Matt ElliottThey redo the bad landlord vote for Holyday. He remembers, this time, where the YES button is. It CARRIES 26-0.
Before the next item, Councillor Gord Perks rises to pay tribute to the departing David Stonehouse, the longtime director of the waterfront secretariat. "He asked that we not do this, but in typical fashion, we're going to ignore advice from staff," jokes Perks.
Up now: the island airport. Premier Doug Ford says he intends to pass legislation that would take Toronto's spot in the tripartite agreement governing Billy Bishop Island Airport, which would clear the runway for airport expansion. https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2026.MM39.59
"I would suggest that the provincial government could assume responsibility for the agreement through legislation, but the federal government would not have to accept the amendment to the contract," says the city solicitor re: the tripartite agreement. The feds could stop Ford, in other words.
Fletcher asks how the city is supposed to deal with all the ongoing planning applications in the port lands if flight paths are going to change at the island airport.
"That is certainly something that we will want to look at," say staff. Okay then.
"Can you help me understand how the airport operations could make life less livable in this city?" wonders Holyday. Staff cite significantly increased traffic, interference with recreational uses in the harbour, the potential for "jet blast screens" on the runway, noise, etc.
Councillor Matlow has a motion on the island airport. It asks staff for advice on "potential legal options to defend the City of Toronto's interests" in waterfront lands like the airport.
"Doug Ford needs to understand that leadership is NOT cutting partners out and making announcements AT people rather than WITH people," says Matlow. He says it doesn't matter what you think about jets on the island, people should want a better process.
"We firmly say, and we demand, a seat at the table. We deserve it, and there is no table without us," says Deputy Mayor Ausma Malik.
"Everything has been put at risk, and we simply cannot take the premier's word that he somehow has the city of Toronto's interest at heart."
"If they take this land of the city, what is next — and in whose interest? What important housing projects are going to be interrupted, cancelled, or backtracked -- what is up for grabs next, without say from our residents?" asks Malik.
"The next thing you know, [Ford] will send in somebody to take the mayor out, if you know what I mean. This is not Venezuela! You just don't do whatever you want. This is Toronto. We live in a DEMOCRACY," says Councillor Paula Fletcher.
Councillor Stephen Holyday says he is "REALLY ANGRY."
"What I see is a city disintegrating and a lack of leadership on all of this!" He's mad, he says, because Metrolinx took some land on Eglington West for the LRT and no one cared, but now people are mad about the airport land.
Holday also argues that wards in Etobicoke and North York are already subject to airplane noise from Pearson, so he doesn't see why the waterfront wards should be spared from additional island airport impacts.
"If you don't understand the economic interest in having a successful international airport ... the problem is not with the policy, the problem is with YOU," concludes Holyday, suggesting councillors who oppose this should run for provincial office.
"If you're not at the table, then you're on the menu," says Councillor Brad Bradford. He argues that Chow and council failed to commit to a "long-term vision" for the airport in 2024, which led to this move for the provincial and federal govs to go forward without the city.
Mayor Chow is up. "Let us not twist truth," she says in response to Bradford. "We have a vision of the waterfront! We've said we have one. We said we will negotiate this master plan, this tripartite agreement!"
"In my mind, democracy matters," says Chow.
"We are a level of government that is one of the biggest in the country. We have a huge budget. And we have to be part of the conversation."
"On Monday, we heard that land will be expropriated. Which land? What land? Has anyone seen the plan? Has anyone seen precisely what kind of tripartite agreement is going to be acceptable? Is there a plan? If there is, it's a mystery to me," says Chow of the island airport.
"We are not shutting down that airport," says Chow, noting that the priority should actually be for Billy Bishop to get the approved runway extensions done so they can meet federal safety regulations.
Saying this is basically a done deal, Holyday asks Chow what the city's plan will be to handle increased traffic around the island airport after it's expanded. Chow says there can't be a plan yet because nobody even knows what Ford's plan is for the airport exactly.
I'm not sure where the number comes from, but Fletcher and Chow are now talking about Ford wanting to increase the number of island airport passengers from ~2 million annually today to 10 million.
At ten million annual passengers, Billy Bishop would be the fifth busiest airport in the country, surpassing Halifax (4.1 million), Winnipeg (4.4 million), Ottawa (4.9 million), and Edmonton (8.1 million)
Councillor Mike Colle moves to request the federal government conduct a safety study before agreeing on any island airport expansion. Nunziata says his motion is out of order because it's beyond what council is debating today.
Time to vote. Matlow’s motion calling for a report to the next council meeting on legal options for the city to defend its waterfront land, including the island airport land, CARRIES 21-3.
The island airport item, declaring that Toronto is opposed to any unilateral expropriation of city land by the provincial and federal government, CARRIES 22-3.
(I believe Councillor Mike Colle was recorded in the negative on those airport items because he was boycotting the vote, but need to confirm.)
Up now: looking a gift park in the mouth? The Weston Foundation wants to give Toronto $50 million to transform Queen's Park North. But nearby resident groups are not big fans of the design concept, especially a proposed raised "tree walk" and washroom/cafe structure https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2026.EX29.3
On the Queen's Park North item, Councillor Dianne Saxe moves a long motion to give staff more time to review the design proposal, include public art, and look at the business plan for the cafe.
"One of the suggestions at the Design Review Committee, which I have to say is at least intriguing, is to put a slide down the back of the horse," notes Councillor Saxe of the Queen's Park North statue of King Edward on a horse. She says it'd be fun for kids, but doubts it'll happen.
After supportive words from Matlow and Fletcher, Saxe's motion on the Queen's Park North item CARRIES via show of hands. New report on the Weston-funded design is due in June.
Mayor Olivia Chow moves to accept $1.2 million USD prize from Bloomberg to fund the school food program. Can anyone possibly oppose this? Place your bets.
Motion to accept a $1.2 million USD Bloomberg philanthropy prize to support the school food program CARRIES 23-0. He found the "yes" button again.
Up now: an item about the next phase of Port Lands revitalization. Asked about development plans, staff say the Toronto Port Authority has agreed to an OLT settlement in relation to the approved 2024 zoning for Ookwemin Minising, but new jet proposal could affect things going forward.
Staff clarify the OLT settlement with the Port Authority re: the port lands is in relation to existing airport operations. "Should there be new proposed operations which involve a different type of aircraft, then we would need to be revisiting the zoning for parts of the port lands."
(The waterfront secretariat does note that Ookwemin Minising is generally north of airport flight paths so the bigger impact of an expanded airport on port lands development would probably be with the lands further south.)
Report on the next steps on the Port Lands Flood Protection project CARRIES via show of hands. Let's take a moment to appreciate the pretty pictures. https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2026.EX29.2
Up now: Mayor Olivia Chow wants a pothole blitz. Staff say there have been a lot of potholes this winter, as our potholes are generally caused by the freeze/thaw cycle. https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2026.EX29.4
Some councillors are asking about the city's plan to test out using AI to identify potholes which has me thinking of responses like, "You're absolutely right. That wasn't a pothole. It was a sewer access hole. I was wrong to fill it with hot ash."
"I have heard a lot about nanotechnology," Councillor Lily Cheng says. She asks if staff have considered using nanotechnology in asphalt.
"I'm not sure that we've considered it, but we're always actively looking and making sure we stay up to date," says staffer.
Council runs out of time. They'll come back to the pothole blitz debate tomorrow. They will also attempt to deal with the other 110+ items still remaining on this agenda. Wish them luck. They'll need it.
See you back here in this thread at 9:30 a.m. tomorrow.
Council is getting set for the start of day two. We're anticipating a very long debate about flag protocol today, so get hyped for that.
The meeting stream for today is here. I'll keep posting until there's nothing left to post about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0CJH1SGjPo
City Council - March 26, 2026
Dealing with some quick items, Council votes to refer a forensic audit on the city's snow clearing contracts to the Infrastructure & Environment Committee. The new festival strategy is APPROVED via show of hands after an amendment from Ainslie to include digital payment options for permits.
Council has resumed its debate on potholes. Councillor Paul Ainslie wants to know why reported pothole issues are marked as resolved when staff go out and can't locate the reported pothole. Staff say improvements are coming on process to "close the loop."
Councillor Jon Burnside asks staff if it's true that state-of-good-repair funding for roads was higher under Tory than it is under Chow. The CFO says he'll need to look at the numbers, but points out much of the transportation repair budget under Tory was going to the Gardiner.
Councillor Alejandra Bravo asks if the increasing weight of vehicles is causing more potholes on Toronto streets. Staff say that's a factor, yes.
On potholes, Councillor Neethan Shan moves for staff to investigate ways to improve the pothole reporting process. He also wants a map to track requests for potholes "larger than a shoebox."
Councillor Jamaal Myers, meanwhile, has a motion to create a road repair task force to try to get to the bottom of why Toronto roads are deteriorating so quickly.
Councillor Holyday wants a report for Q1 2027 on the road repair backlog, with options to speed up repairs.
Still stuck on potholes. Councillor Lily Cheng moves for staff to look at smart cameras on buses and other city vehicles to identify potholes. She also wants to look at new innovations in asphalt.
Time, at last, for some pothole votes. Councillor Jamaal Myers' motion to create a road repair task force to figure out why Toronto's roads deteriorate so quickly FAILS 9-13.
Councillor Lily Cheng's pothole motion to look at smart camera tech and asphalt innovation CARRIES 19-5.
All other pothole motions carry via show of hands. Mayor Olivia Chow's pothole blitz is approved 24-0.
Councillor Lily Cheng rises to object to Nunziata trying to speed councillors along during their speeches. Then she points to a group of pastors in the chamber who have been "praying for city council." But whoops, the pastors have already left.
Up now: an item about Metrolinx transit construction. Chernos Lin asks for an update on council's request for trucks working on the project to have GPS and signage. Staff say Metrolinx is working on it, but there's no indication when the request will be completed. https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2026.EX29.7
After some justifiable grousing about Metrolinx, council approves the construction report via a show of hands. Up now: should Toronto pay people to shovel snow after big storms, like they do in NYC? The mayor wants a program. https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2026.EX29.13
Councillor Crisanti asks about the staff time and resources required to develop this pay-to-shovel program. "We have absolutely no idea," says City Manager Paul Johnson. "We have no one available at this point who is able to be assigned to this."
"Why would we pay twice?" Councillor Holyday wonders, pointing out that the city already pays $145 million a year to contractors to remove snow. He likens this to "the checkers checking the checkers who check things."
Holyday urges councillors to "think carefully" about the pay-to-shovel program. "I understand the politics and wanting to signal innovation, but I really don't think this is a good use of staff's time." He says the program is "fraught with risk."
Councillor Dianne Saxe moves to make sure the city talks to the union while developing this pay-to-shovel program.
"I think this is a terrible idea," says Burnside. He laments that the city has taken on so much responsibility for sidewalk snow and says business and residents should just do it. "Newsflash: people don't want tax increases, so maybe they're going to have to start picking up a shovel themselves."
"This is nuts," says Councillor Mike Colle. "We tried this before. And I remember getting the calls, 'The guy from the city that came to shovel the snow, he just stole all my jewelry!' 'The guy stabbed my dog!'"
Deborah Preuss, pcc 🇨🇦@GraphicMatt if only they'd actually clear and remove the snow ...
Greg Burrell 
🦞🚴🥔@GraphicMatt Sounds like a good rationale for registration fees scaled with GVWR.
@GraphicMatt thank you, Matt. 🙏