Good morning everyone. My name is Osma Malik and I'm uh deputy mayor uh and um vice chair of the executive committee and clerks have informed me that we do have quorum and I'm now calling meeting 31 uh to order and welcome to everybody. Today's meeting is being held by video conference and in person at city hall in committee room 1. And this meeting is also being livereamed online at youtube.com/shano city council live. And although uh we may be meeting in different locations today, the committee would like to acknowledge that the land we are meeting on is a traditional territory of many nations including the Missagas of the Credit, the Anesnab, the Chipoa, the Hodnosoni, and the Wendat peoples and is now home to many diverse First Nations, Inua and Matei people. We also acknowledge that Toronto is covered by Treaty 13 with the Missosagas of the credit. If you are registered to speak at today's meeting, please listen for me to call your name. Um, we'll call speakers in the order that they appear on the list. And the list of speakers can be viewed online as always by visiting the executive committee page at toronto.ca/counsel and the speakers box for today's meeting. And if you are present in the room and wish to register to speak on an item, please come up to the glass partition located on the right hand side. and a member of the clerk's staff will come to you. Uh members, the clerk has provided all the agenda materials on toronto.ca/counsel and CMP. Uh the clerk's meeting portal and clerk's IT staff are available to members if needed. Um and of course, as always, please submit and approve your motions by email. Uh staff are available at excrronto.ca to help with that. I want to begin uh with any declarations of interest under the under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act. All right. Seeing none, we will proceed. Um and uh may I begin with having a motion to confirm the minutes from the meeting on April 15th, 2026. Um moved by councelor Perks. All those in favor? Carried. Um and now we will run through our agenda items. And do we have the speakers? All right. Our first item. Um, thank you. EX uh 31.1, expanding youth programs to create safer and stronger neighborhoods. Uh, there is a speaker on this item and we'll uh I'll hold that. Um, EX31.2 standardizing the air conditioner benefit pilot. We also have a number of speakers on that, so we'll hold that. um ex 31.3 um 838 Broadview Development Plan Update. Um there's also um speakers on that as well. Um uh EX uh 31 uh.4 uh waterfront dock walls and western beaches uh breakwater action plan update. And I will hold that item. Um, ex 31.5 adjustment to capital budget carry forward funding and future year commitments. I'll hold that. All right, we'll hold that for speakers as well. Uh, ex 31.6 remuneration and expenses of members of council and of council appointees to agencies, corporations, and other bodies for the year ended December 31st, 2025. Uh, there's also speakers on that item. Um so that will be held ex 31.7 uh FIFA World Cup 2026 Toronto implementation of the integrated regional paramedic response model and quarterly update on the community benefits plan social procurement and workforce development and Liberty Village and Fort York neighborhood plan on this item. Okay. Um all those in favor? Any opposed? And that carries. Um EX31.8 Eight. Um, uh, amendments to the TTC records retention schedule, municipal code, chapter 219, records, corporate local boards. Um, any action on that? All those in favor? Any opposed? And that carries. Uh, ex 31.9 report on Federation of Canadian Municipalities Committee meetings, February 2026. And thank you to our representatives. >> Well moved. >> Um, thank you. All those in favor? Any opposed? And that carries. EX31.10 report on Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative Confluence Forum. >> So moved. >> All right. Thank you. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Couple more. Um EX31.11 report on Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Cities Initiative. Great Lakes Day 2026 advocacy meetings Washington DC March 3rd to 5th uh 2026. I came back relatively unscathed from that. So moved. >> We're grateful for that. All those in favor. Um any opposed? And that carries. Um EX3112 report on mayors and regional chairs of Ontario Marco meetings in January and March 2026. >> It's all moved. >> Right. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Um ex 31.13 report on Ontario's big city mayors OBCM caucus meeting February 6, 2026. Happy to be there on behalf of the city of Toronto, Mayor Chow. And uh so moved. >> All those in favor? Any opposed? And that carries. Um an EX31.14 report on participation in Ontario big city mayor's OBC meetings April 1617, 2026 and advocacy day April 22nd, 2026. >> Got out of Queens Park relatively unscathed. I'll move that one as well. >> Thank you. All those in favor >> dangerous >> and uh and um that carries. >> My doctor says, "What are you doing?" >> Um all right. And then we'll uh we'll go to the first item um and begin with uh with the speakers on that and I'll hand it over. There is a quick presentation from Deputy Mayor Aninsley from representing me to all of these organizations came back with something. >> This is for you from the Great Lakes St. smart city initiative and they just want to thank you for the uh session that you held last Friday. Uh we had the mayor of uh Milwaukee, the mayor of Buffalo who was very happy to both be here. We had the mayors of Detroit, uh Shabogan, Wisconsin, and uh Rochester all online as well. Thank you very much. >> This is the Great Lakes and the St. Laurens cities initiative. We are talking about tariff and how we could connect with each other because the municipalities are stand a lot to gain if we work together. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay, we have speakers on this item one. Um Muel, you're here. You have five minutes. Miguel, how are you? >> Put the mic on though. >> Do you need some help? No, we're good. >> Okay, one second, please. I'm trying to connect my screen. >> Um, I'll get our staff to give you a hand. >> Hello. >> See, I saw you coming over and then you stopped. Come on over again. Oh, they're resetting something. Just Oh, here it is. No, that's the item. >> Okay, that's the item on the screen. Good morning, everybody. Uh, thank you, Mayor Chow, for addressing this important item. this which we deal with every summer. We call it a program to give our youth an employment opportunities just a program. So to this year we're going to allow 100 more youth to have an opportunity for a youth employment which is good and I like what you said to to the residents who had lost kids to gun violence that you feel them. You you know in region park we had something called the social development plan and in the year 2023 we didn't have one single debt due to gun violence because we invested in our community. We invested in our youth. However, in 2026, we are told we are putting the the program under review and we will only uh release a few thousand bucks and we had to uh understand that is the way it's going to be in 2026. So, Mayor Chow, I I I beseech you to review the decision of the SDFA that is not releasing the proper funds to allow our community to escape which which I have told you guys time and time again that the roots of violence is poverty. I'm speaking today as a parent and the screen you have in front of you are my children. the the the middle the middle kid is going to Centennial College and she's stuck with OSAP bills, OSAP. This my son the same. He is going to college as well and he's stuck with OSAP charges. I mean um debt. So why don't we pro I propose the following as a regent part neighborhood association member. I propose scholarships since not everybody will qualify. So in view that the government of Ontario has screw up our youth and uncle D for is now willing to release funds. I I beseech you to consider scholarships that will give opportunity for our kids to have a better future or we can always upload the police budget to the to the province and that way we can release funds to help our poor our youth and not make it a program. Instead, it should be a a priority for the city to invest in the youth month after month, season after season. I am glad we're doing something for the winter showing program to to hire youth and members of the community. That's wonderful. I know we are addressing it, but it's just a t a tip of the iceberg. We are not addressing the full the full matter. So, Mayor Chow, uh, if you if next month is going to is going to be indigenous month, and I want to recommend that any job creation is giving priority to to indigenous people and to our youth. Save save ours up and keep speaking for the residents and in your second term for for the kids. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miguel. Congratulation of smart kids in college. Good stuff. >> Yeah. Make good babies. >> Any questions to deputent? Seeing none. Any question to the staff? Any question to the staff? Yeah. Deputy mayor Marley. >> Sorry, Madam Chair. I was just highlighting uh councilor Shen online has his hand up. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I don't have that. Okay. >> Uh oh, yes. Sorry, I didn't see you. Okay, council Shan, >> thank you. Um, thank you. Um, so just on on the on the youth programs uh to create safer and stronger neighborhoods. Just wanted to ask u if um there's been any uh thought about how the selection process would work. I know this is coming up pretty quickly and and if there's any um thinking around what happens post summer, would that be incorporated in some of our post uh employment support programs? >> So through you uh chair. Yes. So we will be uh lading opportunities into our six other youth employment programs that currently serve over 3,500 youth. And as part of this one-time initiative, we'll be examining opportunities to continue those youth and other opportunities in the fall, which are very critical to continue. >> And um through through you, Ma Mayor, um the selection process, how would uh is there any anything new or would that be the same kind of approach around how we select who would benefit from the program? So through you, chair, we will be working with our community partners to identify youth most at risk of violence, identifying neighborhoods that are experiencing high rates of violence, identifying youth that are experiencing uh social isolation and disconnection from communities, uh and working with partners uh such as Toronto Community Housing, from school board and many others to identify the right youth for this program. >> Thank you. My final question is related to what uh what type of wraparound support would be provided for the youth because I know it's important to have youth facing multiple barriers and uh potentially justice involved as well. Uh but they would need support while they are going through employment as well. So is there going to be uh structural support uh to to take them through the employment? >> So through you chair that is one of the uh most important components of this program. The youth will be partnered with a coordinator who's also a a youth mentor. They'll be provided workforce readiness and skill building trainings. There'll be conflict resolution uh trainings, financial literacy, and other opportunities to help build their sense of belonging and uh growth. >> Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Thanks, Madame Mayor. >> Any other question to the staff? No. Seeing none, speakers, Deputy Mayor Molly. Thank you, madame uh mayor and good morning colleagues. Really glad to be with you all today. Uh I just wanted to speak in strong support of this great work uh and leadership from our mayor. Uh it's been really uh a moment of reflection, a time of reflection for me in my role as we come to the end of the term, but also in my community. One of our most um our strongest advocates and um biggest champions for youth in our community has recently retired from their from their work. And so we've been looking back at the incredible career that that that this individual has had and uh myself personally reflecting on my own journey uh in community and having sat exactly here as a youth uh speaking to executive uh about the importance of investment in young people. The reality was then council was not prepared to make the kinds of investments that youth in our city needed and deserved. Uh and the sad fact is that many of my peers were lost to challenges whether it was in the justice system or frankly lost their lives to involvement with um with issues in our city. And so to be part of a council and to be part of a mayor's leadership team who is deeply investing, who understands the importance um and the ripple effects that come along with this kind of investment, believing in our young people, giving them opportunities, showing up for them with wraparound supports like my colleague in Scarbor highlighted and pointed out and I know our colleagues um within the division and the youth serving organizations deeply understand um those connections that mentorship is transformational not only for the individuals that we're serving, but certainly for the city that we all love so much. And I'm so proud um of our record on this and the continued uh work around it. So, thank you, Madame Mayor, for your leadership and to colleagues and certainly big shout out to the youth uh the youth mentors and all those who are making this real in our communities and we're seeing really important uh and positive impacts as a result. Thank you. >> Thank you, Deputy Mayor. Anyone else? Deputy Mayor Malik. Well, thank you very much. Um, I also want to thank uh the mayor for moving this forward and I also want to thank Deputy Mayor Moley for her leadership and and her role as the youth champion on council and for taking that very seriously and bringing all of um what uh what was just shared from that experience and that journey um to continue to benefit young people in our city at uh a scale that we haven't seen before. And that is really something to be proud of. And we know that this is a step towards even more that we can do as a city. Knowing the importance of youth employment opportunities and not just the important skill building and community building, but that it is transformational in terms of the path that young people take. and for so many young people that um I have worked with in my community that it is also a path to being able to see that public service and community work and staying rooted um in the places that we love, care about, that have raised us is also a way to have a really incredible career and that is very exciting. I've heard from many families and youth in my neighborhoods who have been looking for employment opportunities. Um, I heard that when I was a schoolboard trustee and worked on initiatives uh to strengthen that at the school board and to be able to continue to bring that into our work at city council has been extraordinary. And I want to also uh share my appreciation for city staff, TCHC staff and my team who has put that commitment into action. And since last year, we have been able to pull together a number of events and workshops from con consulting with young people about what the barriers are uh to employment, the types of supports and services that they're looking for to connect them to employers. And just last week, we held um a job readiness event where we brought together partners who are helping young people with everything from how you apply, what a resume looks like, engaging with employers, um what to do, you know, as uh as you um take that step into into employment and into the job market. And at the my commitment from the very start here at city hall has been to make sure that we are using our public investments and our public dollars to create opportunities to make sure that those dollars are doing double and triple duty. Job training, apprenticeships, and work for young people in particular has been the top of that priority. And it has been amazing to see what uh what that commitment has has demonstrated and that has been in partnership with so many community organizations and advocates as well. I also want to give credit to the Toronto Youth Cabinet that has been continually uh kept this priority um on our radar and in our sightelines and that has been such an important collaboration and partnership that the mayor has been so responsive to. This very program that we are moving forward today was actually mentioned by youth development officers at the events that my me and my office were able to collaborate to work together. Um and I hope that that is an important message to all of us that this work that we are doing is reaching um our communities and the folks who need it the most. I know that we're glad to see this move forward and to continue to strengthen our commitments with initiatives like this. Thank you again. >> Thank you. Yeah, I'll take Councelor Shine. Okay, sorry. Go ahead. >> Thank you, Madame Mayor. Um, thank you, uh, mayor, for your leadership on this. Uh, this is an important, uh, step, uh, in addressing and not only youth employment and safety, but also the capacity building that we need in many of our communities. Um, you know, sometimes we get caught up in larger numbers. uh but taking a uh 100 young people from uh diverse communities uh that need support and uh and uh building capacity for them kind of creates role models and impact in those communities in significant ways that often don't get measured. So this is this is critical and I'm glad to hear uh the continued focus on on postsummer continuous uh employment opportunities and and keeping a career building pathway for many of these young people over time. Um we had a job fair by West Hill Community Association um just a couple of days ago and thousands of people showed up. Uh youth unemployment is high very high in in our city and and in fact higher potentially in in Scar Bro. So um having these career building opportunities, having exposure to certain careers um break some of the barriers that exist in in familiarity around certain positions in in knowledge around how to apply and in in having a belief that uh that uh those young people can be attached to uh city level government and and hopefully um as we continue to build pathways for them to grow into into multiple positions within the city and support and mentor while providing a wraparound support because sometimes uh getting into employment and and growing is not a linear path for many young people. It'll have certain uh you know drawbacks in between and then so we have to continue to believe and invest uh in them and this investment is critical. So, I just want to thank uh you mayor and all the staff involved and all the counselors who have been advocating for this uh hoping to see more of these programs develop to address many of the systemic challenges we face in our neighborhoods. Thank you. >> Thank Thank you. Uh any other speakers? I'm >> Oh, councelor Bravo, go for it. >> Yeah, thanks. Yeah, thank you. Um, I want to echo what my colleagues have said and gratitude to uh you, Madame Mayor, and to city staff for uh and all of the partner agencies that are uh bringing this to light to make to bringing this to make it real. Um, I just wanted to add one thing that labor force workforce uh strategies are really the purview of provincial governments. uh in Manitoba for example, the premier um of Canoe announced a massive youth employment uh program uh connected to some of their other city building and provincial building objectives um greening homes uh etc. What the city of Toronto is doing here is stepping into a space that's absolutely urgently needed but that should really be led by the provincial government about which we would be a participant. So this is another way in which the city of Toronto is using its uh money, its resources to meet a really crucial demand. And just to add that we have workforce challenges in this city. We have um you know pipelines and to all kinds of careers that aren't being uh fulfilled. Rather than looking at um young people to as a group to be fixed, this is really an opportunity to look at one of our most precious um resources which is the young people across the city in all kinds of uh neighborhoods and across the uh income spectrum to uh participate in the workforce and build the city and contribute to the economy. uh what this program will do and what the city's efforts around youth employment are doing is actually just removing the barriers uh removing the barriers to get connected to get trained and and to on the other side come out with an employment. So this is crucial and it's really about building um society and economy for everyone. Thanks. >> Thank you. Um I'll just say a few words about this. Last week or a week before I went to uh visit an agency in Scarbo called towards peace as part of the towards peace team met with great group of young people and asked them how did you get involved in the justice system? How what went wrong? They talked about quick money, easy money, give them a sense of belonging with a group of people, not necessarily good friends, but there's a, you know, there's a sense you belong to something. Purpose, finding purpose, and they're no longer bored. Maybe it's too exciting. They end up being uh caught and put in jail in charge, etc. And then how do they manage to turn their life around? And each has individual stories, but they point to a program that we've run as a pilot last year. It's called Surf TO. What does that do? It brings some of these young people together, talk to them and say there's other ways, but not talk down to them, but through very active listening, bring them into a group. There's counseling, there's music therapy or art therapy. I was watching it and um giving them help helping them to find a purpose in their lives and discover what they're really good at, find their own passion and then go for it. There's an element here that the city of Toronto is is quite unique. We have them come to be mentored by some of our city staff. So they were working with parks and recreation. Not surprising. But they into transportation. Oh, solid waste. Ah, interesting. Finding out what these eventual pathway to a career means like plumbing, film industry. Oh, interesting. Now, not just the city, now outside. So they end up cleaning up some graffiti, working in a food bank to give out some food for others, packing food. I was watching them do that. And they are serving their community which then give them a purpose, give them a sense of belonging that I am contributing to my own community. It's super hyper local which is really important but also um a sense that I can contribute you know that's the magic about it. It's through active listening through grounds up conversation through mentorship through developing young people. Now they've turned their lives around they are out there turning other lives around and transforming young people's life. My next thing is that there's something that I do that is very hard in as a mayor is holding the hands of a mom whose son have just been killed. Okay? Or the day before. This is the case of Holly Roy. Holly lost her six year old son in the middle of at midnight. They were in bed together and that bullet came in. Jave Roy really difficult. So I brought some of the moms together that have lost their kids. Have them grieve together so they know they're not alone, but have them think about what are some of the things they can do for other kids and other moms so that tragedy doesn't don't repeat itself. I want them to now connect with Solar or the youth to watch peace group because it's interesting. Solar also told me his story. He watched his 17 year 17year-old friend. He was 17 at the time dying in his arm shot. They were up to doing no good things together obviously and that shocked him and he then went and changed his life through difficult journey. I wouldn't go into it but having mom that grieved but have some hope to young people that have turned their lives of course are now lead the team that bring a lot of young people together and transform their lives and it's extremely successful and have them connect with each other hoping that they could generate lots of energy lots of hope some joy but more ideas to move this forward. So uh my five minutes are up but thank you for your support of this program. Keep listening to young people keep transforming. Yes our youth violence have dropped by 40%. Which is a good impact. Thank you so much. Um seeing no other speaker all those in favor of the item in front of you. Thank you so much. The next item is the air conditioning benefit standardizing it and there's a pilot program is 31.2. There's a lot of speakers starting with Katherine. Um, oh boy, my eyes getting bad. Wilkinson. Um, and uh, Deputy Mayor Malik. Uh, I have to run off to a media event. May I trouble you to uh, help out and share the meeting for a little bit of time. I will be back. Thank you so much. Uh, you have five minutes. >> Thank you, >> Miss Wilkinson. All right. >> Thank you very much. Um, Katherine Wilkinson, uh, you're online >> and, um, please begin when you're ready. You have five minutes and I'll let you know when you're getting close to your time. >> Thank you. Uh, good morning, executive committee members, uh, guests, uh, people watching online. You know, I really appre appreciate the collaboration of the three committees at the city bringing forward an update on this very important and timely issue and thank you for identifying the needs of tenants living in Toronto housing and Toronto seniors housing. As we know, this is not just a senior only issue. Many other vulnerable tenants lives are at risk. We hear from them every day. You do. I do as well. families with small children, children with pre-existing medical conditions that are exacerbated by extreme heat inside their units. I do hope consideration will be given to accommodating the needs of vulnerable tenants beyond seniors. I would also like to suggest that perhaps recipients of OW and ODSP uh should be informed or reminded they may qualify to receive an air conditioner through those agencies as this is not always well known particularly uh to new recipients. The numbers indicate on the charts that 86% of Toronto housing stock including Toronto seniors housing stock or 50,66 units currently do not have air conditioning. While the numbers clearly indicate the need for air conditioning, even with the new city programs and the TCHC provision of 574 air conditioning units, the demand outweighs the supplies, leaving thousands of tenants continuing to suffer during the summer heat and the extreme heat in their units. As per Mayor Chow's direction on December 8th, adopted by city council on December 16th, 2025, it was recommended that municipal licing and standards report back no later than July 26 with a maximum temperature bylaw for rental units. This is a significant next step to ensuring landlords are put on notice that such a bylaw is forthcoming and the city has provided ample notice for them to review their housing stock and most cost effective options to get their portfolios into compliance. I thank you for continuing to support the needs of renters living in the city of Toronto. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Um, Katherine, um, are there any, uh, questions for the speaker? All right, seeing none, thank you for for joining us. Our next speaker is Samantha Green, Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment. Thanks for joining us. You have five minutes and begin when you're ready, and I'll let you know when you're getting to time. I I don't think your mic is on. Um or we can't hear you properly. >> I know. >> Hello. Oh, that's better. Uh my name is Dr. Samantha Green and I'm a family doctor in Toronto's downtown east. I am also the president of CAPE, the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment. First, I am in strong support of the expansion of the air conditioner distribution program, which recognizes that the best way to protect people from extreme heat is by providing cooling where they live. There is emerging evidence from researchers in Canada like Professor Glenn Kenny that shows that cooling centers can help relieve suffering but do not reduce heat stress once people return to their hot apartments. Access access to in-unit cooling is a critical health intervention that will both reduce suffering and save lives. Providing both the cooling device and installation improves the program tremendously. But I am also extremely disappointed that we do not have a draft maximum temperature bylaw today. A 26°ree maximum indoor temperature standard paired with robust tenant protections is a critical health intervention that will save far more lives than the distribution of air conditioners. The air conditioner distribution program is insufficient and will not protect the most vulnerable. To access the program, people needed to be aware of the program, able to navigate the online forms, or able to attend one of just three in-person distribution sites. Many of my patients are unable to navigate these kinds of applications, especially the very most vulnerable. People experiencing mental health challenges and substance use disorders. Those with physical disabilities, elderly individuals, people who are busy with caregiving responsibilities or gig work, all may have missed the extremely brief application window or not had the time to jump through the required administrative hoops. That is why we need a universal policy like a maximum indoor temperature bylaw. In New Westminster, British Columbia, Canada's first city to enact such a bylaw, there will be robust enforcement through both a complaints process and inspections from bylaw officers. Cities across the United States like Chicago and New Orleans have had such bylaws for years. And of course, in Toronto, we've had minimum indoor temperature rules for decades. I have a patient who works as a superintendent in a building in the downtown east. She has multiple chronic mental and physical health conditions. She and her son live in a one-bedroom apartment in the building where she works. The building apparently has central air conditioning, but it has not worked in years. She has also noted that the window of her apartment opens onto a dusty internal courtyard, and her son's asthma gets very bad if she leaves the window open. Last summer, they suffered many sleepless nights and she sent her son to stay with his grandmother for weeks at a time to get away from the oven-like apartment. She experienced severe depression and her chronic pain condition worsened. She would not qualify for the air conditioner distribution program. She does not qualify for a program through OW or ODSP and yet she and her son are suffering. That is why we need the 26th degree bylaw. Now, extreme heat is the deadliest form of climate disaster in Canada. The 2021 BC heat dome event was the deadliest weather event in Canadian history with more than 600 deaths in just five days. And we've seen hundreds of deaths on previous occasions, for example, in Quebec in 2018. With extreme heat days projected to triple in Toronto in the coming decade, we need to act now to prevent hundreds of deaths and the suffering of thousands. >> Thank you very much. Are there any questions for the speaker? All right, seeing none, thank you very much for joining us today. Our next speaker is Anne Fu, Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment. Is an online. >> Okay. Uh we'll uh we'll go to the next speaker in the me. Thank you very much for joining us, Ann. Um please begin when you're ready and you have five minutes. I'll let you know when you're getting to time. >> Okay. Um can everyone hear me? Great. Okay. Good morning, counselors. Um, it's great to see many of you again. My name is an and I am a first year medical student at the University of Toronto, a member of the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment. Um, and, uh, a member of the Toronto Political Advocacy Committee, a group at U of Medicine that advocates on citywide political issues that impact public health. Over the past two months, we've met with several of you in regards to the maximum heat bylaw, advocating for a support of uh a 26 degree maximum allowable temperature in all rental units without passing costs on to the tenants. This is a health-based policy that is intended to ensure the safety, dignity, and survival of Toronto renters, particularly those who are chronically ill, low-income, and elderly. The expansion of the free air conditioner program for low-income seniors and other vulnerable citizens is an important initiative and it's one that I'm very grateful to hear about. I'm glad to see Toronto continuing to strengthen its heat relief program year after year in response to the growing crisis of climate change. However, despite the merits of this program, it still falls short of addressing the full scope of the extreme uh heat impacts uh that our city faces. Extreme heat is a known health risk of immense significance to the public. Already in Toronto, there is ample evidence to suggest that extreme heat incidents contribute to notable increases in mortality among elderly populations. Even by conservative estimates, it is clear from the uh testimonies of tenants, tenant advocates, healthcare workers, and legal professionals that extreme heat is an issue that affects far too many of our citizens and that represents a significant recurring burden on our already strained health care system. Extreme heat is also, like many public health issues, readily avoidable with structural and political interventions. As a medical student, I've spent countless hours learning about all kinds of drugs and therapies that we can use to make patients better. But my experience has shown me that the greatest tool for preventing illness is strong public policy. More than any pill or surgery, legislation that enforces protections for citizens is what guarantees them healthy and safe futures. It's why I'm here today to urge the executive committee to urgently move towards the establishment of a maximum heat bylaw for all rental units in the interest of the health and well-being of so many Torononians. Currently, Toronto's extreme heat plan focuses on staggering sites throughout the city for heat relief through cooling centers and cooling rooms and multi-unit apartment buildings. While this is a commendable step forward, the scattered placement of these relief centers around the city means that they are not available to those who cannot travel or easily leave their rental unit due to mobility issues, household responsibilities like caregiving, lack of transportation, um, or illness. These are the individuals who are most vulnerable to extreme heat, especially when indoor temperatures can rise to be higher than outdoor ones. What's more, attendants deserve to be able to be safe from extreme temperatures while staying in their home. You cannot sleep, cook, or simply relax as you would at home in a cooling center or an apartment cooling room. Evidence from research synthesis also indicates there is a lack of data to suggest that cooling centers are effective population level interventions for extreme heat. The clear solution then is to provide cooling in homes where people already spend the majority of their time. Other jurisdictions are already on the move on a maximum heat bylaw. Um, as you've already heard, in New Westminster and BC, legislation that requires at least one room in every multif family rental unit to be below 26 degrees between 8:00 p.m. and 8 a.m. was passed just last month. Evidently, a maximum heat bylaw is not only possible, but already being implemented elsewhere in Canada. Toronto has a chance to lead the way in ensuring such protections are available to all citizens, um, which is likely to cascade down to other municipalities across the country. As a medical student, I train to be prepared to treat the many conditions my future patients may have. And I can't help but wonder how many of them may suffer from preventable illnesses caused by or exacerbated by the impacts of climate change. Rather than setting up a patchwork of programs, the best way to comprehensively ensure the safety of Torononians during heat waves this summer is through a maximum heat bylaw. I look forward to the city's continued action on the issue. Thank you so much for your consideration and your time. >> Thank you very much. Are there any questions for the speaker? All right, seeing none, thank you, Anne. Our next uh speaker is Jacqueline Wilson, uh, council for the Canadian Environmental Law Association. Uh, thank you for joining us, Jacqueline. You have five minutes. Um, please begin when you're ready, and we'll let you know when you're getting to time. >> Okay. Thank you very much. My name is Jacqueline Wilson, and I'm a lawyer at the Canadian Environmental Law Association. Climate change is causing extreme heat events to become more frequent, more lengthy, and more severe. The impacts of heat on people living in Toronto are dangerous and they're unfair. 619 people died from heat exposure in 2021 in British Columbia. 98% of those deaths occurred indoors. The chief coroner of British Columbia specifically identified indoor temperatures as the primary cause of injury and death during that heat event. What they said was, "During this time, hot air became trapped indoors and continued to rise over time. Although outdoor temperatures decreased overnight, residences did not cool off, exposing people to harmful high temperatures for extended periods of time. The BC Center for Disease Control identified that people were most in danger when indoor temperatures remained above 26° throughout the heat event. We're supportive of expanding the air conditioner benefit. It gets cooling into people's homes where it's needed. It's reflective of those findings by the BC coroner about indoor temperatures being the harm. Everyone who receives an air conditioner unit is safer in their homes and the proposal to include uh units delivery and installation is uh promising and should be passed. We note though that the direction passed by city council in December 20 uh 25 was for a proposed maximum temperature bylaw for rental units in May 2026. We can appreciate the complexity of the issue and in particular the frustrations about the provincial residential tenencies act regime and the above guideline rent increase regime, but we're concerned about delay and urge the city to move forward expeditiously on the bylaw. The costs of doing nothing are very high, including the health and safety of people living in this city. Let us not lose sight of the fact that this is a public health intervention and tenants lives are at risk. We've outlined in our written recommendations um some of our uh some of the ways to mitigate the cost to tenants in more detail. The residential tenencies act regime allows for a maximum 3% above guideline rent increase per year. Tenant advocates have stressed and that some lord some landlords are already seeking the maximum every year and will not be able to seek more than that. The focus of any complimentary measures at the city level associated with this bylaw should be on additional above guideline rent increases. We also wanted to note that section 26 sub5 of Oreg 516006 prevents landlords from seeking an above guideline rent increase for capital expenditures if they've received any grant or financial assistance other assistance is the wording in the regulation from any level of government. So, in brief um but with more detail on our written submissions, we recommend a few uh complimentary measures. At the same time as the bylaw, establish a new tenant support program which specifically provides financial assistance to income eligible tenants facing an above guideline rent increase if it's associated with this program. Enhance funding for the existing Toronto rent bank and emergency energy fund. Review and increase funding for City of Toronto retrofit programs. There's a list um in our written submission of the retrofit programs available to landlords. Ensure that the programs are easy to access and provide access to mechanical cooling. Not all of them do. Establish city supports. Um I hesitate to use the word concierge, but set up a city staff person in an implementation period to help landlords find uh advice on what they can apply for funding for. there is some available um at the federal level, at the provincial level, at the municipal level, and provide technical advice on what approaches would work well for their buildings. There's a lot of knowledge out there already about how to do these retrofits. New Westminster and British Columbia passed a maximum temperature bylaw this year. Toronto should be next. Sila's supportive of expanding access to cooling through the air conditioner benefit program. However, the overall need for indoor cooling is not going to be met through that type of program. A maximum temperature standard is urgently needed. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Um, questions to the speaker. Councelor Parks. >> Hi. Okay. So, I'm I'm looking at your brief and it it it has what you said in there, but it also says uh tenant protection so tenants don't bear the burden of the cost. >> Okay. Now the if I followed your reasoning, you're saying if a government subsidizes the installation of the air conditioning unit, then the landlord can't apply to for an above guideline increase for those costs. Did I follow that correctly? >> Exactly. So there's already a rule in the provincial regulation under the residential tenencies act that doesn't allow you to double dip. So um what might be helpful is spreading that information to tenants but you know any and it's um it's broader than grants. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Um so essentially if I follow the reasoning I don't think you said this out loud but I want to make sure I understand. Are you saying the city of Toronto should pay for all the air conditioners going into every rental unit in the city of Toronto? >> No. No. Not at all. So if we're not if the principle is tenants don't pay the way we get to that is some government pays. What are you advocating for? >> It's a combination of all of these complimentary programs. So first of all it's recognizing that the scope of the issue that we're worried about with this bylaw is only additional above guideline rent increases. It's only the 3% per year maximum which isn't going to apply in every case. Next, get some tenant support programs in place. You already have a a good system in Toronto, so enhance those programs, but in particular, a program that's directed towards this specific 3% maximum issue per year >> would be helpful, >> but enhanced Toronto Rent Bank, enhanced, you know, the energy program and then as well have landlord supports in place. >> I'm I'm following you now a little better. >> Yeah. Um, but if it's if it's a bylaw, it's every unit, right? Like we can't make a bylaw that says some units if we feel like it. It has to be all units. >> Yes, that's right. >> Okay. So, what percentage of units are currently already at their 3% Aggie? It's not very many. Like, if you're saying it won't matter for the ones that are already capped out, that's a very like the ones that are already capped out. a small number of units out of the whole rental stock in the city of Toronto. >> I think the way to approach it Yeah. >> is first of all not to um not to assume that the city can pay for all of the retrofits, right? That's that's too much money and that's not going to that's not going to happen, >> right? >> So, it's building all of these supports at the same time >> and focusing and frankly on low-income tenants. That's that's the most concern, right? That's the people who can't afford any increase in rent >> focusing in terms of the bylaw or in terms of >> No, focusing in on the uh support programs. >> So, >> so tenant support programs focus in on low-income tenants. >> So, we would have to create some kinds of means testing. >> Yeah. Lots of lots of support programs have means testing and that's a great way to do it. It targets the need where there is both need. >> Okay. >> Right. That's a that's a good uh approach. >> Okay. Has has someone to your knowledge done the work of what the size, scope and cost of that program would be >> or should we do that work? I mean, I think >> when we bring in the bylaw, it's enforcable, >> right? So, I think there's a need to uh not drive the city into paralysis, >> right, >> on this issue. >> Okay. >> So, yes, we need some supports in place. It's kind of well understood how those supports should come in at the same time, >> right? So, that the standard is in place. You already have retrofit programs for landlords. enhance those you know help like have some kind of concier service so that you can direct you know give information to landlords. This is some financial assistance you can get from the federal government as landlords of big buildings. this is financial assistance that's available, you know, like direct people, help make, you know, make this work in a better way, >> right? >> And get, you know, enhance the tenant support programs, but but include a new one that's focused on this 3% AGI maximum low-income tenant piece of it >> and >> kind of as a fail. >> The landlord would have to voluntarily agree to take the subsidy. >> Yeah, they would. >> Okay. So, one of the ways to make sure that that's um going to happen is to make it easy, have, you know, supports in place, direct people to it. Yeah. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Are there any other questions for the speaker? Uh, Deputy Mayor Morley, >> thank you. I really appreciate we love um suggestions around uh opportunities on how we can do better. So, really appreciate the thoughtful um recommendations that you've come forward with. Uh, we heard earlier from Katherine about OW and ODSP who apparently have AC unit programs or some something like that. Is that something you're familiar with and do you see that kind of fitting into some of the um suggested uh improvements? And um >> yeah, that's right. So, there's sort of um currently three different um air conditioner either free air conditioner programs or subsidy programs in Toronto. The Ontario Works Discretionary Health Benefit is available to OW recipients and ODSP recipients and it's administered by the city of Toronto, but it's a provincial program, right? >> That one is um the least well-designed because you need a prescription >> um first of all. So, that's a big barrier to the people we want to reach. Um and currently um there's a a dollar amount that's given for the air conditioner unit. That's one of the things that's in the staff report that's really um promising and should be passed because instead providing the unit installation and delivery um is is a much better approach to it. The second kind of program that exists is the Toronto Hardship Fund. The Toronto Hardship Fund uh mimics the requirements of the Ontario Works Discretionary Health Benefit, but it's for income eligible tenants that aren't on OW or ODSP. Um enhancing it and kind of making it more like the pilot um is better because it again gives you the AC unit uh delivery and installation and the hardship fund currently requires a prescription as well and we should get rid of that requirement because that's a city of Toronto program. You have control over that. >> Very helpful. Thank you so much. Those are all my questions, Madam Chair. >> Thank you very much. Any any other questions for the speaker? All right, seeing none. Thank you for your time. Um, next speaker is uh Millie Roy, Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, Ontario Regional Committee. >> Online. >> Online. All right. Thank you very much. Thanks for joining us. Uh, you have five minutes. Please begin when you're ready and I'll let you know when you're getting to your time. >> Thank you very much. Uh hello, I'm Dr. Millie Roy, uh physician and surgeon with the University of Toronto Faculty of Medicine and co-chair of the Ontario Committee of the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment or Cape. Cape Ontario is calling on the executive committee to urgently pass a maximum indoor heat bylaw for all rental units in Toronto to complement the excellent air conditioner benefit program. And this is a matter of protecting public health that will save lives, particularly for some of the most vulnerable among us. And we commend the city of Toronto for action on a heat relief strategy such as planning a cooling center and support for funding and installing air cooling units in low-income households and for previously passing the staff report that recognized the need to regulate maximum indoor temperatures. As you've been hearing, unfortunately, this will not be nearly enough to address the potential morbidity and mortality on the very near horizon. We are disappointed at the lack of a draft indoor temperature bylaw, as 2026 is expected to be one of the hottest years in recorded history between a super El Nino boosted by some of the hottest ocean temperatures on record. And this will have deadly potential, possibly costing health and lives right here in Toronto. We already know that the deadliest weather event in Canadian history was the extreme heat during the 2021 BC heat dome that killed 619 people. 98% of those died in their own homes. Most were elderly, lowincome, and had no access to air conditioning. The BC Center for Disease Control later confirmed that human health was most at risk when indoor temperatures remained above 26° C. And this sets the bar for the bylaw we now seek. So we also already know how heat stress and heat exhaustion strain our cardiovascular, kidney, and respiratory systems producing symptoms like dizziness, vomitings, uh swollen hands and feet, uh rapid pulse, and even loss of consciousness. This can progress to outright heat stroke in medical emergency as the body's sweating mechanisms, key organs, and ability to maintain core temperature all fail, leading to confusion, seizures, and possible death. The hundreds who died in BC experienced these unimaginable consequences in what should have been the safety and security of their own homes. And the same could happen in Toronto at any time with increasing odds as the climate crisis accelerates. In 2023, the second hottest year on record and worst Canadian wildfire season ever, my niece in Winnipeg gave birth to severely premature twins, a boy and a girl. It was uncertain whether the baby girl would live through her very first night, but she pulled through. Weeks later, when they were finally released from hospital, the city was enveloped in daily wildfire smoke that could rapidly trigger respiratory distress in fragile twins. Every window and door had to be kept tightly closed despite an extreme heat wave that could quickly produce stifling indoor heat, also threatening the baby's volatile health. Inhome air conditioning was crucial to their very survival. So, with all of these lessons learned, this is Toronto's opportunity and responsibility to protect some of our most vulnerable residents from what's coming. In Toronto, long-term care homes are already regulated to have mandatory air conditioning with both a minimum and maximum temperature defined at a range of 22 to 26° C. So the groundwork for this type of a framework is already laid and now is Toronto's time to lead by extending similar temperature regulations to rental units. So at this time we call on the executive committee to protect residents of all Toronto rental units by urgently drafting and ma and passing a maximum indoor uh temperature bylaw to complement the air conditioner benefit which is an excellent start. This could also form a precedent for other jurisdictions uh potentially protecting so many people beyond Toronto city limits. And as a matter of public health, with local lives at stake, we hope the executive council and city staff will address this issue with the urgency and due consideration it deserves. >> Thank you very much. Um are there any uh questions for the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Our next uh speaker is LC Telier um Arch Disability Law Center. Thank you for joining us. You have five minutes and um begin when you're ready. I'll let you know when you're getting to time. Um good morning, executive committee members. My name is Elsie Telier. I'm a lawyer at Arch Disability Law Center. Arch is a specialty legal clinic funded by Legal Aid Ontario that practices exclusively in disability rights law and serves low-income Ontarians with disabilities. Arch and our colleagues on this issue recognize that for vulnerable Torononians, air conditioning is not a luxury. Rather, it is an essential public health measure that can save lives and reduce morbidity in our city. Low-income communities across the city of Toronto are disproportionately impacted by the effects of climate change despite having a notably lower carbon footprint. As climate change progresses, extreme heat events will continue to become more frequent, more lengthy, and more severe. Right now, as the weather warms up and summer approaches, it is important to remember that extreme heat can be deadly, particularly in rental housing with no cooling. Torononians with disabilities faced heightened risks of experiencing health related consequences of extreme heat due to higher rates of poverty and isolation. Torononians with disabilities are more likely to live in low-income housing or group homes and are more likely to be homebound and thus unable to access public cooling areas. A 2025 study conducted by Public Health Ontario and the University of Toronto found that extreme heat was associated with significantly increased odds of mortality in nursing homes without air conditioning compared to those with air conditioning. The study estimates that approximately 33 people's lives were saved by air d by the air conditioning mandate between 2020 and 2023. It also estimates that had the Ontario air conditioning mandate been implemented in 2010 instead of 2020, 131 fewer people would have died on extreme heat days. The initial air conditioner benefit pilot program to distribute air conditioning units to income eligible seniors in 2025 was a success and individuals who receive the air conditioning units are safer and healthier. We strongly support the standardization of the air conditioner benefit as part of the city's overall heat reduction efforts. This program is important public health intervention and will protect recipients from the health impacts of extreme heat. As part of this standardization, ARCH asks that the inclusion criteria for the program be expanded beyond seniors over 65, people who are pregnant, and people with children under the age of one to more broadly include people with disabilities and people with health conditions that make them more susceptible to the effects of heat. The existing discretionary health program under Ontario Works is not sufficient for these communities. Alongside the standardization of the air conditioner benefit program, we want to conclude by emphasizing that this program alone alone is not enough and we therefore urge the committee to address excessive and dangerous indoor heat in rental units through the creation of a bylaw to set a maximum temperature of 26° C and all rental units. In cooling in unit cooling is essential to protect tenants vulnerable to heat from the serious health impacts of climate change and it will save lives. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you very much. Are there any um questions for the speaker? All right, seeing none, thank you for joining us today. Our next speaker is Harper Gene Tobin from the 519. Thank you for joining us. Um you have five minutes. Um, please begin when you're ready and I'll let you know when you're getting to time. >> Thank you very much. Harper Gene Tobin for the 519. As a city agency and AOK member surveying communities exposed to disproportionate risk, we appreciate the work of our city partners to respond to the dangerous levels of heat that the city's climate risk assessment called our most urgent climate threat and that Statan data data suggests is already causing excess summer deaths among Toronto seniors. Only yesterday, I was asked how we can help a client who was sent to the ER last summer with potentially life-threatening heat stroke and fears the same this year, but was told the AC program is oversubscribed. We of course support expanding this program, but we know that today's proposal will still guarantee countless others face the same dilemma. 2400 units would represent less than 1% of the estimated need according to the data in the staff report. Uh likewise, we see some value in public cooling centers. Indeed, we seek to serve as one. Um and yet uh as we explained in the appendix to our written comments, uh the amenity space provision adopted uh last year uh is a worthwhile but ultimately marginal contribution to preventing uh avoidable illness and death from heat. We supported council's direction previously to report back by May with a proposed bylaw and we're concerned that the report before us does not reflect that direction uh or offer any timeline for progress. We agree that protecting tenants from AGIS must be a priority. We hope this challenge will be regarded as a crit as a critical one but also a solvable and urgent one building on existing but underfunded programs uh and on approaches from the growing number of cities who are ahead of us on this. We reiterate that cooling today is not a luxury. It's life and death. The city's human rights obligations demand that a structure we call a home provide protection from the elements that's adequate to sustain life and health. And that is not true of many of what we call homes in this city today. That is the fundamental issue. The gaping hole in our basic safety regulations that we have allowed to persist for too long. We encourage you to reiterate with urgency council's prior direction to bring forward a proposed bylaw to outlaw dangerous heat in rental units. We suggest that any cost analysis should include analysis of the morbidity, the mortality, and the economic costs of not passing a safe temperature standard for rental housing. I wish that we were discussing today and we easily could have been discussing today an analysis of uh different options for the mix of uh incentives and penalties, timelines and alternative compliance pathways. uh option uh policy options uh focused on specific buildings and focused on owners portfolios of buildings. Um that we could be looking at to address this uh and to uh to look at what kinds of investments are worth it to us over time uh to uh prevent deaths that will otherwise continue to occur in overheated apartments. Um, we could be having that conversation. We're not today, but we could be having it very soon. And I hope that we will based on uh a concrete uh report and proposal uh from what I know are the very able and expert staff who are aware of a lot of the information that such a report could already be drawing on. Um, I hope we'll be having that conversation very soon because there are too many of of our clients, our neighbors, folks all over the city who cannot afford another summer without even any progress uh towards uh a solution on this issue of life and death. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Are there any questions for the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for for joining us today. Our next speaker is Sel Bargavei. Bargava um online. Yep. >> Thank you. Um uh thanks for joining us. You have five minutes. Please be good when you're ready and I'll let you know when you're getting to time. >> Great. Thank you so much. Can you hear me? All right. >> Okay, perfect. Thank you. So, good morning, Mayor Cha and members of the executive committee. My name is Dr. Dr. Sel Bargava. I'm the president-elect of the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment as well as Ontario Committee co-chair. I am a family doctor in Ottawa and a public health and and preventive medicine practitioner. Firstly, I wanted to thank you for the work put into and the progress reflected in this item. The expansion and standardization of Toronto's air conditioner benefit program is meaningful and extremely welcome. For residents facing financial barriers to cooling, this will provide important relief, including installation support. Uh because access is not simply about receiving an air conditioner. It's also about being able to use it sustainably. I'm here today on behalf of Cape Ontario to echo the calls of my colleagues for the executive committee to pass an indoor heat bylaw for all rental units in Toronto as soon as possible. I'm disappointed at the lack of a proposed bylaw today given that this issue is a matter of protecting public health that will save lives particularly for some of the most vulnerable among us and that again this summer will introduce severe risk for those people. This is a good policy as it stands, but as a physician and public health practitioner, I'm here to say clearly that it is a good start, but not enough. Air conditioner subsidy programs help some people, but a maximum indoor temperature bylaw protects everyone at all times of the day. Extreme heat's not merely an issue of discomfort. It's a serious and growing public health threat. In medicine, we see what heat does to the body. I'll never forget the home visits I did during a heat wave in Ottawa last summer where I saw the impact that prolonged exposure places on the cardiovascular, respiratory, and kidney systems that my patients experienced. I'll never forget the feeling of helplessness as I changed out a patient's ice pack and hoped that they would be okay. Evidence also shows that overnight temperature elevations are especially dangerous, something that people often don't consider when they go to sleep at night. And based on what we know, we expect temperatures to drop overnight, but with worsening climate change and more frequent and intense heat waves, this is no longer a reality. Importantly, this committee has already acknowledged that extreme heat is a problem. In December, council directed work towards a maximum temperature bylaw for rental housing. And that recognition matters, but recognition without implementation does not protect tenants this summer. Cooling centers are important. Emergency response matters, but public health strategy cannot rely on asking vulnerable residents to leave their homes to survive. Housing itself must be safe. The human body does not distinguish between institutional housing and rental housing day and night. Air conditioner benefit programs are helpful. Cooling centers are helpful, but neither replaces a population level protection of an enforceable housing standard. Toronto has the opportunity to lead and become the second city in Canada with a maximum temperature bylaw. The president that this would set for life-saving action across Canada would be incredibly powerful and be the push for change that we need. Cape Ontario is therefore urging this committee to move urgently towards an enforceable maximum indoor heat bylaw with a protective threshold of 26 degrees C alongside measures that protect tenants from bearing unreasonable financial costs. We at this point know the health evidence. We know who is at risk and we know that delay has consequences and we know the solutions. Thank you so much for your progress made so far and we now ask that you take the next essential step. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. I'm just going to pause us here because we do not have quorum. Um, so, uh, counselors, if you're in the room, can you please just return to your seat so we can check what's happening? All right, thank you very much. Um, >> we're um uh we're back. Um, are there any questions for the speaker? All right, seeing none, thank you uh for joining us, Sigil. Um, our next uh speaker is uh Stacy Sample from Toronto downtown AC uh downtown Toronto Acorn. Thank you for joining us. You have five minutes. Please begin when you're ready and I'll let you know where you're getting to time. Good morning. My name is Stacy Sample and I am the chair of the downtown Toronto Acorn chapter. First, I want to acknowledge the positive steps the city of Toronto has taken. We are extremely grateful for the expansion of the air conditioning program and especially encouraged that this year every applicant more than 2,000 households received an air conditioning unit. However, we are here today because we are deeply concerned by municipal licensing and standards failure to produce a draft maximum heat bylaw despite clear direction from city council in December of 2025. Many counselors and the mayor have publicly expressed support for this initiative, which is why the report before us today is so disappointing. Rather than presenting meaningful action action, it delivers yet another delay. Over the past two years that I have been involved with ACORN, we have consistently advocated for expanded MLS services, and the city has continued to increase funding for those expansions. Yet, residents have seen little improvement in enforcement or outcomes. It was only after MLS announced that no bylaw would be brought forward until 2027 that the mayor's office stepped in and directed staff to move this work ahead. Now today, MLS is once again citing financial barrier barriers as the reason for failing to present a draft bylaw. So I have to ask, what is the cost of a human life? How do we explain to grieving families that we knew extreme heat posed a serious danger? that we knew vulnerable tenants were at risk, but instead of acting decisively, we chose delay. Endless consultations and inaction. Given the int continued funding increases to MLS, serious questions must be asked about the operational effectiveness and accountability. Submitting another report that postpones action sends a clear message that the issue is not being treated with the urgency it diver deserves and that is unacceptable. There are already practical solutions the city should be actively exploring. For example, Toronto could collaborate with New Westminster, British Columbia, which experienced tragic heat related deaths and already implemented a maximum heat bylaw. The city should also pursue partnerships with the federal government through programs such as the greener home affordability program to support retrofits in residential and multi-unit buildings. We also need creative interimm solutions. The city could work with corporate partners and require landlords to complete retrofits by a firm deadline, for example, say 2030, while ensuring vulnerable tenants who require air conditioning units receive them through their landlords without cost being passed on to tenants. This approach would not only protect residents, but also reduce pressure on cityrun cooling centers and emergency response services. I also want to acknowledge the expansion of rent safe by officers and the collaborative work being done to advance remedial action at 500 Jaws Road. But let me be clear, we will continue to organize, continue to advocate for tenants and continue to hold MLS accountable just as the ombbudsman did last year in response to MLS failures. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Are there any questions for the speaker? Thank you for joining us today. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Houseen Chong from the Toronto Environmental Alliance. Thank you for joining us. You have five minutes. Please be good when you're ready and I'll let you know when you're getting to the time. >> Thanks everyone. My name is House. I'm the climate campaigner at Toronto Environmental Alliance. I've been a climate guy for 25 years now. Um and this will become relevant in a little little later. Um first I want to say Toronto Environmental Alliance uh applauds the expansion of the city's air conditioner benefit. This program is going to uh protect lives while also cutting healthcare and paramedic costs during extreme heat waves. But that being said, um we also need a maximum indoor uh bylaw. We agree with many of the deputants here in that case as well. Um first I want to talk a bit about the expansion of the air conditioner benefit why it's good. Um while the scope of the program is not yet at the scale we need and there's still major barriers in terms of the application process um the expansion is positive because it does a thing that that existing programs prior to this one doesn't do which is actually physically install the air conditioners themselves. Um, I last summer I actually helped install an air conditioner for a friend and being relatively able-bodied and like a person with relative means, it was still extremely difficult for me to do. And so the city providing that service and being a a flow through for different funds from different um areas such as the ODSP in order to actually do that installation is a very very positive step. And in the future that we hope we hope that the structure of this program can also be used to do things like install heat pumps um because heat pumps could have the dual benefit of not just providing indoor cooling in the summertime but as well as cutting overall heating costs for both tenants and landlords in the wintertime uh when heat is needed. Um and then of course we need to ensure that the city uh implements a maximum heat bylaw. So today's report shows that more than half of the city's rental units, half of the city's rental units do not have access to indoor cooling. Um, and I think it's important to know that other jurisdictions have moved ahead with maximum heat bylaws even though there are significant challenges especially around affordability. Aside from much hotter jurisdictions in uh like cities in the US south, both New York City and New Westminster, British Columbia here in Canada have approved a maximum uh temperature bylaw. Um and these cities have also grappled with preserving uh affordability for tenants. And so we urge the city to learn from their approaches and investigate what might work best for Toronto. And we of course are available um to work with city and city staff to move forward on those. T also recognizes that measures like the AC benefit program and the renovation bylaw actually are vital to help protect tenants um as we do this difficult work. So we applaud the city of moving forward because those actually are affordability uh uh tenants that uh affordability systems that we need for the city as we do this difficult work. Finally, I kind of want to talk about maybe something psychological that might be happening with a lot of people, including with the city, but also noticing this in myself. Climate change is very, very serious. Um, and because of the serious, I think there's a psychological tendency in a lot of people and sometimes in myself to hope that like a single perfect rule is going to solve this issue forever and then we can just go about doing other things and not worry about it. Um and so I think there may be a tendency amongst you know kind of unconsciously to look for an absolutely perfect maximum heat bylaw. Um because if we were to construct a perfect bylaw maybe that would solve you know the problem of extreme heat forever and it's not. Even if we were to get a maximum heat bylaw for tenants we still need to talk about and figure out solutions for what are we going to do about outside workers? uh what are we going to do about emergency workers who will be working outside and actually dealing with uh extreme uh weather while also protecting people from it. So things like that we're going to need to do. So um in the same way that we have uh we introduced an air conditioner program last year and have already seen significant improvements with this report today. whatever maximum heat bylaw we have will need improvement over time. And but I do not think that means that we need to hold back to find that perfect bylaw before it's passed. And so we do need to move forward on this. I I encourage uh city staff to move forward. I encourage uh city councilors to move forward this on this as well. Um we are in this for the long haul. This problem is not going to go away. And so if we try to if we come in with a mentality that the only thing that will work is something perfect and that we don't have to deal with it anymore, that's not the reality we're facing right now and that's not the reality we will be facing in the future either. So I welcome any questions of people that people may have. >> Thank you very much. Are there any questions for the speaker? >> Seeing none, um, thank you for joining us today. Um, our next speaker is Marcia Stone Weston Acorn. Thank you for joining us. You have five minutes. Please begin when you're ready, and I'll let you know when you're getting to town. >> Good morning, members of the executive committee and all all those that are viewing. My name is Marcia Stone and I am the chair of the Western Acorn chapter. As many of you know, ACORN represents thousands of low and moderate income families uh across the city. I would like to express my gratitude um on the expansion of the free AC program. The additional 1 million will provide up to 2400 air conditioners, up from 500 last year, a nearly five-fold increase like Acorn Ed advocated for in the budget earlier this year. This will make a difference for vulnerable tenants who are at risk in extreme heat and it's a lifesaving measure. My concerns about the maximum heat bylaw is however is that we are deeply deeply disappointed that there is still no draft maximum bylaw being proposed by staff here today. Tenants need this lifesaving measure. People are literally dying in overheated apartments and climate change will only worsen the situation. We understand that the mayor has asked them to still continue to work behind the scenes on this on this bylaw and we suggest that you contact New West Minister and ask them what they're doing over there so that we can implement it here in Toronto. Without a maximum heat bylaw, the lives of many of our community members, many seniors, and people with health conditions remain in danger. We've been deputing on this issue since at least 2024. Reports have been written, studies have been done. We've waited for these to We've waited for these finish, but staff still haven't suggested a draft bylaw. With every summer without relief, tenants are cooking, literally cooking in their apartments. So, here's the message that we have for the committee on behalf of our our residents and our members. Number one, thank you for expanding the free AC program to 2400 units. This is a crucial step that will save lives this summer. Number two, we urgently need a max heat bylaw to protect tenants. Tenants reli reliance people are counting on you. their lives are at risk and the city must take greater action and I thank you. Keep that in mind. People's lives are at risk and today or tomorrow that could be one of you. So keep that in mind when you're making your decisions with regards to people's lives and their health and safety. And with that, I thank you. >> Thank you. Are there any uh questions for the speaker? Right, seeing none, thank you very much for for joining us today. >> Our next speaker is Aziz Abdullahi from downtown Toronto Acorn. Oh, he's not here. All right. Um our next speaker is uh Mand Mandavni Dami uh the Federation of Metro Tenants Associations online. Thank you for joining us. Uh you have five minutes. Please begin when you're ready and I'll let you know when you're getting to time. >> Thank you. >> Hello, my name is Mandavita. I'm the policy coordinator at the Federation of Metro Tennis Association, the FMTA. At the FMTA, we welcome the city of Toronto's continued efforts to address the growing risks posed by extreme indoor heat, as is evident in the most recent proposed responses, including the standardization of the air conditioner benefit pilot and the broader uh development of a maximum indoor temperature framework. The FMTA continues to strongly support the establishment of a maximum indoor temperature bylaw in the coming year. In my submissions, I outlined three different areas that I'd like to discuss today. Um these are the that heat exposure is a disabling event that cooling rooms as an are inadequate and a potentially harmful measures on their own and lastly that maximum indoor temperature bylaws are required and it's a matter of um tenants human dignity. On the first point um disability it's our position that disability must be understood in a social and structural um through social and structural framework. Heat vulnerability and its close connection with disability injustice must be understood in the broader terms of housing inequality as well. Low-income tenants are disproportionately housed in older apartment buildings with poor ventilation, inadequate insulation, aging infrastructure, limited canopy coverage, and greater heat retention. Heat exposure can also intensify at higher elevations within towers due to building design and stack effect conditions. The city's own climate risk reporting has identified that risk of extreme heat in apartment towers for seniors and other vulnerable people. It's our position that vulnerability is not an and identities within groups of that are vulnerable. It's not a fixed category. It's uh vulnerability is something that's created. Um so this on the second point um cooling rooms are inadequate and potentially harmful measure on their own in the on the intensification or production of vulnerability. Again uh consider the measure of common cooling rooms. The FMTA is concerned that reliance on common cooling rooms or shared cooling areas alone cannot adequately protect vulnerable tenants. Shared spaces may be inaccessible during elevator outages, which are more likely to occur in aging buildings. For this and other reason, disabled attendants or seniors risk being excluded from colum common cooling rooms cooling protections and must prioritize safe dignified access within tenants own living spaces. And the third point um our position is that city of Toronto has a duty to protect tenants human dignity and maximum indoor temperature bylaw um requires this. So we urge the city to continue recognize that the issue of extreme indoor heat is fundamentally about human dignity, fairness, and meaningful access to access meaningful access to justice. Tenants most likely to experience dangerous indoor temperatures are also often the least able to navigate lengthy and inaccessible enforcement systems. Beyond the health and safety risks of extreme heat inside homes, climate change has the effect of increasing the cost of living and also reducing tenants bargaining power in the landlord tenant context. The cities recognize that for many tenants, legal protections exist on paper and yet are not meaningful accessible in practice. In response to this reality, the city has implemented rent safe to and we applaud the city for demonstrating its commitment to tenants through this program which continues to provide vital oversight and housing quality. This is especially significant given the reality of unjustly uh lengthy delays in the landlord tenant board's proceedings specifically with respect to tenant application matters. The fact is that the LTB uh proceeding structure uh almost always takes several months, sometimes years to resolve and they're it's designed in a way that presumes tenants have the physical, financial, linguistic, mental, and technological capacities and resources to navigate them during periods of extreme heat. Delayed enforcement can have devastating consequences. Uh, additionally, we uh we uh want to uh applaud the city for uh participating as a member of the coalition of inclusive mun municipalities. In a city committed to inclusion cannot allow tenants to endure unsafe and disabling indoor temperatures because they lack income, mobility, legal knowledge or bargaining power necessary to protect themselves. I also wanted to uh briefly uh uh put take our attention towards a recent infant death um that took place possibly due to or suspected heat related death actually on April 26 2026 and I guess I've run out of time. In closing I just want to say one thing. um the enabling America assessing the role of rehabilitation science and engineering um has uh it's a report that's issued by the nationalmies of sciences engineering and medicine they write that the system through its role in designing public policy can and does have a profound impact on the extent to which impairments and other potentially disabling conditions will result in disability. So I I just I urge you to really consider that and consider the role that you have and the and the power that you have in this position. Thank you. Thank you very much. Um, are there any questions for the speaker? Uh, councelor Sha. >> Yeah, I just wanted to ask uh you starting to talk a little bit about the infant death. Uh, can you tell us what you were referring to? >> Um, yes. So, not not an an infant. Actually, it's a young child. So on April 26, um the um maximum indoor or outdoor temperature recorded that day in North York was actually just 17.5° C. And a young six-year-old uh girl fell from the window. It's suspected that the window was open because uh as a as ventilation mechanism on Facebook, the comments outlined that um it was at a quite high elevation. I think something like the 30th floor of the building. And so this is a situation where we haven't even reached the high temperature of, you know, 30° and yet ventilation is already an issue that is posing a danger to the safety of young children. Um and so that will only elevate and be increased um you know as we continue to move towards um uh extreme heat moments in the city more frequently. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Uh councelor Fletcher, uh you use the word suspected. I don't I think she might be gone. >> Is she gone now? No, I'm right here. >> Oh, I'm >> No, I'm right here. I'm right here. I think the video is just for some reason the video has turned off. >> Something from an investigation or talking to somebody. On what basis do you have that suspicion? >> So, the the idea is that it's it was 17° C outside. It was on a high level of the of like I think it was something like the 29th or 30th floor. Um that's what I identified from the Facebook comments. And so the idea is that >> from Facebook I suspect that you know >> So you suspect >> Well, I suspect that >> the landlord suspect it's you. >> No, no, no, it's not. It's it's it's we No, it's we suspect because it's 17. >> I say I suspect bas basically. Yes. I would like to I would like to explain if it's 17 degrees outside heard everything. Sorry. I don't want to cut you off. Did you hear everything you said? >> It's quite reasonable to from the police that you expected that from No, that's your personal suspicion. Okay. Thank you. I'm fine. Thank you. >> Thank you. Are there any um other questions for the speaker? >> All right. Seeing none, thank you for for joining us. Our next speaker is Kimberly Wargala. Um thank you for joining us. You have five minutes. Uh please begin when you're ready and I'll let you know when you're getting to time. Hello, my name is Kimberly Wargala and I'm the community outreach coordinator at the advocacy center for the elderly in short ACE. I'm here to support uh in support of X31.2 and the expansion and standardization of the air conditioner assistance program. Toronto's pilot worked with modest funding in its initial year. It improved access. It helped 500 low-income seniors stay comfortable in their homes. It preserved independence. It likely saved lives. ACE ACE supports the staff's recommendation to expand funding for the portable air conditioners through the ACAP, the hardship fund, and the Ontario Works Discretionary Benefit Program. But this report also demonstrates something larger. It demonstrates that extreme heat is now a housing safety issue and that this is why sorry and that this is why this program must be viewed as a stop gap not a final solution. The solution is a maximum heat bylaw. Council must take extreme heat seriously and council must not repeat the past mistakes of other legislatures. We have seen this before. Fire sprinklers in retirements in long-term care homes, for example. The risk was known. Experts warned. Coroners recommended action and governments delayed. In 1996, nine residents died in Missaga. No sprinklers in the retirement home. A coroner's jury recommended sprinklers in all retirement homes and long-term care homes. That recommendation was not implemented. More fires, more deaths followed. More inquests, more recommendations, and still no action. Finally, in 2012, sprinklers were mandated, but timelines stretched years into the future. Retirement homes had until 2019 to comply. Long-term care homes had until 2025, and that deadline for long-term care homes has been expanded again. Cost was prioritized over safety. Compliance was delayed and people died while we waited. That was not a failure of knowledge. That was a failure of action. Do not repeat that failure. Extreme heat follows the same pattern. The risk is known. The deaths are documented. 2018, Montreal saw 88 deaths during extreme heat. 2021 ext Vancouver saw 619 deaths during the heat dome. 89% died indoors. Most died in homes without adequate healing, adequate cooling. Toronto already knows this problem is widespread. City staff estimate that 54% of private market rental units in 60 7% of non-market rental units do not have landlord provided air conditioning. This is not a marginal problem. This is a housing system problem. Not because tenants are reckless, but because they are not protected. Extreme heat is one of the deadliest climate risks in Canada. It disproportionately impacts older adults, people with disabilities, low-income renters, people with chronic illnesses, and it is preventable. Cooling rooms are not substitutes for safe housing. People need cooling in their own homes. Vulnerable seniors cannot spend entire heat waves sitting in common areas. The evidence is clear. A recent Gemma inter internal medicine study titled air conditioning in nursing homes and morortality during extreme heat found that in sweet cooling reduces heat related mortality by 8%. That and this also means fewer falls, fewer hospitalizations, less strain on emergency services, more people surviving heat waves in their homes. So let's be clear about this moment. We are not debating the risk. We are not waiting for the science. We are not searching for solutions. We have all three. The city report says 90% of landlords indicated they would try to pass on costs onto tenants. That is not a reason to delay protection. It is a reason to build stronger tenant protections into the bylaw. Other cities have started implementing these types of bylaws. New West Minister for example. What you are deciding is simple. Do we act before people die or after? Without a maximum heat bylaw, Toronto will be added to that dreaded list. It is not a question of if. It is a question of when. And when it happens, the record will show. Council had the data. Council had the warnings. Council had a made in Toronto solution and did not act. Toronto does not need another summer of study before taking action. The evidence already exists. Do not let this become another sprinkler story. Pass the a maximum B heat bylaw. Set firm standards. Avoid endless extensions. Act now while actions will save lives. Thank you, Kimberly. Are there any questions for the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Our next speaker is Louise um Hi Dinger. Thank you. Um you have five minutes, Louise. Um, please begin when you're ready and I'll let you know when you're getting to time. >> Uh, hello. Can you hear me? >> Yes, we can. >> Okay. I'm speaking on behalf of Clean Indoor Air Toronto. We're a group of concerned residents who are advocating for improvements in indoor air quality and equitable access to clean, safe to breathe air. I'm a chemist and the lead on science communications for our group. We applaud the expansion of the city's air conditioner program and we urge the city to proceed with implementation of a maximum indoor temperature bylaw. But we also wish to point out that temperature is but one aspect of indoor air quality. Indoor air quality comprises a number of different parameters including carbon dioxide, relative humidity, temperature, carbon monoxide, formaldahhide, total volatile organic compounds and particulates. The portable AC units are welcome, but they do not filter the air. They only recool recirculated indoor air. With climate change events becoming more severe and more intense, poor air quality often accompanies extreme heat. Over the past few years, we've seen wildfire smoke combined with high heat. And with the weakening air jetream and changing climate weather conditions, poor air quality is happening during cooler days as well. However, on poor air quality days, people are told to shelter indoors. But many buildings in the city do not meet the current ventilation st standard set forth by Ashray, the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning Engineers, which sets the ventilation standards for many countries around the world. So, this means sheltering indoors where indoor air quality is poor. Without adequate ventilation or filtration, air pollutants like wildfire smoke and smog will collect and concentrate. As well, the risk of airborne diseases is greatly increased in poorly ventilated spaces. The city of Toronto has an indoor air quality policy for its office environments that lists a range for each of these parameters that constitute acceptable indoor air quality and an acceptable maximum temperature. It is based on compliance with Asher standard 62.1. Unfortunately, at present, there is no citywide indoor air quality policy that ensures all other buildings have acceptable indoor environmental conditions. As I and other deputants have noted, access to safe and healthy indoor environmental conditions is a matter of equity. It should come as no surprise that many of the buildings which do not comply with Ashway 62.1 and 62.2 too include our public schools, shelters, LTC's, older buildings, including rental apartment buildings, and buildings in less affluent neighborhoods. Poor air quality and poor indoor environmental conditions have a disproportionate impact on our most vulnerable, children, seniors, tenants, and people with chronic health conditions. We're urging the city to work towards implementing a city-wide indoor air quality policy, starting with providing guidance to the public, especially building operators. We understand it will take a considerable amount of investment to upgrade and retrofillings to improve indoor air quality and ensure these buildings are resilient to the impacts of climate change and air pollution. However, we note there are a number of existing city programs that could be leveraged in order to prevent costs from being downloaded onto individuals. For one thing, the transform to net zero program program includes HVAC upgrades and retrofits, incentives and grants for these upgrades. So, please consider boosting this program to continue conversion of gas furnaces to heat pumps, thus supplying air conditioning to residents and also consider expanding this program to subsidize the cost of MV 13 filters in air handling systems, thus providing protection against fine particulate air pollution from wildfires and combustion engines and heavy industry. We also consider that there should be installation of an indoor air quality monitoring system in municipal buildings, schools, childcare centers, LTC's, shelters, Toronto community housing, and Toronto seniors housing. That will allow building operators and the public to immediately see where indoor air quality is poor and how we should focus our efforts. We also asked for expansion of the air conditioner program for seniors and low-income residents to include portable air cleaners and MUV 13 filters. This air filtration equipment will help to protect against wildfire smoke, fine particulate air pollution, as well as helping to reduce indoor spread of airborne diseases. Last September, Health Canada issued indoor air quality guidance, which can be used as a framework for developing guidance for the city of Toronto and developing indoor air quality policy. We're urging the the city to work with Toronto Public Health to use this Health Canada guidance to take bold action to improve indoor air quality for all residents, especially our most vulnerable, and make our buildings more resilient to climate change and an everinccreasing burden of air pollution. Thank you. Thank you very much. Are there any questions for the speaker? It's seeing none, thank you for joining us. And our final speaker is uh Miguel Abila Valarde. >> Thank you. Um you have five minutes. Miguel, please begin when you're ready and I'll let you know when you're getting to time. >> Thank you. Um I just want to say that uh thanks for allowing me to speak on this important item and I want to say I agree with most of the comments made by the previous deputants that is good news that we're addressing in a small scale the need to have more portable uh air conditioner units. I want to um acknowledge that my landlord TCSC last week uh at their uh monthly board meeting they approved to be in compliance with uh allocating a unit uh uh in the buildings that will be the cooling centers. But why we we want to talk about air conditioners? I want to talk about an interesting experiment in war 11. I think I saw councelor Saxs. This is in her war. This is the property named 250 Davenport Road. In this building on the left was built in about 52 years old. It didn't have central air conditioner but w with investments made after the selling of the property which is the property on the right on the right side of the screen is a condominium. They were able to build um a central air conditioner in every floor. It is amazing the amount of energ uh uh u engineering invested in this building to allow residents to have central air conditioner. So I want you if you are interesting I can talk to you about it. We are talking about thermostats thermostat temperatures. Unfortunately, in my building of 54 years old, we don't have thermostats. So, I don't know what is the max, what is the minimum. I had to rely on my phone or watching the uh weather network. I want to bring to your attention something very important. This is about an accident, an incident that happened in the year 2019 and 1,500 residents were a bit removed from their units because of the electrical system um burn out. This is 650 Parliament Street in in Toronto center. All the residents were um asked to leave the building because the whole electrical system burn out. Now, if you're going to add more electrical uh AC units, it's going to overload maybe um is it will be important to check how is the the state of your electrical systems. At 220 Oak Street, we have an ambition 30 million uh tower renewal plant which included the replacement of the electrical system, uh new windows, uh thermostatas and these beautiful things. So I agree with my my sister uh Wilkinson uh share with you guys about the implementation of the air conditioning program at Toronto Community Housing. They're doing their best they can. And I I know they're not perfect, but let's take a look at this problem, at this future problem. If we don't take under consideration the electrical systems in in the old buildings, multi-units, be careful. Thank you. That's all I had to say. >> Thank you very much. Are there any questions for the speaker? All right, seeing none, thank you for joining us. Um, so we will just hold down this item um to allow for the mayor to return. I know this has been a priority. So, uh we'll move that will take us to the next item. Um EX31.3 um 838 Broadview Development Plan Update. And there are two speakers uh registered. Um our first speaker is um Ari Kersian Blat from Broadview Group, Inc. Thanks for joining us. You have five minutes. Uh please begin when you're ready. >> Some materials. How do I use this? >> Um yes. Uh the the tech team can help you with the overhead projector. Um it should turn on. >> Can we just get some help uh from the tech folks? >> Oh, there it is. Thank you. And please begin when you're ready. Um you have five minutes and we'll let you know when you're getting to time. >> Good morning. My name is Ari Kerschinlat. I represent the owners of the three adjacent properties at 840, 842, 844 Broadview Avenue that are referenced in the staff report in motion. For the past 10 years, these properties with the cities form an assembly that's already been subject to ongoing discussions in a formal agreement of purchase and sale with the city of Toronto. I spent the t past decade working alongside create Toronto, the TPA, the affordable housing office, and city planning to bring this affordable housing project to life. I do not believe that this committee today has been given enough information to make an informed decision. What you are not being asked today is the more important question. Whether a joint development on the assembled site remains the right approach as council already determined it was in 2019 and 2022. I continue to believe that it is. The public and private sites individually are undized, but together they form the minimum size of a meaningful development site. The value of this combined site is far greater than the sum of the parts. This property is a stones throw away from the Broadview subway station fully within a PMTSA where city and provincial policy demands maximizing housing options. A standalone building on a 65 ft lot delivers a fraction of what the combined site can and what is already approved. Instead of that question, you are being asked and presented with scenarios on the city's parcel alone, without the full context of 10 years of joint planning, without meaningful reference to the approved resoning that already covers the site for 125 units and a TPA parking garage, and without any mention to two concrete offers we made to the city in the past 6 months. It is unclear to me why you are now being asked to consider an entirely new approach when the work is already done and now only requires direction to staff to be flexible and innovative on the site within a PMTSA. I want to make it known to this committee that there are two other options available. Habitat for Humanity, a nationally recognized nonprofit, came forward last year ready to deliver the approved project as a 100% affordable rental building with a green pea parking garage. That offer was on the table to city staff as recently as last month and that offer was not advanced because of the motion today. Two, if the city feels it can no longer work with the private or nonprofit sector, we formally offered the sale of our adjacent lands to the city last month so the full development could be maintained and the existing zoning used. Unfortunately, that offer was also declined without an opportunity for discussion. I was only made aware of this meeting on Friday. If you if you have not already had a chance, I ask that you read our written submission filed with the cler clerk before you vote or that you defer this item until you can. When the city acquired 838 in 2016, council direct that any future redevelopment include a parking facility. In reliance on that, my firm acquired the adjacent properties in 2017. The city agreed that neither site alone could deliver both housing and a parking garage for Greenpe. We immediately started working with the city to acquire their land and deliver on council's vision. At our sole cost and risk, we reszoned the combined site. City Council approved that resoning in 2022 for 125 homes, 18 permanently affordable, and the 33 space car Green Peak parking garage. Unfortunately, that zoning was right was approved right when the housing market collapsed and construction costs and municipal fees exploded. Recognizing that the project was underwater, we didn't wait. We approached Create Toronto in 2022 with a straightforward ask. Remove the commitment to provide the TPA garage uh in order to save the affordable housing units and the project move forward. Unfortunately, that offer was rejected. We were told that any joint development must include a TPA garage despite it being underfunded with no additional dollars forthcoming. For years, I raised alarm bells at city hall. I share cost reports and performance and offered solutions. The staff report before you now proposes a standalone development with no TPA garage at all. The condition that was presented to me as a non-negotiable for a decade has simply been removed. Had removing the garage been an option four years ago when I raised it, we would not be here today and 125 more families would already be living in this building. When it became clear that the private market could not finance the project that was being asked for by city hall, I didn't walk away. I asked who could deliver this project if we cannot. That answer came in the form of a nonprofit. Habitat for Humanity approached us last summer, ready to step in using provincial financing tools unavailable to the private market. We entered into a conditional agreement of purchase and sale with them to sell them our lands. They met with city staff multiple times. Their proposal to deliver the project as already zoned 120 plus units as 100% affordable rental with a commitment to build Green P their parking garage. However, following the motion without notice in December that the nonprofit was told by staff that discussions could no longer continue as there is new direction from council to pursue a standalone building. Since then, our agreement has been terminated, but it could be revived if the committee directs staff to explore it. When that door closed, we made one final attempt to salvage the work. We formally offered our sale of our lands to the city last month so the city could own the full assembly and use the existing zoning. That offered was declined the following week without an opportunity for discussion. Neither of these options appear in the staff report. >> Your final >> request is simple for you to defer this item back to staff to explore these two options. A decade's worth of work has already been done. There's no reason to start over. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Are there any questions for the speaker? Councelor Fletcher. >> Good morning, Ari. Um to that was a 100% rental. I understood it was a Habitat humanity and they don't do 100% rental. >> That's correct. >> So they are proposing 100% rental. That's in writing and formally proposed at 100% rental because I haven't seen that. >> I wasn't a part of the discussions. I wasn't a part of the discussions with Habitat for Humanity and city staff, but from my understanding that's what was being proposed. >> So, I will clarify that because uh you had assigned that work to Habitat for Humanity. So, you're not clear if that was rental or or their model of affordable ownership. Correct. >> No, it's not affordable ownership. I'm 100% certain it is rental. >> Okay. So, that's something I'll I'll clarify if you Sorry. Now, in council and I do have a motion that I've sent to Yes. to the secretariat there. Um, just can I ask you, you said three owners, uh, 84,842, 844. Can you tell me who those three different owners are, please? >> They're the same owners. There's two different companies that are all owned by the same shareholders. I'm one of them. >> There's three properties. >> Three properties. You said three different owners, but that wasn't my There's two owners. >> Yes. Correct. >> And what's the company? >> 2572344 Ontario, Inc. and 2572345 Ontario Inc. And but you're a principal in both of those then. Okay. And the offer of the lands, do you know if that was at market value or assessed value or >> the offer of the lands was based on the cost to date for us to bring, you know, the entitlement process forward. >> So including your soft costs, >> correct? >> And the value of the lands and then the soft costs, right? So I'll have that checked as well. >> Correct. >> Thank you very much for coming to this been a long project because when it first came there was no affordable housing assigned to it. Correct. That's right. >> So, it's been many years to try to figure out how to get the best affordable. So, >> um I will definitely check that rental. >> There was always 18 affordable housing units. There was always 18 affordable housing units within the approved zoning. In 2024, uh when the city passed the rental housing supply initiative, we revised the condominium design to a rental design so that we could apply to that uh program. Unfortunately, our application was denied because of our >> So, the CHC, you didn't have funding from CHC either. >> We never got to that point. >> And when you said there was definitely provincial funding that was assigned to this project, was that through Habitat or through you? So, >> through Habitat, >> are you clear on the Do you have that signed, sealed, and delivered from them that they Yeah, you would have to speak to Habitat for Humanity. They're not here, unfortunately. >> You did tell me that. So I'm asking you, so you're unclear whether or not they had pursued that or whether they had received that yet? >> I would imagine that they would if they were talking to staff about the site to >> ask staff if that was something that they were correct. Thank you so much. Thank you, Larry. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Are there any other um questions for the for the speaker? All right, seeing none, thank you for joining us today. Our next speaker is Peter Martin. Um, Peter, you have five minutes. Uh, please begin when you're ready, and I'll let you know when you're getting to time. >> Yes. Uh, good morning, uh, councilors, chair. Um, first off, I just wanted to give you some context. We were, the Toronto Alliance End Homelessness, of which I am the housing solutions manager. We were before planning and housing last week to uh support the uh implementation by the housing development office of the Toronto Builds Policy Framework. Um and particularly in regard to the fact that that framework distinguishes between supportive housing and affordable housing as different forms of community housing. uh and we reiterate re reiterated at that meeting the uh the important distinctions in regard to built form and capital and operating cost issues which make them two different beasts. Um, as you all know, in December of last year, Councelor Fletcher brought a member's motion which was approved by council uh directing the housing development office to uh do a development plan for a mixed income affordable housing project. on its own initiative, create and housing development office also decided to do a secondary analysis of a a supportive housing model on that site and the Toronto Alliance dead homelessness totally supports that initiative. uh we think it's completely consistent with the uh desires of the Toronto bill's policy framework and uh the way the city has been moving forward recently with regard to the distinction it makes in uh supporting supportive housing in contradistinction to general affordable. Uh we are particularly uh gratified to see that the uh the initiative was borne out by the results. Uh as you can see from the uh uh the public report for action, the uh the binary analysis showed that there were significant differences with regard to the uh the built form requirements and the potential for a zoning bylaw amendment. And uh I think this is a really important thing to recognize that uh you still have options on both of those fronts. Uh thanks to that initiative. I'd also point out that uh the alliance as a whole is gratified that over the last number of years the uh development and growth services area of the city has really taken to uh to heart that distinction between those two types of housing as recognized in the recent inclusion of uh of the uh a supportive housing metric in the housing action plan me uh dashboard as well as the specific references to supportive housing in the Toronto Builds framework. work. Uh as for the binary analysis which we see uh in this uh in this agenda item, the the Toronto Alliance Homelessness is recommending that the city uh use this as a model moving forward when dealing with city initiated developments as set out in the uh uh attachment one to PH uh 30.6 six, which is the uh the three-year Toronto bills uh uh work plan. Um by building up a database using the same consistent methodology, the city will achieve three things uh which are all salutary. First, it will have its own internal information on the distinctions between those two types of housing and will then be able to modify its policies and programs to uh to make it more likely that supportive housing in particular will be built because we all recognize and this leads to the second uh salutary uh result that the uh provincial government currently is not as keen on providing operating funds for such buildings as we would like. Uh the city of Toronto and the federal government through the installation of the new crown agency, the bill calendar homes recognizes that supportive housing is its own beast and they are both prepared, the city and the federal government to support these kind of programs. The sticking point, as we all know in this room, is operational costs for those supportive housing programs from the the Ontario government. We are gratified that the city consistently uh is advising the Ontario government of that need and we look forward to uh to seeing some results from that. Finally, the third thing is that we will then be able to share that information um hopefully in the spirit of the memorandum of understanding that the alliance has with the housing secretariat can be mirrored and reflected in a ongoing collaborative relationship with the new housing development office and together we can work with the now for-p profofit housing sector to achieve the highly ambitious goals of the housing action plan and if we're lucky to uh uh exceed them. Uh with that, unless there are any questions, those are my submissions. >> Thank you very much. Are there any uh questions for the speaker? Councelor Fletcher, >> thank you and thank you for being here and your distinction between the supportive housing and affordable. It it is a little more expensive to build supportive uh because of the operational end. Correct. >> Yes. And it's not just that. There's also the built form differences. >> What would they be? >> Well, with supportive housing, for example, you're looking at well, there's twofold. One is supportive housing generally needs to be smaller in size and scale. So you don't get the economies of scale you can get with affordable housing. Uh for highly supportive housing, deeply supportive housing, you don't want really to get above 50 or 60 units. Uh that type of housing, you're going to have a different design for the units themselves. And you're also going to need more community space for the the support services which are inherent in supportive housing. So that's going to include that's going to change the the capital costs. But at the other end, you've got these operating costs which also need to be taken into consideration when you're looking at the revenue generated and uh to maintain the building and to support the financing. So it's a vicious circle and uh as I said the the key would be I think that we need to really um from both ends from the federal government side and the city side uh execute a sort of pinser movement to get the provincial government on board to really expand its its operating costs because I think we all agree that's the sticking point for us to build more supportive >> that would be the issue to ensure that but this would be more along the lines of the wood green first steps to homes on Queen Street the 25 supportive units, fairly large amount of uh >> space that is not housing space but supportive space. Correct. >> Yeah. And and the other thing which is an ancillary benefit, not only would the city be advocating for its own projects, but by changing the provincial policy on operating costs, it would help open up a lot of uh potential developments in the not for-p profofit sector which are currently stalled because the proformers currently just don't pencil out. >> Correct. So the what you're talking about for supportive the whole site really wouldn't work. It's nine stories of supportive housing. Generally they're smaller uh more boutique if you can use that word smaller units less people higher degree of support than a large development. >> I will point out I made the distinction between high high supports. So when you have low support housing which is also needed you can have larger buildings because uh the the level and degree of supports needed are less. >> So for larger for for lower support buildings you can have larger and of course there's nothing to stop as has happened in the past having uh hybrid buildings where some of the uh floors are supportive housing while others say above them are for affordable. >> Thank you very much for coming today. >> Thank you. Thank you very much. Um, any other questions for the speaker? Thank you for joining us today. Um, and now we'll move to questions of staff from members of the committee. Are there any questions for staff? I just want to I will ask about the provincial funding for supportive from a gather RH HDO our housing development officer see chief development officer that there there this is an ask for this type of housing correct that we would make >> through the speaker yes the housing secretariat is leading discussions with the province about securing that kind of funding uh the operational funding for those kinds of units. >> And then there's the larger uh Toronto Well, the Toronto Bills and there's the federal fund as well. Are they interested in supportive housing? >> They are very much interested in supportive housing >> and are they able to um get the province to assist with operations or is that a bridge too far? At the moment, >> I'm going to turn it over to Doug Rollins uh who has been involved in those conversations. >> Uh thank you councelor um and through the chair. uh conversations are ongoing with all orders of government to activate the necessary capital and operating funding so we can continue to build supportive housing. >> So this would be a higher higher level of support in on the smaller site. >> That is correct through the through the sheriff >> and then as we I'm just interested if you happen to know because Mr. Christianblot didn't they assigned this project to Habitat am I right about that? Yes. they made an asignation. So they weren't actually directly negotiating >> through the chair. Uh there was discussions where they indicated there was an agreement with Habitat though that's between those two parties >> but Habitat was talking to uh I believe to the city and was that rental housing or what was the nature of the housing for that larger site >> through the chair? Uh the initial conversations with Habitat uh focused on the attainable home ownership program uh and unlocking provincial funding uh for that uh type of project >> and that was Habitat having a conversation with your office. Correct. >> They did reach out uh to discuss that. >> Um okay. So this this is a direction that we didn't have previously. You've outlined a potential direction. We do own that. Toronto parking authority had owned it. It is under of course being a parking lot. Um direction from city council. So Mr. Christian Blot talked about options to maintain the whole space, divide the whole space, sell the space. Would you agree with me that there are many avenues here on this site that remain >> through the speaker? You are correct. So, if I was to ask to continue to review all these options, including the one that we heard from the Toronto Alliance to End Homelessness for council, would that be something that you could undertake >> through the speaker? We can. Yes. >> Very good. Thank you very much. >> Thank you, Councelor Fletcher. Any other questions? If not speaking speakers, council Fletcher, >> I do have a motion. I hope that it got that. It was pretty one one sentence. So, I hope that was easy. >> Is your mic on? >> Yes. >> Oh, okay. So, we >> My mic is on. Can we >> just I just want to make sure it's correct. >> Oh, sorry, Mayor. Here we are. >> Report directly to council. Yes, that's great. Thank you. Uh there it is up there. Executive committee request DCM Planning and Growth the Executive Director Housing Development Office to review all options for 838844 Bravview Avenue and report to the May 20 21st 22nd 2026 meeting of city council. And of course um that's only in a few days. So if you need a bit more time that would be fine, too. But I want to put that in there. I just want to say that this along with Don Somerville, this was one of the properties that I got in the Doug Ford lottery in 2018 where we got new parts of our ward and um I think mayor you visited Don Somerville which at the original had been 120 rent gear to income and 650 condos. through working with the community, working with uh housing development office. It now is uh 120 rent gear to income replacement, 125 rental, including a co-op, 100 affordable, 100 affordable rental, and 300 condos. So, a very different blend that we were able to change. This is also one of those properties that I inherited from a previous colleague that had uh TPA and city agreement. There was no affordable housing on the site and I think you all know that nothing moves forward that we own or TCHC owns without a significant affordable housing quotient. This has been very difficult to deliver. We've gone back and forth and Mr. Kersian Bla is right. It's back and forth and uh it's been a very complicated one and I am sorry for that in trying to reach that and of course the market did change. So this um notice of motion said let's just look at it if we can't achieve the big site let's just see what we might be able to achieve on our very own site. I was interested to hear that they have offered a sale to the city, but I'm not sure what the terms of that are. And I think we'll probably get more information at council, whether that's worth our while or not, whether it was market value, what the soft cost would be on top of the market value, what the market value of our site is. um these deals that were made before we had our approach mayor that you had which is if it's city land we're going to have affordable housing on it is um they're they're very complicated and I'm sorry it just is and I do want to commit to getting something great here for affordability whether it's a larger building with affordable 30% or more whether it is a supportive housing on our site. Whatever is there to continue to review this, but I think everybody now knows there's options here. Build on our site, they can build on their site. Um, amalgamate the two sites, have something larger. But I appreciate all the feedback and all the work that's been done by our city staff and as well by create. Thank you. >> Thank you, councelor. Thank you for your good work. a good mix of income and uh people coming in rental and condos. It's a very good >> I have no more uh legacy projects from pre pre-war doubling. >> This was it. >> Any question to the counelors? Seeing none, all those in favor of the motion should moved and item as amended. All those in favor approved. Thank you if you allowed me. We're back. Thank you for allowing me to uh go to an event. Um 31.2. Uh I believe there's question to the staff. Yeah. Or that's done. Okay. Council Deputy Mayor Mley. Any other questioning to the staff? Okay. Deputy Mayor Moley. >> Thank you. Uh Madame Mayor and through you to staff. Um we heard a lot today and we know it's highlighted in the report. um the really important work around maximum heat temperature bylaw. Um it's not before us at the moment. Can you provide a status update on that work? >> Sorry, I'm just talking. >> Come on. Trying to do some work here. >> My apologies. >> Would you like me to repeat the question? >> Yeah. Why don't you ask it again? >> Great. You can start my time as well, Madam Mayor. Thank you. Just starting. >> Thank you. Um we heard a lot and we know was highlighted in this report. Um the work that council directed related to a maximum heat temperature bylaw which was expected back uh before us this month. Uh we heard from almost every single deputent about the importance of that work and I'm wondering if you could provide us a status update on the report that we're expecting. >> Uh thank you for the question through you speaker. Again, my apologies for um for missing the question the first time around. >> It's okay. Uh staff undertook as part of um the research into bringing a bylaw a compliance analysis study that reviewed um different building types throughout the city, assessing what it would take for those buildings to comply with a proposed bylaw, a maximum temperature bylaw, >> what it would look like uh for example for low-rise buildings, high-rise buildings, depending on the kinds of heat sources that they would have had, electrical um um infrastructure Um so that work was done. We've also done uh extensive consultations uh throughout this process uh as well as collaborate with other uh city divisions at both um turning our minds to a bylaw and also what other uh options are available to the city. Keeping in mind uh what we've heard today from a lot of deputants is that this is a uh significant health risk. um and with the understanding that a bylaw is a blunt tool uh in reaching those that are at the highest risk uh for health uh for health risks as a result of extreme heat. >> So in terms of when we anticipate a report with recommendations coming back when is that? uh through your chair. The the recommendations that we have in the report now are the the recommendations that we've made uh which is that um bylaw uh has um both unintended consequences and uh perhaps even more unforeseeable consequences. Um and if the goal is perhaps to address those that have the highest uh health risks uh that supporting uh programs that would um reach those uh immediately those individuals immediately uh would perhaps be a better approach. So on that uh we heard and we understand that while this program pilot program has been incredibly successful and the expansion of it is welcome and important um it we heard from one of the deputants that it represents about 1% of the total population in need of additional intervention for heating and cooling. Is that number accurate? Can you give a little bit more context to the extent of the need? So to the chair, I don't think we would necessarily say in need. Again, there's different levels of need. It just represents 1% of units that aren't cooled. So, uh, I could I mean, you could say if every unit required cooling, then you would do that. It may not be that case if it was lowrise, a basement, apartment, something of that nature. The impact might not be the same as you would find in a high-rise building at a a higher level. So it is represents the number relative to the number of units. It doesn't talk about need or impact. >> Okay. Um we heard about some other jurisdictions that have successfully implemented a maximum heat temperature including New Westminster. Have we looked at that model and can you talk to us about how that may or may not be relevant in our context? >> Um through you um chair. So yes, we have looked at uh other jurisdictions that have implemented and I should say implemented is a is not necessarily the correct term I would I would use. Uh there there is not a municipality uh that we've looked at, not New York, not New Westminster that has a fully baked program up and running with uh with demonstrated success or any demonstrated achievements. uh but we have looked uh at different municipalities and different jurisdictions. It's important to uh note and understand that different jurisdictions um outside of Ontario are operating under different legislative structures than us. Um but we have certainly studied uh from those and are continuing to look at those municipalities. >> Thank you. That's an important distinction and I think helpful for us all to understand. Um you mentioned as well in the report I believe and we heard from deputants today about uh the value in reviewing an enhancement to our hardship program and other city interventions that en ensure that uh folks have access to this kind of program and keeping um their living affordable. And can you talk a little bit more about the work underway related to potential enhancements to existing city programs that will help uh in the heat heating and cooling of units specifically cooling? >> So to the chair every year or at least our intention is that we review the programs um coming out of the experiences of the year before. So this year uh we reviewed it after last year's pilot. We brought forward enhancements um and we identified some potential enhancements which we're now suggesting that be made uh through uh the decisions today. Following this uh summer, we'll do the same thing. We'll review the programs, what's working, what isn't, and we'll provide advice forward uh either through uh regular sessions or through the budget process if there's additional resources required. >> Sorry, your time's up. My apology uh councelor Perk, >> thank you to the city solicitor. Like I want to be very clear about what's going on in New Westminster. Do they have an approved bylaw for maximum temperature? >> Yeah. So our information is that the bylaw first came forward at the end of March. Went through uh second and third reading. Then it came back to their council at the end of April for a second and third reading with amendments and it has not been adopted to date. Does it have a So there's no approved implementation date for a maximum temperature bylaw in New Westminster. >> There is no approved implementation date. Uh there is a reference in their agenda minutes that staff were asked and they indicated they might be able to implement before 2027, but again it wasn't adopted and there's no implementation date. >> Okay. And just for reference, what's the population of New Westminster, BC? >> I don't have it in front of me, but I believe it's around 75,000 people. >> Thank you. um to the I guess I'm not sure who can tell me this. So there are distinctions about what municipalities can require of landlords under the building code act. Can we require a landlord to achieve this through major repairs to their building? So, I'll attempt to answer this in general uh in the sense that the building code act does create and has uh provisions in section 35 of the act that specifically prohibit uh municipalities from regulating construction. Uh so those are some of the limitations that would exist here in Ontario. >> Okay. So, so just to be clear, we couldn't pass a bylaw that required them to construct something. >> That is generally how that is interpreted. Yeah. >> Okay. Uh, thank you. Those are my questions. >> Um, >> Madame Mayor, I have questions. >> Council Bravo, >> thank you. Um, I wanted to uh just start by asking what um what work has been done to date on the creation of a bylaw. and what considerations are are being looked at in terms of um why like through the through the course of development what are the kinds of things that you're taking a look at? >> Um thank you through you uh chair. Um so we have undertaken uh a compliance analysis study which again was a a third-party uh consultant work to examine what it would take for different building types uh throughout the city to come into compliance with a maximum temperature bylaw. Uh we've looked at different um uh buildings, for example, lowrises, highrises, uh buildings that have uh certain infrastructure already in place that have balconies or no balconies, those kinds of things. Uh we looked at we um part of that analysis assesses um what the cost would be for uh different building types uh as well as what potential timelines might look like for them to come into compliance. Uh we did also consider different uh city priorities for example uh housing affordability as well as protection of vulnerable tenants and how would a bylaw impact those priorities of the city uh with the recognition that a bylaw is and I I will repeat that a very blunt tool to address this this issue. Um so we've looked at those things and then we've also in in uh strong collaboration with other city divisions uh looked at what other options would be available uh to the city to reach the the intended goals which is protecting uh residents and tenants in the city. >> Thanks. Um maybe I'll go to the acting deputy city manager to just uh maybe flesh out anything around this in this requires interdivisional work. um from your perspective, what um what are all the divisions that are involved and what would what um lens would they be using to through the development of the bylaw? >> Yes. Uh through you, Madame Mayor. So, I think it's fair to say that this is a very complex issue. It's larger than one city division. It's larger than one government actually. Um we have multiple city divisions involved in the work. MLS obviously has involved the housing secretariat and other city divisions to assess um the impact of a bylaw such as this. Um you know our view is that bringing a bylaw such as this would would present significant risk to vulnerable tenants. Um, most of the vulnerable tenants are living in building stock that would require a significant investment by the landlord and there's nothing in place protecting those landlords from above guideline rent increases. That is that is a serious risk to the city moving forward with implementing a bylaw such as this. Um, the reason we're honing in on the air on the expansion of the air conditioning program is we are targeting those most vulnerable now. when you look at the practical imple implementation of a bylaw such as this, it's years away. So that's really where we're going back and saying how can we help those most vulnerable folks today. Um so uh so so what I heard is questions of jurisdiction for the city um for you know are we are we actually able to legislate in in one particular area also questions of um of ensuring that there aren't unintended consequences and one question I had early on was what if the building hits 26 degrees does that mean that the building has to be shut down? Um are these the kinds of things that you need to consider? And finally just um the there was a deputent that said that you know you can bring in a bylon even if it's not perfect but is is that possible to does does it make it vulnerable to challenges like there is it can you re can you sort of um have a a straw dog or kind of a a do it in pencil and then fix it later? Um maybe I can start uh chair and if uh legal or anyone else feels I missed anything. Um any any bylaw that uh we bring uh is always uh subject to potential challenge. what um what the work around a maximum temperature bylaw uh where the pitfalls are, where the dangers are. This is really uh an area where there are multiple governments um that have jurisdiction over this. Uh our ability to regulate things under the city uh if it were to be this would not be able to conflict with any provincial legislation. So I is it possible to to bring a bylaw? Theoretically, yes, it would have to be tailored in a way that would not conflict with provincial legislation and to change it after the fact uh would be extremely difficult because the the costs and timelines of implementing a maximum um temperature bylaw would really require and create offenses um from the point of implementation. So, it would be extremely hard for uh landlords and the city to comply with any proposed bylaw with the expectation that it may change at some point down the line. >> Just to add, I I think it's important to say that this a bylaw such as this would we would need to get this right. Right. Um so, you know, given the risk that we detail to to vulnerable tenants, this isn't something that we should implement and then go back and fix. we need to do the work in order to get it right and as I mentioned it's a highly complex issue um and requires further work >> sorry on the same >> legal yeah >> um I know many of us I certainly moved a motion requesting this like a decade ago Um, what discussions have there been with the provincial government to address the concern that AGIS could be approved at the board? What work has been done to try to remedy the concern? Uh, so through you uh, chair, there have been uh, requests to the province through previous reports. Um there are um sort of continued work that the province could do uh to uh perhaps uh bring a maximum temperature uh as uh as part of uh the building code. Uh there's also amendments that could be done to the residential tenencies agreement uh act uh to be able to protect tenants more. Uh so a good chunk of of the authorities and the powers that um perhaps limit the city's ability to do everything that it would want to do uh rests with the province. But has there been active work like over the last decade has there been active work being done to try to like work with bureaucrats, work with political leaders there to to address this issue to discuss uh you know different ways to uh whether it be specifically this issue or even reform the AGIS like with the 10% capital reserve that's been discussed but some way to kind of remedy this. Has there been active work on this on behalf of the city? >> Um, councelor Doug Rollins, housing secretariat, we brought forward through a number of reports the housing to plan and others a number of requests for the provincial government um to amend uh and adjust the the residential tenencies act to support uh and protect affordability and vulnerable tenants. Most recently the the bill 60 submission that was before council. Um, changes to the RTA have been challenging to obtain. Um, conversations will continue. Um, and again, I think the city of Toronto from a staff perspective, we continue to augment our requests for residential tenency act reform. Uh, in many ways through the MLS report on the max temp, through the housing secretar, it's work to preserve affordability and protect vulnerable households. Um, and those conversations continue. I know that a number of people ask uh why doesn't Toronto do something that another city is doing and often outside of Ontario and typically it's not apples to apples because they've got different laws pertaining to what they can do versus what we can do. Um that's why many of us are advocating for a city charter. I digress, but I wanted to throw that in. Um but um but cities like uh and correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is cities like in the United States um Phoenix, New Orleans, Tempe, Arizona, um several others uh have maximum temperature bylaws. They also, to my understanding, don't have they're actually some of them are even prohibitive prohibited from having rent control. Yet somehow they do it. Has there been an environmental scan on those jurisdictions to understand where where the similarities exist and how they've mitigated those concerns >> uh through the chair? Yes, we have looked at those various uh jurisdictions and you are correct that it is not comparing uh apples to apples, >> but they don't have rent control for example. So, how how is it that they're able to maintain a maximum temperature bylaw without uh and and and and well, I don't know the answer. Has it been their experience that landlords have then turned around and put the cost on the tenants or have they found a way to mitigate it perhaps with uh with fines that a landlord might receive if they were to do that, for example? >> Uh through the chair. I'm not sure exactly how to answer that question. There are uh various ways that different jurisdictions would handle such a bylaw, different authorities that they may have. We have looked at them given the context that we are under in Ontario. Uh some of the things that have worked in other municipalities and other jurisdictions would not work here. And if if I could just add to we've we've taken close look. We obviously have consideration of the Ontario legislative framework and are giving advice and making sure that uh policies and bylaws that are brought forward fit within the framework that exists here in law. >> No. And I and I recognize that and I and I stated that from my from my preface, but I'm just kind of wondering where similar similarities do exist. for example, like my again I I I I'm not I'm not an expert in in in Louisiana ordinances, but if it's true that Louis if New Orleans doesn't have uh rent control and they do have a maximum temperature bylaw, do we understand how they're able to uh to to maintain their maximum temperature bylaw without landlords just raising rents uncontrollably in response to it? uh through your chair. Uh I don't have the exact uh examples of uh Louisiana, but we can certainly look at those more. Um there are uh various ways of um implementing a bylaw, a maximum temperature bylaw. Uh in some jurisdictions, for example, uh it is the scope of how many rooms are being cooled. and others. There have been longstanding um building code or relevant building um code provisions that would make uh cooling uh infrastructure uh as part of the building. So there are certainly >> pardon me. >> Right. So what I'm what I'm trying to say is that yes there are uh a lot of things that we can learn from other municipalities. Um and that's part of the the sort of timeline that we've had in delivering this. uh our report was in December, we're in May is that the timeline that we had with the compliance analysis study highlighted a lot of issues with bringing a maximum temp bylaw such as AGIS, such as uh uh an inability to uh really address those vulnerable tenants in the immediate uh and a lot of unforeseeable uh consequences as a result of a bylaw. >> Thank you. Um, let me just be very clear that um, I'll get to you in a minute. It's 127. I want to finish this item before we break for lunch, which is 12:30. We can extend a bit. I am moving a motion to seek uh, examples of other mun. The second part of the motion which is being drafted right now is to consolidate all our requests sounds like from different divisions different times of how to protect tenants. Uh what is our request provinially and then have we gone to the feds because if you're looking at eco energy program they could use geothermal they could heat pump there's any number of things. So there's the the negative side dowia but you know here are the incentives that is burn less and pay less. um and save some lives. Okay. So, we'll draft we'll have that councelor Fletcher >> and I'll circulate that motion to everybody stand. >> Uh thank you. That's very helpful to know that you're going to be moving that because one of the questions that I had was just do we have something where you've really dug in on the research in New West in New York and any other place that has that to look at the comparables. I'm and I would actually ask legal because uh you've told us that New Westminster has come back and there's been back to council for a number of other um changes to the original bylaw that was put out. So, have you done that? I'll call it as councelor McMahon used to call it. Have you done your homework on that to the degree that you'd like or is could you do that under what the mayor is proposing? >> Yeah. So I I think I'll answer that in two ways. Which is that we can always take more time to look closely at different jurisdictions and compare the legal framework that exists there. We have taken a very close look at uh New Westminster in particular obviously um as in light of their legislative framework which is a bit different than here in Ontario and in Toronto. Uh so I I guess two-part answer which is yes of course we can always take more time and do a thorough analysis. We're very confident to date that we've looked at New Westminster in particular and uh have compared it to the limitations and authorities that exist here in Ontario. >> You'll remember that New Westminster had to run evictions bylaw and they did have a different legal framework and it took a number of year. We couldn't just do exactly what they had done in New Westminster, but we eventually ended up with our own renovations bylaw that fit within our legal framework in Ontario. Uh, I think I'm right in saying that. Correct. >> Yes, you're absolutely correct. >> So, we can't just take what they have and say do this, but Hamilton and other cities, Ottawa was working on that. It's a bit more of an iterative process, but understanding what they've done and what we can't do that they've done is a helpful process for us. >> That's absolutely correct. >> And, uh, there's just another question. And I think maybe the housing secretariat, if they're here, I'm very familiar with a uh retrofit that CHC actually had retrofit dollars that went to Wood Green in order to do um uh HVAC heating and cooling. Obviously, they was built. Well, most of these places were built. There's no air conditioning or actually unit control. I'm just going to clarify that. Yes, that was a fund. That was a CHC fund. Federal dollars for that. I don't know if Mr. Oh, there he is over there. Can you tell us that? Is that true? >> You're correct. >> So, identifying some of those pockets of potential funding because it's capital could be small capital construction. It could also be fairly major capital construction. I think the wood green grant was something 75 was it 75 million or 77 million? >> I think it was 7 million, councelor. But I'm I'm I'm going off memory. Um what I will say and I think it's drawn out in the report as well. Um a number of the federal and provincial programs focus at their core on carbon reduction and GHD reduction. Um so um while cooling can be a subset of that, sometimes it's bundled in a larger program. So, another thing to parse away is how do you effectively pursue the cooling with programs that may have um a link back to GHG reduction and they may not line up exactly, but great a great uh point. We could also look at the degree of programs available outside of the city of Toronto that we could partner with. >> Yes. because reducing hopefully the federal government's still in the business of reducing greenhouse gases that um and CHC is still uh making those kinds of 7 million 75 would have been a lot of money for that one building. So just 7 million but that's quite manageable actually if uh it's possible to look at some of the funding sources and to dovetail temperature reduction with other goals is I think what you're saying to me here >> yes counselor exactly >> and then I'm just interested in public health and my memory when I used to be on the board of health the board of health had very robust approach and thinking about um heat how to manage Pete and perhaps interim measures. Is that something that the board of health still has as its mandate or is it shifted? I see there's a shake. It's shifted. But that is something actually that within this review that the board of health could also I mean the Toronto public health could also have a lens on this because there are interim measures which I think could happen. Would I think Miss Ms. Basil that would be question to you? Yeah, I think through the chair I think that is something that that we could look at. I know um Dr. Frinklestein is here as well if anything to add. >> Yes, the the the board of health or Toronto Public Health did contribute to the earlier report that came forward >> over here. Uh counselor. >> Oh, thank you. Okay. >> Yes. Uh so Toronto Public Health did contribute to the uh previous reports on the science behind uh heat and and the uh the drawing of 26° for instance which we heard a number of uh of our uh of the deputants. Um so we here supporting uh of the work here >> but there could be more that you might do uh more as you had done in the past. I think that's something I'm going to be pursuing. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Um any I will be the first speaker. Okay. Um can you put the uh >> can you >> can you put the motion in front? Counselor Saxs, I have not seen you. Uh did you want to speak on this item? to observe. Okay, let me uh put the motion uh in front of you folks and as I promised earlier, it really has two parts, right? Um and uh let me just being put on the screen in one minute. Okay. Um Okay. The Yes. No. >> No. I just I need to update this. >> So, someone can amend my motion. Don't worry about it. >> Okay. We're good. >> Okay. Um motion is right in front of you maybe. Okay. Here we are. >> Okay. Hooray. Um, my I I've lived in uh apartments for quite a long time. My dad spent I don't know three decades in them, four decades. And when it gets hot, it is very hot. Now, those apartments, this is in St. Jamestown. It's constructed in the early '7s and it has the windows and if if you open the right windows, it's it's there's air flow. I noticed there are some new apartments that don't have that. And also, uh I would bring in an air conditioner to help my dad out in in very hot situation. We know that heat can kill. We have seen those data and it this is really not just comfort well that's important being able to sleep or but it's also health and safety issue. So last year we piloted uh the air conditioning uh units. It was very popular. We are now seeing that expanded fairly dramatically I think several times and it's now 2,400 units. Um, thank you to Acorn to bring this item to us, but it is just scratching the surface. Really, we have to deal with legislation. So the motion the first part of it is uh looking at what other other municipalities are doing which is what everybody was asking question but also very important is how do we protect the tenants because right now it sounds as if there is basically if you force them to go and put in air conditioned units they will just pass it to the tenants and then the tenants will then have to pay and some of them won't be able to. So that's a difficulty. So we'll have to figure out how to do it. Um some of you asked the question of have we not asked the provincial government to change the land the tenants or act there's any number of things they could do to make this possible. So the second part of the motion is consolidate what we've asked before so that we collectively can push the provincial government and the federal government to do the right thing and um help protect the tenants. But there's another piece of it which is the environmental piece. Um some of these buildings are old and it's not very energy efficient. council sex you would understand if we can put in geothermal or heat pump then heat pump of course also provide air conditioning uh but it's the air conditioning unit is actually energy not efficient at all there are many other ways to cool buildings and whether it's deep lake water cooling or any number of things so if the federal government are really interested in a big infrastructure program it would be a good thing to do bring in some financial incentives so that the apartment owners would burn less, keep people cool, and then pay less. So, it's a win-win situation, but that requires a bit of financial incentives, which in the past, um, better building partnership, the high-rise build programs when we had a little bit of money, we can do a few, but certainly, if you're looking at a lot of the buildings across the city, we required a massive investment of eco energy, whatever you want to call it, funds to make that possible. posible. So, let us see whether that's possible or not. Let's gather what we have. I'm sorry, I forgot to put my cell phone on. It's 12:30. I need a motion just to finish this item. All those in favor opposed. Carrie, I don't think there's that many. I'm done speaking. So, those are the motions in front of you. Um, councelor Matlo, you have a question? >> Yep. Speaking. >> Uh, thank you. Um and uh no, thank you for the motion, Mayor, and um and thank you uh to staff for working on this with us. The frustration uh that uh we've all heard from uh many of the the residents and and advocates uh today is that this has been a conversation for years, >> like years and years and years. And um and every time um like every time, especially during the shoulder seasons, uh we experience tenants like boiling in their homes. And the most that they're told is that maybe there'll be like a cooling center in the neighborhood or a cooling room in their building, >> but that means that they still have to vacate their own home and their own bed to like go hang out somewhere while they aren't able to be in their own apartment safely. I've personally been to buildings where um I've uh I've spent time with seniors who um it it might be extraordinary and then usually hot outside and then imagine if you're an upper floor it can be like 90 100° like it's not healthy it's not safe and it's not acceptable and then you know this becomes kind of a big thing every shoulder season it gets in the news for a little while everyone's talking about it and then it just disappears and then everybody moves on to other things and then next year we get to it. Um, this has to stop. Like we have to get to the finish line. We have to get to a maximum temperature bylaw that is effective, that works. The concern raised regarding AGIS is reasonable and has to be addressed. Uh, we have an unfair and unethical system in Ontario where tenants are unfairly asked to pay for uh the um the properties of landlords. um and their equity out of their own pocket and that has to change for a lot of different reasons. That's just unfair that tenants need to uh find out that they have surprise increases in their rents. That being said though, there are jurisdictions um not far from us that have figured out different ways to get there. And while Toronto is in Ontario and we've got different sets of laws and rules that are unique to us as opposed to other jurisdictions, there are similarities and solutions that have been found that we can learn from and we should borrow from. And that's why the mayor's motion is is uh is thoughtful uh because it asks staff to do a deeper dive into what works and what we can learn from. But please, I don't mean to I don't want to speak for long, but I just from the bottom of my heart, let this be the year that we finally figure this out. Um because there's going to be another year where we're going to be hearing from too many people. We all hear from them, every one of our wards and the mayor, too. uh from people who are just pleading with us um we're not safe, we're not healthy, we're like we cannot live in our own home. We need you to have our backs. We need you to do something to support us. And if we find out that there's just some reason that this isn't going to work with the rules that we have in place, then we need to prioritize this right at the top with the provincial government and say like you have to even if you're going to keep the draconian awful AGI in place. There's got to be some exemption, some way to address this health and safety priority. >> So, thank you to the mayor. Thank you to all of you and let's just figure this out this year. at least what has to be done to achieve the real goal which is protecting our residents. Thank you. >> Well, Cox Sax, I should have seen Have you speak first? >> I I would actually just like to say this. First of all, thank you for the motion. Um, but I want us to remember we're not alone. There are m uh counselors I I am a member of the climate caucus and the elbows up group u which has been working together with counselors and mayors across the country. I was in Ottawa three weeks ago lobbying the federal liberal MPs and senators um for the elbows up campaign, part of which is federal support for retrofitting these older buildings. Um there's so many reasons to do it. Health and safety in the summer. We know this is going to be probably an extraordinarily bitter, brutal summer as climate breakdown accelerates. We're going to have more and more of them. But this looks like it's going to be a very bad summer. Um, so we've going to have health risks for everyone, not just tenants, also people in condos. We've got huge, huge problems. Also, low-rise buildings that don't have air conditioning. We have a general generational problem because the city was built for a climate that we no longer have. But we're not alone. There are counselors and mayors across the city working on the Elbowups campaign. I hope that the city will support that campaign, and we need the Liberals in Ottawa to hear us. Thank you. Thank you, council mayor. >> Yeah. Where who we speaking? Oh, council bravo. Council Fletcher and then council bravo. Go for it. >> Thank you. >> Uh thank you. I just wanted to go back to the example that Mr. Rollins gave of the um money that went to Wood Green for 22tory seniors building for retrofit. that will now bring all of those units into a comfortable place to live, winter or summer, cold weather or hot weather. And taking up on what you said, councelor Saxs, that this isn't just Toronto's problem. This is a multifaceted problem, the heat, how we're dealing with it, what other levels of government are doing, because it is a health issue. and Canada Health and Ministry of Health. There's so many partners that need to be at this table and who is at the table in the other locations. I'm interested to hear in New Westminster and New York, who's actually at that table thinking about that, not just MLS and bylaw enforcement and then built form capital dollars. Where does that come from? One of the things we don't want to happen is having everybody here that has been so passionate and thoughtful about it and working on it together with us end up with um above guideline increases for years and years and years. That's not our intention. Our intention is to find a way to manage the heat without uh putting people into debt or they can't pay their rent. that would be an unintended consequence that we shouldn't consider. So, I think your motion, Mayor, is a good one because I'd like to see that factored in when we're looking at what happens to folks in their um in their AGIS. I think, you know, we just talked about the new Westminster, they were a leader around the renovictions bylaw. We understood, it took us a while to kind of understand, well, can't just take their bylaw and say plop it into Toronto. We had to have our own bylaw that met all of our own conditions legally, bylaw enforcement, a landlord and tenant and everything else. So this approach right now, I know it's not a bylaw, but I don't want to have a bylaw that we can't defend. I don't want to have a bylaw that we can't um implement. And I think from our renovations bylaw work um we had very successful one. was highly successful and you'll notice that we don't have a lot of renovictions which was our plan to start with that if they have to do those things there's not going to be so uh we actually we had our large consultations with landlords with large landlords small landlords tenants so it's a really good model to look at how to move forward on this bylaw thank you >> thank you um seeing no speaker >> I I am on the I'm sorry, man. >> Councelor Braff, you're right. Pardon me. >> Thank you. >> My apologies. >> Yes. Yeah. Thank you. I um I'm I think what we have what we've heard today is we are working on a bylaw. Um the mayor has moved two really important motions uh regarding lifting up some of the what you know what the uh deputent shared around um being able to be solid on the answers uh in relation to other jurisdictions and also the role of other orders of government and in particular I think we the comparing the relationship between municipalities in the province of BC um is a little bit different than Ontario. Um the I think that one of the important things here is that the bylaw has to be defensible. It has it can't be challenged. Um the bylaw has to be workable to protect tenants. Um and it has to be effective. And as much as it's wonderful to hear examples and and look at New Westminster, um I you know I think the entire municipality is half the size of a city ward. Um but it's also what they were able to do. um you know the as I understand it the fines of up to $750 for landlords for not complying with a bylaw that I'm not sure how effective that would be a disincentive in Toronto and the exemptions that come with it there would have to be you know look at that uh I I think that one of the challenges is that this is so important to people to people's lives livelihoods um public health um mental health uh because extreme heat is also has a huge impact on mental health. I'd like to um suggest as staff are looking to implement the the mayor's amendments to consider some of what I've been able to do um in uh the divisions that report into economic and community development committee where we've held you know with the childcare sector for example also very complex multi-government uh vulnerable users at the end important to the economy etc. um a working space where stakeholders in this case could be tenants um organizations working on legal environment uh public health experts etc to sit with some of the questions that are being wrestled with here which are pretty existential and staff have to wrestle with those questions and that could be an opportunity to do that together. um you know as as a space uh we also had through the implementation of so the creation of a um of an inclusive economic development framework we had meetings with a multitude of stakeholders to be able to consider uh how it would work you know that it's really important I think to create those spaces and if possible through uh the direction that the mayor has given perhaps there's a way to externalize some of the deliberations that uh staff are dealing with so that uh we have a space that isn't just coming to debut at committee to lift up some of the complexities and the tensions that are inherent in legislating in such an important area. Thank you. >> Thank you, councelor. Seeing no other speaker, the amendment in front of you, the two parts, all those in favor? Post carry at the item as amended. Post carry. Thank you. There are three other items left. I don't think we can finish it. I you Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. I We're leaving. We're leaving. We have waterfront dock wall. Uh item four. Okay. You You have Yeah, you have some motions and questions. Okay. Item five is one speaker and item six has six speakers. Uh so we'll come back at uh 130 I believe. Yeah. Uh >> 13. >> 1:30 on time. and uh to to finish the rest of the agenda. Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much. Um, uh, clerks have informed me that we do have quorum. Um, and we will, uh, pick up on the agenda with item EX31.4, waterfront dock walls and western beaches breakwaters action plan update. Um, and I do have a few questions for staff. Are there any other questions for staff? All right. Um, I'll begin then. And uh my first uh question is on the responsibility of each level of government for the dock walls. Can you describe what the responsibility is of each level of government um for our city's dock walls and and what guides this? >> Uh yes, thank you. Um the what what guides the responsibility for dock walls firstly is clarity and ownership which is something that the work set out in this report seeks to clarify and determine so that we can engage in a whole of government approach to managing the complexity of the asset and so how have wallals been addressed as part of our waterfront revitalization and the and the uh kind of trigo government work there >> through waterfront revitalization. Um the team responsible for that work has replaced approximately 400 to 500 meters of aging dock wall and naturalized edges through projects like Portland's flood protection which in some cases replace those aging dock walls with revetments and also along the edge of Badassagay Park along Lakeshore Boulevard East Parliament slip and Jarvis slip and I guess reviewing this report um I'm just looking for clarity on what the Toronto port authorities responsib ibility is on the maintenance of the dock walls as an agency of the federal government. >> Yes, thanks for the question. Um the preliminary work that we have set out in the report which will be verified through future ownership work um assumes that right now the Toronto Port Authority owns approximately 8 km of dockwall in the central waterfront. Uh and we do have confirmation specifically around the west uh the eastern gap at Toronto Islands that the remaining 40 meters of dock wall at Wards Island is the responsibility of Toronto Port Authority to repair. >> All right. Um that's helpful. And I guess just the final question is um hearing a little bit more about how improving our central waterfront dock walls um helps support and address and is an investment in the city's climate resiliency. I mean even already today we've talked about the impacts of uh extreme weather events and and the climate crisis. Um what relationship does that have to what we're looking at today? >> Uh thank you. When dock walls are weakened, they're more susceptible to uh environmental impacts uh related to climate change. And we know that the work that's being considered both for the dock walls and the western beaches breakwaters is around uh shoreline protection so that important investments such as housing, parks and public realm investments in transportation infrastructure can advance as well as the flatwater paddling areas that are important recreational assets uh on the western beaches. >> All right, thank you very much. Those are my questions. Um are there any other questions? All right. Um speakers on this item. All right. I will just speak very briefly um to the item. Um I want to begin by thanking city staff particularly from the waterfront secretariat and all the uh engaged divisions who have contributed to this framework. Um, I know it has been uh a long-standing um issue and and one that um that folks over uh many years have been working to uh to ensure that the the city um has in in the right order. And we know that our harbor is one of our most important resources. It's a destination. It is a place for recreation, for boers, for paddlers, and a waterway for shipping and cruises and so much other activity as well. And these dock walls are so important in protecting those critical uses and for keeping our city um on um on point when it comes to our climate resiliency, our climate leadership and our capability uh to manage uh well through climate change and extreme weather as uh we also work to to be a leader uh in in on that front. And as staff have outlined, there has been a long history of ownership with this infrastructure that is um continuing to be complex and that city staff have been working very hard with partners to make sense of and and create um a more comprehensive path through. For example, the eastern gap seaw wall, for example, um that has taken years for Transport Canada and the Toronto Port Authority to agree that it is federal ownership. Um the work that staff will undertake to ensure there is focused due diligence to make sure that those responsibilities are clear and that what is needed to take care of this infrastructure is agreed upon is very critical and this will take the involvement of the federal government as partners on these crucial uh pieces of rehabilitation. Um it's important for all of the marine and harbor uses and for us as a city um and in terms of some of the um some of the bigger projects that we have to make uh waterfront revitalization uh stay on track and and realized in the way that all three governments have invested in. Working together with um all levels of government to protect and enhance this infrastructure that supports our waterfront is a priority of mine. and I know it's one that the city has uh been at the table uh for, you know, for for a very long time and really uh encouraged by this continued progress. And thank you for that. All right. Um all those in favor? Any opposed? And that carries. And now we um are moving to EX31.5 adjustments to capital budget carry forward funding and future year commitments. And we do have a speaker on this item. Um, Albert Venel, >> thank you. Venel, sorry. >> Um, you're you have five minutes and please begin whenever you're ready and I'll let you know when you're getting to your time. >> Sorry. Go ahead and turn it on yourself. >> Okay. Uh, good afternoon. Well, this is an obvious no-brainer. If the city has an additional 237.2 2 million from unspent capital projects funding. $50 million ought to automatically go to fund a remote viewing program which can save many innocent lives. What the police refuse to do? What actions have these eight counselors done to recall the review, convene Ryerson, and hold TPS accountable? You're not even going to try to get to the bottom of this matter. Civilians name does not belong to the police. They cannot use it to cover up their negligence. The review proved what I am saying. They have the 2013 France warnings which includes incel Danforth MacArthur and they record a new set of 2019 corona virus predictions. What page of the Epstein report is this on? How do we restore the good name of civilians they have so badly tarnished? Do civilians want to know when and where the next terrorist event is coming from? That they have dormant superpowers and that free energy and flying cars is being suppressed by a shadow government. Toronto police are in the Epstein files as the iconic exemplar of gross negligence and mass overwhelming incompetence. We have the EFTA number. This matter has gone viral on a global scale. The whole world is watching. The onus is on the city council to confirm what I am saying. Recall the review, convene Ryerson, and hold the police accountable. Redux what Ryerson and the reporters have already done. Place all my witnesses in a room and let them talk. This time publicly without the review and TPS orchestrating a blue wall of silence cover up. Congress is having hearings on the UFO phenomena. A public Ryerson confession should push the zero point energy from hell put off into the public domain. Office of the chief knows exactly what I am talking about. They were at Ryerson many many times regarding this matter. Then they tried to hide it from the review. The review found the France warnings and proved a UAP incident happened, then falsified their report to hide this crucial information from the civilians who paid for it. The civilians answer is yes. Why are the review and TPS on the wrong side of history? And why is city council doing nothing about it? Zero point energy means you can scrap the TTC and fleet services altogether. Flying cars zip right over the city's congestion problems. At a much higher level, ZPE is guaranteed to break a global change event. Why is TPS frantic to destroy my evidence? Why is city council doing nothing to rein in their rogue police department who hide behind falsified civilian reviews? I urge the executive committee to confirm what I am saying by public testimony of my witnesses, the review Ryerson reporters and the police. and to finally end the truth embargo by placing ZPE into the public domain, take an act on new predictions, and hold the past negligence accountable. So, I I just add lib to the five minutes. Um, we should order a new review to investigate Ryerson and my understanding is that the ZP is going to break. The United States government is doing a slow roll on UFO disclosure and they have guaranteed me the ZP is going to be in there. >> Thank you, Albert. Are there any questions for the speaker? All right, seeing none, uh thank you. Um are there any questions uh for staff on this item for members of the executive? Any um uh speakers on this item? All right. Um all those in favor? Any opposed? And that carries. Um and now our final item, EX31.6, remuneration and expenses of members of council and council appointees to agencies, corporations, and other bodies for the year ended December 31st, 2025. Uh and we have a number of speakers um on this item. Um I'll begin with the first uh Nikki Ward online. Okay. Um, uh, David Mitchellson. Okay. Uh, Daniel Tate, you have five minutes and please begin when you're ready and I'll let you know when you're getting to time. >> Okay. Good afternoon. Um, we're talking about the remuneration and expenses of council in 2025. Uh, we're just going to go over some fast facts here. Uh, the total cost of city council in 2022 was $18.5 million. In 2025, it was $24.3 million. That's a whopping 31% increase in only four years. Cumulative inflation since 2022 was 16%. So, why is city council expenses double that? Now, let's look at councelor spending. From 2020 to 2024, not a single city councelor spent over $1 million. Not one. In 2025, there were five. Yes, five. Bravo, Mley, Malik, Meyers, and Moyes. Each spent between 1.01 and 1.08 08 million, a council spending record. Bravo, Mley, Malik, and Moyes were also the top four withdrawers from the council general budget, ranging from 121,000 to $178,000. The average counselor budget draw was 55,892. And if you remove those top four counselors from the draw, the average comes down to $36,742. These are unprecedented numbers. The spending is getting progressively worse. Now, let's look at some of the specific expenses. Mike Cole spent almost $500 on an elbows up sign. Amber Moley spent $514 on branded magnets and stickers. Francis Nuniata spent a staggering 45,000 on management consulting services. Aliendo Bravo spent 4,400 on branded tote bags. Osma spent 2,600 on bubble tubes. Yes, bubble tubes for blowing bubbles. Diane Sachs took two big trips to Rio and Mexico City. What was her carbon footprint? Diane Saxs also spent $10,000 on polling and branded hoodies, polos, and t-shirts. Chris Moyes spent a whopping $16,000 on advertising and promotion, including $1,000 on candy pouches and $700 on branded ice cream cone wrappers. And not to be outdone, Shelley Carol spent $16,000 jet seting around to Paris, Vancouver, and Frankfurt. The expenses I've just listed are egregious and leave taxpayers wondering how any of this frivolous spending benefits constituents. What we are seeing is a culture of spending, one in which respect for public coffers appears virtually non-existent. It's increasingly clear that this city council does not have a revenue problem. It has a spending problem. Taxpayers are questioning whether counselors are prudently managing public money and what value, if any, this spending actually delivers to constituents. At a time when residents are contending with rising housing costs, escalating property taxes, aging infrastructure, and declining affordability, many of the expenditures listed in this report reflect poor judgment and weak stewardship of public funds. Future councils should re-evaluate these budgets, especially the bloated advertising and promotion budget, which moonlights as de facto campaigning, further entrenching the incumbency advantage. This needs to end. Uh before I conclude, I just want to play a quick sound bite here. Um from where is it? here uh from councelor Sachs >> train there's no gravy train city hall >> there's no >> many would argue that the gravy train is alive and well and so finally taxpayers are very disturbed at these spending patterns and are questioning the judgment of this $24.3 million city council thank you >> are Are there any questions for the speaker? All right, seeing none, we'll move on to our next speaker, um, Shiva Balo, uh, Toronto Crypto Exchange. >> Our next, uh, speaker, uh, Dan Seljack, another glass box. Um, you have five minutes. Um, please begin whenever you're ready, and I'll let you know when you're getting to time. >> Thank you. All right. Before we start, I want to give some props to uh councelor Steven Holidayiday, who taught me the importance of props when speaking at city hall. So, here I've got two cups, right? Each cup is meant to represent a budget serving a population. The water inside these cups represent funds. Now, the larger the population, you might have a larger cup. When you have a smaller population, you might have a smaller cup. We're talking wards, we're talking cities, whatever. Now, if I drink this cup, I drink 3/4 of it and there's 25% left. I drink this cup and there's 0% left. You might say, Dan, you drank more water out of this cup, but this one is now empty. And when we talk about budgets for a large growing city, what I think is important is not to look at the absolute figures. $1 million this, $1 million that, but the fact that budgets need to grow with populations that grow. And what you're doing with the budget allocation in your ward or your city relative to the population of that city, relative to inflation, relative to all the rising costs of working in Toronto is important. Is there money left over at the end or not? Is there something inappropriate happening with that money or not? People are allowed to spend money within their budget. You've heard today from a speaker who's using that absolute value value of $1 million as a threshold for excessive spending, ignoring whether or not that absolute number was a waste relative to what was budgeted. Sure, a million dollar seems like a lot of money, but what are we really doing here? If we look instead at what was allocated and overages, according to consultant Britney Ford, for instance, we get a different picture. Using that metric, Nunziata, Mantis, and Bradford come out looking worse. Looking specifically at office expenditure limits according to journalist Matt Elliot Nunziata Malik Peruza come closest to reaching that limit. Close but importantly again not over. If we're talking about waste I would argue that cherrypicking figures to turn this very mundane item into a debate long-winded debate is quite wasteful. Considering the hourly wages of the folks in the room right now, each five minute deputation costs based on the salaries of the folks here approximately $315 for 15 minutes, which is the lowest the Harvard Business Review uh can go. So we'll divide that by three. This is costing about a h 100red bucks for me to talk to you for 5 minutes. So if I'm farming social media clips or doing what have you to elongate this debate, each time I come up here is costing money. The importance of deputation should be preserved no matter what. I believe it's worth the costs. But if we're talking about waste, what is waste? What's a deputation that actually makes sense versus one that's just being used for social media clout or not really progressing the debate at all? Instead, let's look at how funds were spent. For instance, Brad Bradford spent a pittance, $250, one might say, on a podcasting coach to launch a podcast that then talked about the city at large and arguably helped solidify his position as someone running for mayor of a whole city. Not really clear how that promotional cost helped specifically his ward and his constituents. Hours spent recording a podcast just $250, but still an expense nonetheless and something that we could classify as waste even if it doesn't show up as a budget line item. Similarly, if we look at transportation expenses versus council attendance, I can understand spending a lot of money getting around town if you are then going to show up for every council meeting. But for instance, Michael Thompson spent over $6,100 driving around and then was absent for 22% of votes. So, where was he? I'm going to shout out my boy Holiday again. And for those of you who know me, as you leave, you might want to look for flying pigs in the sky because uh I don't give him praise often, but the guy expensed no travel and he missed no votes. My ask is simple. While the way that this uh information is presented is a little bit opaque, it allows people to cherrypick figures for their own political means. And I would really love it if the executive committee could actually maximize transparency and put maximum daylight on these issues. Working with open data, creating a dashboard so that people can see these expenses relative to one another and to decide on their own merits with one cost versus another with the population size with all of these figures in a nuanced and actually presentable way because it's difficult to read the documents as they are. you might actually be able to defang some folks who are perhaps presenting data for their own means. Uh in the meantime, canispens.com has a very interesting dashboard that while I can't speak to its accuracy or if its efficacy, the presentation of it, the simplicity of it is exactly what I'm talking about. This is a means for regular citizens to hold counselors accountable without having to go through third parties who might be using this information to present a very specific story and very specific data points. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Um are there any questions for the speaker? Seeing none, um thank you for joining us today. Um and our final um speaker on this item is is is W KALI Ali. Okay. Um please begin when you're ready. Uh W and you have five minutes and I'll let you know when you're getting to time. >> Uh thank you Deputy Mayor Asham Malik. Uh my name is Wed Kgali Ali um a candidate in the upcoming municipal elections for Toronto center war 13 and I'm here to speak to this item uh the annual report on the remuneration and expenses of members of council and council appointees. Um I understand that this report is being received for information as required under the city of Toronto act. Uh it provides transparency on rem remuneration, office expenses, travel and other costs associated with elected officials and council appointees. That transparency matters. Uh residents deserve to know how public dollars are being spent and public officials should be accountable for the resources entrusted to them. The report itself states that it is an itemized statement required annually and that there are no financial implications arising uh from receiving it. But I want to use this item to raise a broader point. Budgets are not just neutral documents. Uh they're moral documents. They're a reflection of our priorities. Uh when residents see detailed uh reporting on the cost of elected office, they're not only asking whether the expenses were eligible, they're asking whether city hall is investing in the things that matter uh that make their lives safer, healthier, and more dignified. In Regent Park, we've seen that what real community investments can do. Uh the social development plan is not an abstract policy. It's a community safety strategy. It's an employment strategy. It's a youth's uh empowerment strategy. It's a food security strategy. It's a way for residents, grassroots, agencies, and institutions to work together to prevent harm before it happens. And yet, the region park social development plan has faced a funding cut. a funding cut, my friends, of half a million dollars. At the same time, Toronto Police Services received $93.8 million increase for the 2026 operating budget, approximately a 7% increase, bringing the net operating budget request to $1.439 billion. That contrast is painful for communities like Regent Park when many residents um organizations and stakeholders have deputed in favor of such investments while no res 31. >> So yeah, so we are told that there's not enough money for communityled prevention. Not enough money for youth employment. Not enough money for access to space. Not enough money for food security. Not enough money for the residents who show up every day to build safer neighborhoods from the ground up. But there's always seems to be enough money uh after harm has already happened. I'm not here to attack individual members of council. I'm here to ask council to apply the same level of scrutiny, transparency, and accountability to the city's broader spending priorities that this report applies to renumeration and expenses. If we can itemize office expenses, we can itemize the cost of underfunding prevention. If we can track travel and conference expenses, we can track how many youth are left without employment opportunities. If we can report the cost of public office, we can report the cost of cutting community safety infrastructure. Residents are asking for a city that respects communities before a crisis is born. A city that invests in people before policing becomes the only response. A city that understands that affordable housing, youth jobs, access to community space, food security, and social development plans are not extras. They are core public safety investments. So my request is simple. receive the this report, but do not treat it as a routine administrative item. Let it remind us that every dollar tells a story. And right now, communities are asking council to write a different story, one rooted in respect, prevention, dignity, and real investment in the people who make this city work. Thank you, uh, Deputy Mayor Malik and members of the executive committee. >> Thank you. Are there any uh questions for the speaker? >> All right, seeing none, thank you for joining us today. All right. Um that concludes our speakers on this item. Um and now I will uh turn to members of the executive. Are there questions for staff? Uh councelor Carol. Uh yes. Um I was going to ask this question anyway, but now it becomes a followup on uh the uh some of the the uh comments from one of the deputants, which is to, you know, find a way to format this so that we're further explaining things. And it it comes up for me around travel. Um because we we don't always make clear here why this counselor, why are they going there? Um, and I'm wondering purpose of attendance. I'm wondering how you populate that. Is that just based on how we fill out the sheet >> through the speaker? Yes, that we are relying on the information provided by the member in particular about who is attending and why. But we can always add like we know in some cases that some members are being are going to events because the mayor's delegated them to go as her representative and others are going on economic development trips. We can try to work on making that clearer in the next report. We do appreciate this is a very >> complicated and you know very difficult report to read >> because I'm I I was wondering if that was down to me for instance uh um I don't think you'll mind my highlighting council where it says mayor's designate or intergovernmental it's because he's the designated person in that body. I haven't thought ahead to this sheet because if you and in my section every single one is actually because I'm the vice chair of economic development and the mayor's champion on economic development. That's a mouthful. I don't put that under every trip. But there's there's no excursion here that isn't about that. Um but I don't know that we've it would be problematic for you. I believe, tell me if I'm wrong about this, those those roles and those reasons would have to be made official. They're they're sometimes not official. That's just the way we've chosen to to work in a particular term of office. That that would need to be more formulated. Am I right about that? Uh if it was more official that obviously does assist us, but we we can also we appreciate how uh the committee structure works and sometimes we will we can learn to adapt to kind of identify in that like in your case that you're traveling as vice chair of of um economic development to flag that and be more clear about it. >> Right. Right. And I'm I'm uh I'm happy, madame chair, that um the uh um the general manager of economic development is still here in the room. I hope you won't mind my putting him on the spot. With respect to the missions that we we have undertaken on economic development, um the the impetus for all them, we're being more strategic. We we've certainly reduced where we can for for affordability purposes, but where we have um taken economic development missions, they are really in response, am I right, to uh the trade situation we find ourselves in at the moment. The uncertainty created by the White House is certainly impacting 2025 and will again in 2026. Am I right about that? >> To the chair, you're correct. uh council adopted a tariff action plan in March of 2025 that directed the division to diversify trade for Toronto exporters and there's been efforts to train up Toronto firms on how to access priority markets those priority markets defined by where we have trade agreements and then we have brought missions into those countries uh with many businesses accompanying in order to create the trade links necessary to grow business >> right and so what you see here is uh my colleague trying to keep open some of the relationships through Great Lakes cities and other organizations and uh your work in economic development some of which I took part in is about you utilizing CEDA to greatest effect the the Canada Europe trade agreement >> to the chair that's correct >> thank you thank you those are my questions thanks madam chair are there any other questions um to staff All right, seeing none, are there any speakers on this item? All right, seeing none, um, all those in favor? Any opposed? And that carries. And that's our final item for today. And that concludes our meeting. Thank you everyone. Yeah, I uh Daniel