TABLE OF CONTENTS

REPORTS OF THE STANDING COMMITTEES

AND OTHER COMMITTEES

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998

SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO REVIEW THE FINAL REPORT

OF THE TORONTO TRANSITION COMMITTEE

REPORT No. 7

1Approval of Design Concept, Budget and Work Schedule for Phase One Renovations to Toronto City Hal

2Number of Citizens to be Appointed to the St. Lawrence Centre for the Performing Arts, Board of Management

3Qualifications for Appointees to the Licensing Tribunal

4Other Items Considered by the Committee 6091

City of Toronto

REPORT No. 7

OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO REVIEW THE FINAL REPORT

OF THE TORONTO TRANSITION TEAM

(from its meeting on June 3, 1998,

submitted by Councillor David Miller, Chair)

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998

1

Approval of Design Concept, Budget and Work

Schedule for Phase One Renovations to Toronto City Hall

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted the following recommendations:

"It is recommended that the recommendations of the Sub-Committee for the Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall as embodied in the communication dated May 29, 1998, from the City Clerk, be adopted, subject to:

(a)amending Recommendation No. (2) of the Sub-Committee for the Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall by adding thereto the words 'and that funding for Recommendation No. (3)(iii) be included within the $5.2 million already approved by City Council', so that such recommendation shall now read as follows:

'(2)recommended to the Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team the adoption of Recommendations Nos. (3)(i) and (3)(iii) embodied in the report (May 25, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services, and that funding for Recommendation No. (3)(iii) be included within the $5.2million already approved by City Council'; and

(b)adding thereto the following:

'It is further recommended that:

(1)a lottery take place at Council on June 4, 1998, and that Members of Council be given the opportunity to select their own ballot;

(2)Members of Council presently located in offices at City Hall be permitted to remain in their offices if they so choose, and those Members of Council who choose to remain in their City Hall office be excluded from the lottery;

(3)Councilor Berger's name not be included in the pool for seating in the Council Chamber, and, in recognition of his hearing disability, he be assigned a seat in the most opportune location within the Chamber prior to the lottery, and that such seat be removed from the lottery;

(4)Members of Council be permitted to negotiate an office trade with another Member of Council and that such trades take place within one week of the lottery for offices;

(5)those Members of Council who are interested in Office No. 35 be requested to submit their names to the City Clerk, and the City Clerk be requested to assign Office No. 35 by lottery;

(6)the current parking allocation at City Hall be maintained;

(7)the Budget Committee be requested to report to Council, through the Corporate Services Committee, on the source of funding over and above the budget of $5.2 million previously approved by Council, to accommodate all of the additional items requested; and

(8)the following motions be referred to the Project Architect for his comments and a determination on whether minor changes can be made to accommodate the recommendations embodied therein:

Moved by Councillor Faubert:

"It is recommended that a count-down clock be installed in the Council Chamber in City Hall in a location that is visible to all Members of Council."

Moved by Councillor Jakobek:

"It is recommended that the Project Architect be requested to:

(1)investigate the cost of moving the wall in the City Hall Council Chamber back, in order to:

(a)allow for two rows of Councillors' seats; and

(b)maintain, as close as possible, the size of the Councillors' desks in the City Hall Council Chamber to the size of the desks currently in use in the Metro Hall Council Chamber;

(2)review the issue of accommodation for the Press, including the possibility of the installation of glass partitions and a second level to provide a total of 20 to 24 seats; and the permanent office space for the Press on the first floor be completed in Phase 1;

(3)incorporate, in his reconsideration of this project, a projection screen which is not fixed and which can be hidden when not in use, so that the Corporate logo can be seen prominently on the back wall;

(4)ensure that a light is installed on the microphone on the Councillors' desks in the Council Chamber to indicate when the microphone is 'live'; and

(5)re-examine the second floor layout to ensure more equity in office space."

Moved by Councillor Johnston:

"It is recommended that the Commissioner of Corporate Services be requested to review the feasibility of accomplishing the move to City Hall by the end of December 1998, without placing enormous strain on City staff, and submit a report thereon to the Sub-Committee for the Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall."

Moved by Councillor Moscoe:

"It is recommended that plans for the additional podium floor to house new Committee rooms, media offices and other needed facilities be moved forward to Phase 1 from Phase 2 and the Commissioner of Corporate Services be requested to report thereon, through the Mayor's Office, to the Budget Committee."

Moved by Councillor O'Brien:

"It is recommended that the following items be added to the City Hall project:

(1)sound-proofing of windows for offices overlooking Nathan Phillips Square, to ensure that the affected offices are useable; and

(2)an escalator between the ground and second floors, to allow easy and proper access to the second floor."

Moved by Councillor Pantalone:

"It is recommended that the Commissioner of Corporate Services, together with the appropriate staff, be requested, as soon as possible, to:

(1)develop plans to 'humanize' the outside roof area surrounding the Council Chamber, especially the area to the north of the proposed links to the East and West Towers; and

(2)develop plans for the Civic Centre, such plans to be submitted, as soon as possible, to Council, through the Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team."

Moved by Councillor Saundercook:

"It is recommended that the secondary concerns regarding changes to the renovation plan be addressed in a regular and timely fashion, so that all Members of Council can have input and be involved."

Moved by Councillor Shiner:

"It is recommended that:

(1)the space on the second floor currently proposed for the staff of the City Clerk be relocated to the first floor;

(2)the space on the second floor currently proposed for the support staff for the Mayor, as shown on the sketch in a separate area away from the Office of the Mayor, be relocated to the first floor below the Mayor's office, and an interior connecting staircase be incorporated into the layout; and the space made available on the second floor, as a result of this change, be used for additional Committee Rooms of various sizes; and

(3)in the event that Recommendation No. (2) fails, the space on the second floor currently proposed for the support staff for the Mayor be reduced to the same size as the space allocated to the support staff for the Councillors, thereby reducing the space from 2,650 square feet to 1,700 square feet, and the remaining 950 square feet of space be used for additional meeting rooms for Councillors."

Moved by Councillor Silva:

"It is recommended that the Commissioner of Corporate Services be requested to consider aesthetic lighting for the Council Chamber, the second and main floors, as well as additional sound barriers for the offices facing Nathan Phillips Square." ' ")

The Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team:

(1)submits the communication (May 29, 1998) from the City Clerk; and the report (May25, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services without recommendation, noting, for the information of Council, the urgency of making a decision by the June 3, 1998, Council meeting; and noting the additional budget requirements requested in the aforementioned report respecting the Phase One renovations at Toronto City Hall; and

(2)recommends that City Council give consideration to this matter after the scheduled presentation by the architects at 9:30 a.m. on Thursday, June 4, 1998.

The Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team submits the following communication (May 29, 1998) from the City Clerk:

The Sub-Committee for the Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall on May 26, 1998, had before it the following report/communication:

-(May 25, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services, respecting the Approval of Design concept, Budget and Work Schedule for Phase One Renovations to Toronto City Hall; and

-(May 22, 1998) from Councillor Dick O'Brien, Markland-Centennial, respecting City Hall Renovations - Councillors' Offices Questionnaire.

On Motion by Councillor Moscoe, the Committee:

(1)recommended to the Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team the adoption of Recommendations Nos. (1), (2) and (4) embodied in the report (May25, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services;

(2)recommended to the Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team the adoption of Recommendation Nos. 3(i) and 3(iii) embodied in the report (May 25, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services;

(3)recommended to the Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team that a Lottery take place on June 3, 1998, at City Council after the Architect's presentation scheduled for 2:00 p.m.;

(4)recommended to the Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team that should Council agree that those Councillors can remain in their offices at City Hall if they so choose, those Councillors who choose to remain in their office be excluded from the lottery;

(5)requested that after the outcome of the Lottery, Councillors be given 24 hours to contact the Commissioner of Corporate Services regarding their decision on:

(i)flexible partitions between staff workstations, as outlined in Recommendation No. 3(i) embodied in the report (May 25, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services; or

(ii)a fully enclosed office for the Executive Assistant, as outlined in Recommendation No.3(iii) embodied in the report (May 25, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services;

and requested the Commissioner of Corporate Services to report thereon to the next Sub-Committee meeting to be held on June 10, 1998; and

(6)received the communication (May 22, 1998) from Councillor Dick O'Brien, Markland-Centennial, addressed to the Project Manager, City Hall Relocation Project Team.

(Report dated May 25, 1998, from the

Commissioner of Corporate Services, addressed to the

Sub-Committee for the Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall.)

Purpose:

To present the final design concept plans for the Phase One renovations to Toronto City Hall and budget package and work schedule necessary to complete the project by the end of the year, for City Council's approval.

Source of Funds:

City Council approved $5.2 million for the Phase One renovations to City Hall. As indicated on the budget schedule attached in Appendix A, the design concept recommended in this report can be implemented within the $5.2 million approved budget and $1.14 million from the Operations Maintenance, Equity Program and Access Improvements for City Owned Buildings Accounts.

If City Council decides on options for Councillors' office layouts beyond the scope of approved budgets, additional funds will be required up to $314,000.00.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the budget for the Phase One renovations to Toronto City Hall attached in Appendix A be approved;

(2)the design concept for the key components of the Phase One renovations to Toronto CityHall, as described in Section 3 of this report and shown on the attached drawings in AppendixB, be approved;

(3)City Council approve one of the three options for the Councillors' offices, as indicated below:

(i)Councillor's Office Option No.1 which includes flexible partitions between staff workstations, as shown on Drawing No. 1 in Appendix C, with no additional funds required; or

(ii)Councillor's Office Option No. 2 which includes a three-quarter height drywall partition between staff workstations, as shown on Drawing No. 2 in Appendix C, with additional funds in the amount of $86,000.00; or

(iii)Councillor's Office Option No. 3 which includes a fully enclosed office for the Executive Assistant, as shown on Drawing No. 3 in Appendix C, with additional funds in the amount of $314,000.00.

(4)the work schedule for the Phase One renovations to Toronto City Hall attached in AppendixD be approved.

Background:

At its meeting on February 3 and 4, 1998, City Council approved Toronto City Hall as the seat of government for the new city. City Council approved Phase One of the renovations to City Hall to consolidate Councillors' offices and City Council operations at City Hall by the end of 1998, with a budget of $5.2 million.

The Sub-Committee for the Relocation of All Members to City Hall was established by City Council to report to the Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team and City Council on the renovation plans and budget for this project. It was also given the task of liaising with the Project Team to ensure that the project adequately addresses the needs of Councillors.

Discussion:

(1)Scope of Phase One Renovations:

Recognizing that creating a fully functional seat of government at Toronto City Hall is a multi-year project, City Council approved the first phase of renovations to City Hall necessary to accommodate Councillors' offices, City Council and committee meetings, and key administrative staff at City Hall by the end of 1998.

The key elements of the Phase 1 renovations to Toronto City Hall include:

(i)Council Chamber Upgrades:

(a)increasing Councillors' seating capacity to accommodate full City Council operations;

(b)installing new audio-visual and enhanced electronic voting systems; and

(c)installing multi-media projection facilities, including full in-house broadcast capability.

(ii)Second Floor Renovations:

(a)accommodating 57 Councillors' offices by adding 34 new offices and refurbishing 23 existing offices;

(b)improving the Mayor's offices; and

(c)upgrading committee and public meeting rooms, including adding new larger rooms and improving audio-visual systems.

(iii)Pedestrian Links and Washrooms:

(a)building two fully accessible pedestrian links to provide better connections between the Council Chamber and the east and west office towers; and

(b)installing additional fully accessible washrooms near the Council Chamber.

(2)Consultation With Stakeholders:

Over the last few months, the Project Team and Project Architect, the architectural firm of Kuwabara, Payne, McKenna, Blumberg (KPMB) have submitted reports and made presentations on the project to both the Relocation Sub-Committee and Special Committee and held associated workshop sessions with committee members to provide opportunities for discussion and resolution of issues.

Meetings have also taken place with numerous key stakeholders such as the Mayor, City Councillors, the Chief Administrative Officer, Commissioners, the City Clerk and other relevant City staff concerning the Council Chamber and second floor renovations. The plans as proposed are supported. In addition, there has been ongoing consultation with Heritage Toronto staff who are satisfied with the proposed renovation plans, including the design of the pedestrian links.

Two open houses were held with Councillors' office staff (Executive, Constituency and Administrative Assistants) to obtain their comments on the design options for Councillors' office layouts. A questionnaire was also sent to all Councillors concerning the allocation and design of Councillors' offices. Representing a 70percent return rate, a total of 39 Councillors responded to the questionnaire survey, as follows:

(a)72percent agreed that a lottery system to allocate Councillors' offices at City Hall should be held;

(b)64percent agreed that Councillors in existing offices at City Hall should be permitted to retain their present offices;

(c)54percent agreed that the standard design elements (i.e., flexible partitions between staff workstations) included in the $5.2 million approved renovation budget would be acceptable for their offices;

(d)among the 20 Councillors (51percent) who stated that they want something different for their outer office area:

(i)13 would like a fully enclosed office area for their Executive Assistant (not necessarily sound-proofed);

(ii)another 7 replied that they would like 3/4 height drywall partitions for staff workstations, the relocation of existing walls to provide better space distribution, or more flexibility in design and colours; and

(iii)only 12 would support an increase in the approved budget for these purposes.

In summary, the Councillors were divided on their requests. Therefore, this report recommends that City Council decide on the options for the design of Councillors' offices. Once Council approves one of the proposed schemes, the City Clerk will hold a draw to allocate the Councillors' offices. Staff will then work with individual Councillors to finalize their office layout.

The Project Team and Project Architect also assessed the accessibility issues related to the Council Chamber, committee and public meeting rooms and public washrooms to ensure that the accessibility needs of staff and the public are met, as well as ensuring compliance with the Ontario Building Code. Although staff have made every effort to involve the new Toronto Joint Committee of People with Disabilities in reviewing the project plans to ensure that the accessibility issues are adequately addressed, we are still waiting for the committee to be established and meet. Changes to the plans will be made accordingly.

(3)Phase One Design Concept:

As described earlier, the Phase One renovations can be divided into three distinct project components, namely the Council Chamber renovations and upgrades, the second floor renovations and the construction of pedestrian links between the Council Chamber and east and west office towers. The Project Team and Project Architect have developed a design concept for each of these components as described below.

(a)Council Chamber:

As shown on Drawing Nos. 1 and 2 in Appendix B, the Council Chamber will incorporate the following design elements:

(a)a new podium seating area for the Mayor;

(b)a new expanded seating configuration to accommodate 57 Councillors, including new desks and chairs;

(c)a new seating area for the City Clerk and associated Council support staff;

(d)a new seating arrangement for the Chief Administrative Officer and six Commissioners, facing the Councillors and public gallery;

(e)installation of new audio-visual and enhanced electronic voting systems;

(f)installation of multi-media projection facilities, including full in-house broadcast capability;

(g)a fully accessible public deputation area; and

(h)enhanced lighting for the Council Chamber floor area and perimeter.

(b)Second Floor:

Renovations to the second floor, as illustrated on Drawing No. 3 in Appendix B, will include the following design elements:

(i)Councillors' Offices:

The Project Architect used a "street" design concept as the theme for the Councillors' offices, which includes:

-an outer rim of 57 Councillors' offices of approximately the same size, including the addition of 34 new offices and refurbishing of 23 existing offices;

-"shop front" treatment for each office entrance through the use of special signage, lighting and seating elements;

-unifying design features for office interiors through the use of similar lighting, paint colour, and carpet treatments and workstation layouts;

-four small meeting rooms (10 to 12 people) at strategic locations in the vicinity of Councillors' offices; and

-strategically located reception workstations.

Given the input from the Councillors and their staff on office layout designs, three options have been developed for the design of workstations for Executive, Constituency, and Administrative Assistants, as follows, including Option 1 which is already incorporated in the approved budget and Options 2 and 3 which require approval of additional funds. Recommendation No.(3) of the report, therefore, sets out options for City Council to decide on:

Option 1 (Drawing No. 1 in Appendix C)

-an open concept work area with flexible three-quarter height flexible partitions between workstations.

Option 2 (Drawing No. 2 in Appendix C)

-a three-quarter height drywall partition between workstations.

Option 3 (Drawing No.3 in Appendix C)

-a full-height enclosed office for the Executive Assistant.

(ii)Mayor's Offices:

-expanded Mayor's office areas to accommodate the Mayor's additional functions in the new city.

(iii)Committee/Public Meeting Rooms:

-four strategically located committee/public meeting rooms, with improved table and seating arrangements and upgraded audio-visual systems.

This plan assumes that meeting rooms at Metro Hall will continue to be used in the short term. Planning for additional meeting rooms on the ground floor of City Hall, as well as for other uses on he ground floor will begin shortly, once the Phase One renovations are underway, so that appropriate funding can be requested for the 1999budgets.

(iv)City Clerk's Office Area:

-five offices for City Clerk's senior and support staff; and

-unifying design features for office interiors with paint colours, carpet treatments and enhanced lighting and workstation layouts.

(c)Pedestrian Links:

As shown on Drawing Nos. 4, 5 and 6 in Appendix B, two elevated, enclosed pedestrian links will be constructed to provide accessible connections between the Council Chamber and third floor mezzanines which lead into the main elevator banks of the east and west office towers. This scheme also incorporates additional, accessible public washrooms for use by visitors to the Council Chamber and Members' Lounge.

(d)Other Matters:

Work is proceeding on a number of other matters as discussed below, which are not included in the Phase One design concept approval process. Separate reports will be forwarded on these matters in the near future.

(i)Offices for Chief Administrative Officer and Commissioners:

Staff and outside consultants are currently working on staffing needs of the new organizational structure. A preliminary concept plan is being developed of "who goes where", including the civic centres. In the meantime by the end of the year, the Chief Administrative Officer will be relocated to City Hall, as well as moving all the Commissioners and their offices into the east and west office towers at City Hall in the close proximity to their departmental staff.

(ii)Security:

A separate building security study will be undertaken shortly to determine the security needs at City Hall, including the underground parking garage. At the completion of the study later this year, I will report on the study findings, together with recommendations on any security improvements necessary for City Hall and the budget implications.

(iii)Press Gallery Needs:

Staff have met with members of the City Hall and Metro Hall press galleries to ensure that the renovation plans meet the media's audio-visual and broadcast requirements related to the Council Chamber, committee rooms and press gallery office space.

(iv)Day Care and Fitness Centres:

The day care and fitness centres at both City Hall and Metro Hall will be consulted regarding staff relocations so the appropriate reallocation of spaces can be accommodated.

(v)Urban Affairs Library:

The relocation of the Urban Affairs Library from Metro Hall to support the new City Council at City Hall is being studied and moving costs will need to be included in the 1999 budget. A separate report will be prepared on this matter.

As work on the City Hall renovation project progresses, other items will be identified and have to be dealt with, but it is essential that City Council now approves the design concept plans for Phase One as presented in this report so that the necessary construction work can be completed by the end of the year.

(4)Budget Schedule:

The budget schedule attached in Appendix A provides a breakdown of the cost estimates associated with the various components of the Phase One City Hall renovations, revised to reflect major changes resulting from recent program changes, additional needs identified by stakeholders, and emerging design refinements. For example, the Council Chamber costs were increased to better accommodate all Councillors and senior staff, create a better public deputation area and provide an adequate barrier between the Council Chamber floor and public gallery seating areas. The IT costs were increased to accommodate additional needs identified by the City Clerk and Councillors and are the result of further modifications to the Councillors' seating areas. Additional costs are also attributable to elevating the two pedestrian links for better accessibility and adding washrooms on a new third floor mezzanine level.

As already stated, the revised costs related to the design concept recommended in this report can be accommodated within a budget package consisting of the $5.2 million approved budget and $1.14 million from the Operations Maintenance, Equity Program and Access Improvements for City Owned Buildings Accounts.

(5)Work Schedule:

The attached work schedule for the Phase One renovations to City Hall (Appendix D) provides a breakdown of the major activities related to the various project components. The Project Team and Project Architect have worked closely to develop a properly phased and well coordinated project schedule that includes the design phase, demolition work, tender bidding and award processes, and construction work necessary to complete the project by the end of the year.

Conclusions:

The Phase One City Hall renovations project is proceeding as scheduled. Staff moves from second floor offices at City Hall have been completed and demolition work on the floor is underway. City Council, at its June 3 and 4, 1998 meeting, must approve the design concept plans, budget package and work schedule for the project so that the necessary construction work can begin on schedule and be completed in time, by the end of the year. Also required is approval of one of three design options for Councillors' offices, with the necessary funding.

Contact Name:

Cathie Macdonald, Project Executive, phone 392-0449, fax 392-0029 (cs98077.wpd)

--------

List of Appendices:

Appendix A - Budget Schedule for Phase One City Hall Renovations;

Appendix B - Phase One City Hall Renovations: Design Concept Drawings;

Appendix C - Phase One City Hall Renovations: Options for Councillors' Offices; and

Appendix D - Work Schedule For Phase One City Hall Renovations.

The Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team submits the following communication (May 22, 1998) from Councillor Dick O'Brien, Markland-Centennial:

It has been brought to my attention that the issue of soundproof solid walls vs. partitions for internal layouts of Councillors' offices was discussed at an open house meeting with political staff on Wednesday May 20, 1998.

At that meeting, Council staff asked questions regarding the need for "soundproof" walls between the Councillor, the Executive Assistant and the Administrative Assistant. You made reference to a discussion you and I had regarding the need for soundproof walls in the offices. I stressed that there is a need for soundproofing of the walls that separate Councillors' offices - not the internal Councillor/EA/AA offices within each Councillor's suite.

The concern was raised by political staff that the two options which were presented on the questionnaire (with a cost of $1,500.00 per partition wall vs. Full height sound proof walls at a cost of $7,500.00) should be augmented with a third choice - a less expensive, non-sound-proof option for offices within each Councillors' office suite. It is my understanding that you indicated you would advise the Councillors that they could choose this third option, and it could then be hand-written on the questionnaire.

However, no further notification of this third option appears to have been brought forward to all Councillors. As a result, only those offices with staff in attendance at the "open house" meeting held on May 20, 1998, would be aware of the discussions surrounding this third option, and the direction that this third option could be added to the questionnaire.

I am concerned that the results of your questionnaire will be tainted because this third option has not been fully brought forward by staff in time for the questionnaire to be revised. Faced with a choice of walls at a cost of $1,500.00, compared to a cost of $7,500.00, may sway Councillors to vote in favour of the cheaper option without being aware that there may be an option which will be somewhere in between these two prices.

I therefore request that you place this letter on the agenda of the Relocation Sub-Committee agenda of May 26, 1998, so that all Councillors can be made aware of my concern which may be shared by others.

--------

The following Members of Council appeared before the Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team, in connection with the foregoing matter:

-Councillor Doug Holyday, Markland-Centennial;

-Councillor Tom Jakobek, East Toronto; and

-Councillor Blake F. Kinahan, Lakeshore-Queensway.

2

Number of Citizens to be Appointed to the St. Lawrence

Centre for the Performing Arts, Board of Management

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team recommends the adoption of the following report (May1, 1998) from the City Clerk:

Purpose:

To revise the number of citizen appointments to be made to the Board of Management of the St.Lawrence Centre for the Performing Arts to conform with the composition of the Board as outlined in By-law No. 1997-0109 enacted by the former City of Toronto to amend the Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 11, Arts Centres.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Not applicable.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the number of citizen appointments to be made to the Board of Management of the St.Lawrence Centre for the Performing Arts be revised from 12 citizens to 14, of which threepersons shall be nominated for appointment as members of the Board as follows:

(a)one person shall be nominated by a music presenter in the Jean Mallet Theatre; and

(b)two persons shall be nominated by the Canadian Stage Company; and

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

Council Reference/Background/History:

Council at its meeting held on March 4, 5 and 6, 1998, adopted Clause No. 4 of Report No. 3 of The Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team, headed "Selected Issues Respecting Agencies, Boards and Commissions".

By adopting the Clause, City Council authorized the City Clerk to begin the process of citizen appointments for 12 citizen positions on the St. Lawrence Centre for the Performing Arts when there are sufficient numbers of appointments to be made to warrant the cost of advertising. However, the City Legal Department has advised that such 12 citizen positions should be revised to conform with the composition of the Board as outlined in By-law No. 1997-0109 enacted by the former City of Toronto to amend the Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 11, Arts Centres.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

The aforementioned By-law No. 1997-0109 was enacted by the Council of the former City of Toronto on February 24, 1997, to give effect to Clause No. 1 of Report No. 8 of the Executive Committee, which authorized an increase in the membership of the Board of Management of the St.Lawrence Centre from 15persons to 16 persons.

By-law No. 1997-0109 amends Chapter 11, Arts Centres, of the former City of Toronto Municipal Code, insofar as it pertains to the membership of the Board of Management of the St. Lawrence Centre, as follows:

"Section 11-4A is deleted and the following substituted:

'A.The Board shall consist of sixteen (16) members appointed by Council, two (2) of whom shall be members of Council and the remaining members shall be persons qualified to be elected as members of Council or who are residents of the City and have attained the age of eighteen (18) years, provided that three (3) persons shall be nominated for appointment as members of the Board as follows: one (1) person by a music presenter in the Jean Mallet Theatre and two (2) persons by Canadian Stage Company.'"

Conclusions:

It is recommended that the number of citizen appointments to be made to the Board of Management of the St.Lawrence Centre for the Performing Arts be revised in accordance with the aforementioned By-law No. 1997-0109.

Contact Name:

Joanne Hamill, 392-4339.

3

Qualifications for Appointees to the Licensing Tribunal

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, adopted this Clause, without amendment.)

The Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team recommends the adoption of the following report (May 29, 1998) from the Chief Administrative Officer, subject to amending Item (i) embodied in the Section, entitled "Professional Competencies", contained in Appendix "A", headed "Selection Criteria for Toronto Licensing Tribunal Members", to read as follows:

"(i)the ability to develop a good understanding of the mandate of the Toronto Licensing Tribunal and relevant laws;":

Purpose:

To recommend qualifications and selection criteria for citizen appointments to the Licensing Tribunal.

Financial Implications:

There are no financial implications.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1)the selection criteria presented in Appendix A be used by the Nominating Committee to select members of the Toronto Licensing Tribunal;

(2)staff forward the list of sample interview questions developed by the Society of Ontario Adjudicators and Regulators to members of the Nominating Committee for information purposes;

(3)the City Solicitor work with Tribunal members, once appointed, and Licensing staff in developing a training program to complement and improve the skills and strengths of Tribunal members; and

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

Council Reference:

The Special Committee recommended structural changes to the Licensing Commission that would establish licensing policy as Council's responsibility, integrate the licensing administration with the City's administration, and reconstitute the existing Commission as a Licensing Tribunal composed of citizen members to conduct quasi-judicial hearings. When Council adopted these recommendations at its meeting on May 13, 1998, it also adopted a companion report from the Chief Administrative Officer recommending that the qualifications and selection criteria for citizen appointments to the Licensing Tribunal be reported to the next Council meeting to allow the appointments process to proceed. This report responds to Council's request.

Discussion:

This report reviews how the Provincial and Federal governments make appointments to administrative agencies that perform regulatory or adjudicative functions and applies the qualifications sought for members of quasi-judicial tribunals in general to the Licensing Tribunal.

Appointments to Provincial and Federal Administrative Agencies:

Appointments to Provincial agencies are made by cabinet on the recommendation of the Minister to whom the agency reports. In Ontario, the Public Appointments Secretariat (PAS) supports cabinet in making appointments. Positions are rarely publicly advertised, and most do not have formal job descriptions stating requisite skills and duties. Prospective candidates are evaluated through informal consultation between the PAS and the agency chair. A similar process exists at the federal level. As a result, the desired qualifications for members of administrative tribunals have rarely been formally described at either level of government.

Numerous reviews of administrative agencies have been undertaken at the Federal and Provincial levels. These reviews have commonly recognized that the appointments process needs to be refocused on ensuring that appointees have the necessary skills. The most recent review in Ontario was conducted by the Agency Reform Commission. It reported in April of this year on regulatory and adjudicative agencies and recommended that the government review the public appointments process to ensure that it is attracting qualified candidates, with consideration given to:

(a)publishing functions and job requirements for each agency;

(b)establishing selection criteria based on core competencies; and

(c)clearly communicating to appointees the expectations of service.

In Ontario, the Society of Ontario Regulators and Adjudicators has played an important role in improving the administrative justice system in Ontario. The Society is composed of members and executive staff of administrative agencies, and has helped to identify the skills required of tribunal members by drafting papers on performance management, rules of procedure, and member responsibilities. The Society has argued that the selection process should use formal criteria to identify the best possible candidates, and provide job descriptions to clearly communicate job expectations to tribunal members.

At the municipal level, many of these processes have already been in place for many years. The new City of Toronto's interim policy for citizen appointments requires that functions and skill requirements be established and communicated to interested candidates along with expectations of service. As the structure for newly formed agencies is being approved, these requirements are being established and formalized.

Qualifications for Tribunal Members:

The qualifications for tribunal members flow from a consideration of the role played by tribunals. Tribunals exercise a quasi-judicial function independently of other functions in order to promote impartial hearings. Tribunals are more court-like than other administrative agencies. Like courts, they are expected to determine the facts in a particular situation and apply the provisions of the legislation to the case at hand. The principle of natural justice dictates that tribunals comply with minimum standards of fair procedure before making a decision.

The expectation of natural justice and fairness is codified in the Statutory Powers and Procedures Act. The Act applies to tribunals that, by legislation, must afford an opportunity for a hearing before exercising a statutory power of decision affecting a person's legal rights or eligibility for a benefit or license. The Act establishes procedural requirements for the hearing, including notice provisions and rules of disclosure and evidence.

Therefore, the ideal tribunal member combines an understanding of adjudicative procedure with knowledge of the subject matter being heard. Because tribunals apply government legislation to particular cases in a specific field of activity, tribunal members should have:

(a)experience in the field related to the subject matter of the tribunal's hearings;

(b)knowledge of the legislation applied by the tribunal to the cases it hears; and

(c)an understanding of the mandate of the agency in the context of relevant legislation.

In addition, because tribunals are expected to follow court-like procedures, tribunal members should have:

(a)experience with public hearings;

(b)an understanding of natural justice as contained in the Statutory Powers and Procedures Act;

(c)an aptitude for adjudication, including open-mindedness, sensitivity to various interests, good listening skills, an ability to analyze evidence, and sound judgement; and

(d)the ability to write clear, well-reasoned decisions.

Applying the Generic Selection Criteria to the Licensing Tribunal:

The generic selection criteria mask the fact that, despite their similar functions, not all tribunals are alike. Different tribunals operate in different contexts and have unique responsibilities and procedures. As a result, different tribunals will emphasize certain selection criteria over others. Some tribunals stress knowledge of adjudicative procedure to an extent that most of their members are lawyers or judges. Other tribunals are content to let members learn adjudicative procedure on the job or through training, and look for members with experience in the business or policy field relevant to the tribunal, or with general analytic and communication skills.

Listed below are some of the factors that account for differences between tribunals and impact the skills required of tribunal members, particularly the emphasis placed on adjudicative experience versus background in a substantive field:

(a)The complexity of the hearing process - tribunals with more complex hearing procedures may be expected to put a greater emphasis on adjudicative experience;

(b)The size of panels - the smaller the panel, the more necessary it is that all panel members have a good understanding of adjudicative procedure;

(c)The need for specialized knowledge - some tribunals require scientific, medical or industry-specific knowledge to be applied in reaching decisions, while others deal with issues that can be resolved largely through common sense;

(d)The writing skills required - some agencies produce brief oral decisions immediately after a hearing, while others produce written decisions; and

(e)The use of mediation in addition to traditional adjudication - some agencies use pre-hearing mediation to try to avoid the need for lengthy or costly hearings, and require members with experience in alternative dispute resolution.

In general, tribunals with complex hearing procedures, small panels, and less need for specialized knowledge will emphasize adjudicative experience, while tribunals with less complex hearing procedures and a need for specialized knowledge will focus on general skills and experience in the field.

When considering the Licensing Tribunal relative to these factors, it becomes apparent that knowledge of adjudicative processes and administrative law would be an asset. The Statutory Powers and Procedures Act will apply to the Licensing Tribunal, and the current Licensing Commission has rules of procedure adopted under this Act that will be used by the Licensing Tribunal. With two-member panels conducting hearings, it will be important that all Tribunal members be familiar with adjudicative procedure.

However, it is not necessary that the Licensing Tribunal stress experience in adjudicative procedures over other considerations. Members need not have legal backgrounds, as is the case in some provincial agencies with very complex hearing procedures. The Licensing Tribunal's hearings will range from the complex to the straightforward. An aptitude for adjudication and general knowledge of the principle of natural justice is more important than having direct legal experience. Because the Licensing Tribunal will operate in the complex field of business licensing, members should be familiar with this substantive field and understand the intent and purpose of Council's licensing policy. Members will also be required to deliver written decisions and should have good writing and communication skills.

The Chair of the Tribunal will require all of the skills of the members, but must also be able to establish and organize hearing schedules and agendas. The Chair will also be required to discuss and report on issues and decisions to a variety of audiences including Licensing staff, Committees of Council, the press, and the general public. The Chair may also be called on to represent the Licensing Tribunal at City meetings and functions as well as public meetings and possible speaking engagements. Candidates for the Chair must be willing and available for the additional responsibilities and possess excellent communication skills.

Appendix A lists the selection criteria for Toronto Licensing Tribunal members, adapted from a report on performance management by the Society of Ontario Regulators and Adjudicators. It is recommended that the selection criteria presented in the appendix be used by the Nominating Committee to select members for the Toronto Licensing Tribunal. The Society has also prepared a list of sample interview questions that can be used to assess whether prospective candidates have the necessary qualifications to serve on a tribunal. It is recommended that staff forward this list of potential interview questions to members of the Nominating Committee for information purposes.

Training of Tribunal Members:

Finally, it should be recognized that no matter how careful the selection process, members will probably not possess the full range of knowledge, skills, attitudes and values required to be a good adjudicator immediately upon their appointment. Training and ongoing education in areas such as rules of evidence and procedure, statutory interpretation, natural justice, cultural sensitivity and decision-making are necessary to supplement the skills that members initially bring to the Tribunal, and to ensure that the Tribunal delivers a high level of administrative justice. It is therefore recommended that the City Solicitor work with the Tribunal members once appointed and Licensing staff in developing a training program to complement and improve the skills and strengths of Tribunal members.

Conclusions:

This report recommends selection criteria for appointment of Toronto Licensing Tribunal members. A selection process that focuses on the skills and knowledge required of Tribunal members will result in good appointments, good decisions, and a high standard of administrative justice.

City Legal has been consulted in the preparation of this report.

Contact Name:

Robert Vandervelde, Corporate Policy and Planning - 397-9803

--------

Appendix A

Selection Criteria for Toronto Licensing Tribunal Members

Professional Competencies:

(i)a good understanding of the mandate of the Toronto Licensing Tribunal and relevant laws;

(ii)good listening skills, open-mindedness, sound judgment, and tact;

(iii)understanding of a field related to business licensing and sensitivity to the various interests and issues;

(iv)a good understanding of procedure, including the concepts of natural justice/fairness;

(v)an ability to organize and analyze evidence (written and oral); and

(vi)the ability to write a clear, well-reasoned decision that takes into account the evidence, the submissions, the law and policy.

Personal Attributes:

(i)a commitment to public service;

(ii)good interpersonal skills, including the ability to work in a team;

(iii)the ability to work under time pressures; and

(iv)flexible work schedule.

Additional Requirements for the Chair:

(i)administrative skills to organize, schedule, and arrange appropriate support for hearings;

(ii)excellent communications skills, both oral and written, to articulate issues and decisions to Licensing staff, Committees of Council, the press, and the public; and

(iii)a willingness and ability to represent the Tribunal publicly and perform speaking engagements.

Adapted to the Toronto Licensing Tribunal from criteria presented in "Towards Maintaining and Improving the Quality of Adjudication: SOAR Recommendations for Performance Management in Ontario's Administrative Justice System".

4

Other Items Considered by the Committee

(City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998, received this Clause, for information.)

(a)Amendment to the Terms of Reference of the Sub-Committee

for the Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall.

The Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team reports having deferred consideration of the following communication until its meeting scheduled to be held on June 26, 1998:

(May 21, 1998) from the City Clerk advising that the Sub-Committee for the Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall, recommended to the Special Committee that the Terms of Reference of the Sub-Committee be amended to permit the Sub-Committee to review the long term options for the Civic Centre proposal and its process.

(b)Relocation Issues considered by the Sub-Committee for

the Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall.

The Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team reports having received the following communication:

(May 21, 1998) from the City Clerk, advising of the following actions taken by the Sub-Committee for the Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall:

"On motion by Councillor Moeser, the Sub-Committee:

(1)requested the Commissioner of Corporate Services, in consultation with the City Clerk, to review the possibility of making a "Citizens' room available at City Hall on a first-come-first-served basis, under the control of the City Clerk Department, and report thereon back to the Sub-Committee as part of the consideration of Phase II;

(2)received the following motion by Councillor Johnston contained in the communication (April 23, 1998) from the Commissioner of Corporate Services;

"That the issues outlined in her communication (March 16, 1998) addressed to the Sub-Committee for the Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall, specifically as it relates to the Ontario Building Code (Section 3.6.4.2), be referred to the Commissioner of Corporate Services for report thereon to the Sub-Committee for the Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall;"

(3)requested the Commissioner to report back to the Sub-Committee on the following motion from Councillor Johnston:

"That the Commissioner of Corporate Services, in consultation with the appropriate officials of the Urban Affairs Library, Representatives of the Union, and Representatives of the appropriate Management Association, be requested to report to the Sub-Committee for the Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall, on the issue of the day care centre and the Urban Affairs Library;" and

(4)requested the Commissioner of Corporate Services to submit the names of individuals who have been appointed by the Project Team.

The Sub-Committee endorsed the following motions by Councillor Moeser contained in the report dated April 3, 1998:

(1)"that the Chair of the Sub-Committee for the Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall be requested to review the security and parking issues with the Toronto Parking Authority and report thereon to the Sub-Committee;" and

(2)"that a monthly newsletter be produced to advise Members of Council to the progress of the renovation at City Hall and that the newsletter be co-ordinated by the Chairman of the Sub-Committee and Mr. Lawrence Quinn, the City Official appointed as the Lead Official respecting the renovations at City Hall".

On motion by Councillor Johnston:

The Sub-Committee received the following motions contained in report (April 3, 1998) from the City Clerk:

"(1)that the Sub-Committee for the Relocation of All Members of Council to City Hall continue to discuss the configuration of the Council Chamber at City Hall and take the following into consideration:

That Option 1(b) respecting the Council Chamber be referred back to the Commissioner of Corporate Services with a request that she:

(i)explore the feasibility of expanding the floor space for Councillors;

(ii)recognize the Councillors' seating in order to permit Councillors to face staff when asking questions of staff; and

(iii)report back to the Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team, on whether or not the timetable for the relocation of Members of Council to City Hall is realistic."

The Sub-Committee was advised that Recommendation No. 1 contained in the communication (April 3, 1998) from the City Clerk had been approved by City Council:

"(1)That authorized staff to proceed on the following options;

(a)with respect to the third floor mezzanine - Option 2;

(b)with respect to the second floor - Option 2; and

(c)with respect to the Council Chamber - Option 1(b) with the directive that the space between councillors be widened and the Mayor's seat be closer to the full Council."

The Sub-Committee was also advised that the Commissioner of Corporate Services was canvassing Members of Council on options on Councillors' office configurations; and will report back. The Sub-Committee also requested the Commissioner of Corporate Services to report on discussions to date with respect to the lease of Old City Hall.

On motion by Councillor Moeser:

The Sub-Committee:

(1)received the communication (April 24, 1998) from Councillor Bossons and was advised that the Chair would be forwarding a response;

(2)received the communication (April 22, 1998) from Councillor McConnell; and

(3)requested that a Joint Meeting be held to considered the Approval Schedule for Phase I in order to report thereon to Council for its meeting to be held June 3, 1998."

Respectfully submitted,

DAVID MILLER,

Chair

Toronto, June 3, 1998

(Report No. 7 of The Special Committee to Review the Final Report of the Toronto Transition Team was adopted, as amended, by City Council on June 3, 4 and 5, 1998.)