewhere. Where does the runoff go to? How do we kind of ensure that the salt that's all incorporated in that is not going into the tributaries and our water system and so on? Or do we ensure or do we care? So through the chair, yes, we do ensure and we do care. The city has five designated snow dump sites which we utilize to store that snow and they have the protections in place. Right. By the way, I know we care. I just said I wanted to make sure that you responded that way to ensure that the public understands that. Um so will we then bake this in as part of our our our program for snow clearing? um that is um allocate the funding from a budgetary perspective and so when we need to bring that service in we would just bring it in without having to come back and amend and or now giving you permission to having spent those funds and can you project that so through the chair I mean in simplistic terms the answer is yes we we will do that and we'll do that in two ways we'll be bringing a report forward later this year with our uh summary of of our winter service this year and the lessons learned and we'll be making some recommendations as part of that of things that we can do to improve further but then also we'll be taking those lessons learned and building them into the new contracts as well. So could I ask you please your professional opinion have we done a better job this year than the previous year in terms of snow clearing, snow removal, responding to the needs? and we know that we've had record snow in our history this year. Have we done that? And are you satisfied with the work that you and your team has done? So through the chair, certainly in my opinion, we've done a we've done a better job than we have on previous years. Um and that's in large part to the major snow response plan that we had in place which was discussed at council previously. That worked very well. approaching it as a one city emergency um had huge benefits. Coordination across multiple divisions uh enabled us to be far more responsive and have far more equipment and boots on the ground out there getting rid of getting rid of the snow. So I think yes absolutely it's been it's been better than previously. Are we all the way yet there yet? No, we're not. We we've identified improvements based on our experience so far this year that we want to make and we'll be bringing those forward to council in the summer. So I can call you on that miss Curtis when my residents give me flack and says it hasn't been better that it has been better because it's my view as well that it has been much better than previous years and but certainly it's not perfect but it is has been much better. Thank you and your team. Thank you council. Uh councelor Burnside do you have any questions? I sure do. Thank you uh Mr. Chair. Um so okay so this is an emergency non-competitive contract. Was there an opportunity to do a forget the emergency part but just a snow removal contract for this year? uh through the chair uh we given the timing once we had the approval of the major snow event plan in November December of last year it it didn't really lead us enough time to prepare a a dedicated snow removal contract um for things like the uh Dawn Valley and Gartner. Having said that, um that is something that we're looking at right now potentially a roster of contractors that we could draw on on the go forward rather than doing an emergency a non-competitive procedure. Well, I'm not worried about the emergency part or the non-competitive part. Sorry. So, let me just rearticulate that if I can. Um you you took resources off the the highways and put them into the city. Yes, that's correct. Okay. So, what I'm what I was trying to get at or I'm trying to understand is was there or is there an opportunity, let's even say for this upcoming year to actually put in place snow removal contracts. I seems to me that's the thing that's missing and and I think uh Mr. Curtis and I talked about that report where it would be aboutund up to $130 million for a snow removal contract. But I just want to understand is there that opportunity to have a snow removal contract irrespective of the scope could be small could be large. Is there that opportunity through the through the chair? So the city manager and MVU's report came forward to city council in 2025 as you're aware that outlined a number of uh options around snow removal. City Council determined to uh not move forward with any additional snow removal contracts at that point in time. As staff, we are guided and directed by the will of council. Okay. Yeah. Sorry. And and thank you. This isn't really a criticism of you. I'm just trying to understand that council made the decision not to enter into snow removal contracts for this past year and as of now has not entered into any snow removal contracts for last year. It just seems like there have been statements from certain people uh non-staff that um they're waiting for this current snow clearing contract to expire. But I'm just trying to understand if there's what the impediment is to entering into a snow removal contract before the snow clearing contract actually expires. Is there one other than money? Other than money. So through the chair, I I think you've hit the nail on the head. It would be money that would be the would be the criteria and whether council wanted to move forward with additional snow removal contracts. As you are aware, our existing winter services contracts do enable us to to do snow removal and that's what we've been doing over this past um season. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Council Burnside. Uh I believe that is all the questions. Councelor Holidayiday, you held the item. Um thank you, Chair. Um I I will support the report. I I'm actually grateful that staff used a methodology to use uh somebody else's another government's contractor. I hope that the procurement processes in the future would allow you know maybe for the ability to for the city to access a provincial vendor of record and you know those sorts of things take time. Um, but I wanted to ask questions about snow removal because it's not that it's brand new, but I think what was done this past winter is relatively new. And I think what we're really talking about here is issues around snow storage in our city. And that is an issue on because of two things. The first is either poor design or poor planning and that is possible that people made choices in the past and they didn't think out where the snow was going to go or more likely uh calculations were made. In other words, the land needed for snow storage was decided to be used for something else. Now whether that is to put a building on to put uh other transportation infrastructure such as parking or other things, somebody made the choice and here we have a situation where there isn't enough places to put the amount of snow that fell. The reason why I'm additionally interested is because I think this is only a tiny window into the cost of snow removal. I suspect it's in the multiple tens of millions of dollars for the type of events we had this year. Uh, and I've seen different things. We We've all lived through those snowstorms and we know that, you know, there was snow accumulated at corners and it was hard to walk and it was hard to see at times and there was so much snow built up at really busy intersections that it was a problem. And then I saw other things that I'm not really sure I fully understand at this point. I saw snow removal along long uh arterial roads. Some of them were back lots. There was no driveways. there was snow storage and yet the snow got removed and and some of it occurred like really recently before the last little snap of hot spell but you know while the weather was improving and so Mr. Chair, what I would say is I I just don't fully understand all the decisions that were made, especially towards the end of the process this year. And so it just begs questions about what it is we intend to do, the problems we're trying to solve, how we got here, and what this looks like going forward. If this is something that is to be sustained and at great cost, um I think we should zero in a little bit more on on the why and how and how the decisions are made. And maybe in my speaking, I'm just signaling to staff is that there's more work to be done with members of council and the public so that we have a clearer understanding of what it is we're setting out to achieve as a city. and constantly evaluating whether or not we did over or under of what was required just because of the sheer price involved and the time involved. So I thank the opportunity to speak. I don't have a motion on this but you know I think there's more discussion which is needed. Thank you. Thank you councelor Holiday. Any other speakers on this item? Seeing none. Council Holiday moving the recommendation. Councelor Holidayiday is moving the recommendation number 19. All in favor? That carries. That was our last item of the day and we still have the bills. So don't Councelor Thompson, would you like to read the bills? Yes. that conf that the confirmatory bills to confirm the legislative proceeding of the general government committee acting under delegated authority at uh meeting 27 on March 9, 2026 be declared as bylaws and passed subject to section 226.9 of the city of Toronto Act 2006. Thank you, sir. All in favor? That carries. That's it. We're done. Thank you everybody. Meeting adjourned for a great meeting.

Full Transcript