TABLE OF CONTENTS

REPORTS OF THE STANDING COMMITTEES

AND OTHER COMMITTEES

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on November 25, 26 and 27, 1998

EMERGENCY AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE

REPORT No. 12

1Other Item Considered by the Committee

2By-law to Amend By-law No. 20-85 - Accident Towing - MandatoryDrop and Accreditation of Vehicle Repair Facilities

City of Toronto

REPORT No. 12

OF THE EMERGENCY AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE

(from its meeting on September 8 and 11, 1998 and October 6, 1998,

submitted by Councillor Dennis Fotinos, Chair)

As Considered by

The Council of the City of Toronto

on November 25, 26 and 27, 1998

1

Other Item Considered by the Committee

(City Council on November 25, 26 and 27, 1998, struck out and referred this Clause back to the Emergency and Protective Services Committee for further consideration.)

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, deferred consideration of this Clause to the next regular meeting of Council to be held on November 25, 1998.)

_______

(Clause No. 2 of Report No. 10 of the Emergency and Protective Services Committee)

(City Council on October 1 and 2, 1998, deferred consideration of Item 5 of this Clause to the next regular meeting of Council to be held on October 28, 1998.)

_______

(Clause No. 5(m) of Report No. 9 of the Emergency and Protective Services Committee)

(m)Toronto Police Service - Air Service Business Case.

The Emergency and Protective Services Committee reports having:

(1)recommended to the Budget Committee that the recommendations of the Toronto Police Services Board with regard to the establishment of an Air Service be endorsed;

(2)requested the Chair of the Toronto Police Services Board to report back to the Emergency and Protective Services Committee with a review of the Air Service Business Case submitted by the Chief of Police in sufficient time to include this initiative in the 1999 Operating Budget and that the Committee's Toronto Police Services Board Budget Working Group be directed to work with the Chair of the Toronto Police Services Board and the Board's Review Committee in considering the acquisition of an Air Service as part of the budget process; and

(3)requested the Fire Chief and the Acting General Manager, Toronto Ambulance, to consult with the Toronto Police Service to establish a resource sharing agreement to achieve some of the protocols related to the shared use of the Air Service as discussed by the Chief of Police at the meeting.

(i)a report (August 5, 1998) from Councillor Norman Gardner, Chairman, Toronto Police Services Board, advising that the Toronto Police Services Board on July 16, 1998:

(1)received a report (June 30, 1998) from the Chief of Police recommending that:

(a)the Board approve in principle the establishment of an Air Service; and

(b)the Board approve $1.5 million in the 1999 Services Operating Budget for the establishment of an Air Service;

(2)approved, in principle, the establishment of an Air Service;

(3)established a committee to review the business case submitted by the Chief and:

(a)to explore innovative opportunities for joint corporate sponsorship; and

(b)to consider, as an alternative to the full Air Service program recommended by the Chief, the feasibility of establishing a pilot project utilizing one or two helicopters;

(4)structured the Review Committee as follows: Chairman Gardner as the Committee Chairman, two additional Board members, Deputy Chief Reesor and other appropriate Service staff selected by Deputy Chief Reesor, and

(5)directed that a copy of this report be forwarded to the Emergency and Protective Services Committee for information.

(ii)Communication (June 29, 1998) from Councillor Norman Gardner, Chairman, Toronto Police Services Board, forwarding a report (November 20, 1998) prepared by Dr. Kathryn Asbury, Research Management Consultants Inc. for the Toronto Police Services Board identifying key strategic issues for members of the Toronto Police Services Board and Command officers to assess the potential contribution of helicopters in municipal law enforcement;

(iii)Joint Report (September 1, 1998) from the Fire Chief and the Acting General Manager, Toronto Ambulance, advising the Committee and City Council of the options which may exist with respect to expanding the role of a police helicopter so that it might serve multi-emergency service functions; and

(iv)(July 16, 1998) Brief submitted by the Toronto Police Service entitled "Air Service Business Case" and a video on police helicopters in Toronto.

________

The following persons appeared before the Emergency and Protective Services Committee on behalf of the Toronto Police Services Board and gave an audio/visual presentation to the Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

-Chief of Police David J. Boothby;

-Deputy Chief of Police Steven Reesor;

-Detective Sergeant Brian Raybould; and

-Councillor Norman Gardner, Chairman, Toronto Police Services Board.

Councillor Chris Korwin-Kuczynski, High Park, also appeared before the Emergency and Protective Services Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

2

By-law to Amend By-law No. 20-85 - Accident Towing - Mandatory

Drop and Accreditation of Vehicle Repair Facilities

(City Council on November 25, 26 and 27, 1998, amended this Clause by adding thereto the following:

"It is further recommended that the City Clerk be requested to ensure that the report previously requested by City Council from the City Auditor on Auto Collision Centres, be brought forward as requested.")

(City Council on October 28, 29 and 30, 1998, deferred consideration of this Clause to the next regular meeting of Council to be held on November 25, 1998.)

_______

(Clause No. 4 of Report No. 11 of the Emergency and Protective Services Committee)

The Emergency and Protective Services Committee recommends:

(1)the adoption of the report (August 26, 1998) from the General Manager, Toronto Licensing, recommending amendments to Sub-section 40(3), Schedule 37, of By-law No.20-85, subject to the following:

(a)that the notice simply read "The tow truck operator may not recommend a body shop or other vehicle repair facility - By-law No. 20-85."; and that appropriate wording be included on the notice with regard to penalties for failure to comply with this provision of By-law No. 20-85;

(b)that By-law No. 20-85 also include guidelines for the display of signage, i.e. that it should be clearly visible and not be covered up; and

(c)that the City Solicitor, the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, and the General Manager, Toronto Licensing, be requested to meet with the Chair of the Emergency and Protective Services Committee and Councillor Moscoe, the Toronto Licensing representative on the Committee, to develop a revised waiver form consistent with the By-law;

(2)the Toronto Police Services Board be requested to:

(a)advise tow truck operators that if they charge patrons for the recovery of vehicles towed under common law, they are in danger of losing their contract with the Toronto Police Service;

(b)lay charges against towing companies that collect fees contrary to the Nash decision; and

(c)request the Parking Enforcement Unit of the Toronto Police Service to establish a suggested protocol for towing companies and property owners to follow with respect to towing from private property and to submit a report thereon to the next meeting of the Emergency and Protective Services Committee to be held on November 3, 1998; and

(3)that the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services be requested to ensure that the By-law Enforcement Officers allocate time to enforcing this issue.

The Emergency and Protective Services Committee reports, for the information of Council, having:

(1)requested the General Manager, Toronto Licensing, to ensure that the signage at all pounds in Toronto conform with By-law No. 20-85;

(2)requested the City Solicitor, the General Manager, Toronto Licensing, and the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services to submit a report to the Emergency and Protective Services Committee on amendments to By-law No. 20-85 to prevent tow truck operators from collecting fees from cars towed under common law;

(3)requested the General Manager, Toronto Licensing, and the City Solicitor, in consultation with other appropriate officials, to submit a report to the Emergency and Protective Services Committee on harmonizing towing by-laws across the new City of Toronto so that the by-laws of the former municipalities of East York, Etobicoke and Scarborough are brought into sync with the by-laws of the former Cities of North York, Toronto and York;

(4)requested the Chair of the Emergency and Protective Services Committee to meet with staff of Toronto Licensing and to report back to the Committee on some proactive measures that can be taken to protect citizens from being charged illegal fees under the By-law and from being towed improperly;

(5)referred the following motion to the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services, in consultation with the City Solicitor, for a report thereon to the Emergency and Protective Services Committee:

"Moved by Councillor Moscoe:

'That By-law Enforcement Officers be directed to lay charges against pounds collecting fees in excess of the amount set by By-law No. 20-85.' ";

(6)referred the following motion to the City Solicitor for a report thereon to the next meeting of the Emergency and Protective Services Committee to be held on November 3, 1998:

"Moved by Councillor Moscoe:

'That the City take immediate legal action against companies issuing phony parking tickets.' "; and

(7)received the following communication (July 15, 1998) from the City Clerk.

The Emergency and Protective Services Committee submits the following communication (July15, 1998) from the City Clerk:

City Council, at its meeting held on July 8, 9 and 10, 1998, in adopting, as amended, Clause No.1 contained in Report No.6 of The Emergency and Protective Services Committee, headed "By-law to Amend By-law No.20-85- Accident Towing- Mandatory Drop and Accreditation of Vehicle Repair Facilities", directed, inter alia, that the following motion be referred to the Emergency and Protective Services Committee for consideration in September, 1998, and the City Solicitor and the General Manager, Toronto Licensing Commission, be requested to report thereon, in writing, to such meeting:

"Moved by Councillor Jakobek:

'That the foregoing Clause be amended by striking out the recommendation of the Emergency and Protective Services Committee and inserting in lieu thereof the following:

"It is recommended that:

(1)Recommendations Nos. (1)(b), (c), (d), (2) and (4) embodied in the report dated May 15, 1998, from the General Manager, Toronto Licensing Commission, with respect to accreditation, be deferred to the meeting of Council scheduled to be held on October 1, 1998, and the Chair of the Emergency and Protective Services Committee be requested to meet with representatives of the Provincial Government to encourage swift passage of a Province-wide accreditation which would complement the City's plan;

(2)the City Auditor be requested to submit the report, previously requested by Council with respect to accident reporting centres, to Council, through the Emergency and Protective Services Committee, no later than October 1, 1998;

(3)staff be requested to submit a report, to the same meeting, on the possibility of establishing City-operated/independent reporting centres, as previously requested by Council;

(4)the operators of the existing reporting centres be advised that City Council will not tolerate any solicitation of any resident by agents of insurance companies, auto body shops, car rental companies, tow trucks, or other businesses;

(5)a self-help or 'what-to-do' pamphlet be produced and submitted to Council for approval, such pamphlet to provide guidance and advice to every person involved in an accident and distributed by the police, tow truck operators and reporting centres;

(6)Recommendation No. (1)(a) embodied in the report dated May 15, 1998, from the General Manager, Toronto Licensing Commission, be deleted and the following inserted in lieu thereof:

'that the mandatory drop be delayed until January 2000 and the City Solicitor be requested to submit a report on the legal authority to force all tow-truck operators to display or hand-out notices to the public which would advise the public that any recommendations of body shops or other businesses made by tow truck operators will result in the immediate suspension of their licence and a hearing before the Licencing Tribunal';

(7)City staff be requested to strictly enforce these rules at all collision reporting centres with all tow truck operators on a regular basis; and

(8)Recommendation No. (3) embodied in the report dated May 15, 1998, from the General Manager, Toronto Licensing Commission, be adopted. " ' "

The Emergency and Protective Services Committee also submits the following report (August18, 1998) from the City Solicitor:

Purpose:

The purpose of this report is to provide a legal opinion on the authority of City Council to require licensed tow truck operators to display or provide notices advising members of the public that the tow truck operator may not recommend body shops or other vehicle repair facilities and that such recommendations would result in an immediate suspension of the operator's licence and a hearing before the Licensing Tribunal.

Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

Not Applicable.

Recommendations:

If City Council decides to amend Schedule 37 to By-law No. 20-85 of the former Metropolitan Council to implement the proposed notice, it is recommended that:

1.The notice be made consistent with subsection 40(3) of Schedule 37, by stating that:

(a)the tow truck operator may not recommend a body shop or other vehicle repair facility unless requested to do so by the vehicle owner; or

(b)by amending subsection 40(3) by deleting the clause therein which permits tow truck operators to make such recommendations at the request of the vehicle owner; and

2.The notice be amended to state that a hearing will be held before the Licensing Tribunal to determine whether the licence should be suspended, revoked or have conditions placed on it.

Council Reference/Background/History:

At its meeting of July 8, 9, and 10, 1998 considered Clause No. 1 of Report No. 6 of the Emergency and Protective Services Committee entitled "By-law to Amend By-law No. 20-85 - Accident Towing - Mandatory Drop and Accreditation of Vehicle Repair Facilities". At this meeting, City Council requested a legal opinion on its authority to require licensed tow truck operators to display or provide notices advising members of the public that the tow truck operator may not recommend body shops or other vehicle repair facilities and that such recommendations would result in an immediate suspension of the operator's licence and a hearing before the Licensing Tribunal.

Comments and/or Discussion and/or Justification:

In my opinion, two concerns arise from the proposed notices. Firstly, subsection 40(3) of Schedule37 to By-law No. 20-85 permits a tow truck operator to recommend a body shop or other such facility when requested to do so by the vehicle owner. The proposed notice is inconsistent with this provision in that it suggests that the tow truck operator is prohibited from making any recommendations, even when requested to do so by the vehicle owner.

Accordingly, I recommend that the proposed notice, if implemented, be consistent with subsection40(3) of Schedule 37 to By-law No. 20-85 by amending the notice to take into account recommendations made at the request of the vehicle owner as permitted by the present provision. In the alternative, the by-law provision could be amended to prohibit tow truck drivers from making any recommendation. Such amendment would result in the by-law provision being consistent with the proposed notice.

The second concern that arises from the proposed notice is with respect to the reference to the "immediate suspension of their licence and a hearing before the Licensing Tribunal."

It is well-settled law that the rules of natural justice and procedural fairness require that a licence holder be afforded an opportunity to be heard in respect of any suspension of the licence. The purpose of the hearing before the Tribunal is to afford the licencee this opportunity to be heard. It is on the basis of the evidence and argument adduced at such a hearing that the Tribunal would determine whether or not the licence should be suspended, revoked or have conditions placed on it.

The difficulty that arises from the wording of the proposed notice is that it suggests that the suspension of the licence is somehow independent of the hearing before the Tribunal and that the licence will be suspended before the hearing. It is my opinion that a suspension of a licence in these circumstances prior to a hearing before the Tribunal would be contrary to the rules of natural justice and procedural fairness.

Accordingly, I recommend that the proposed notice, if implemented, state that a hearing will be held before the Licensing Tribunal to determine whether the licence should be suspended, revoked or have conditions placed on it.

Regarding the manner in which the proposed notice may be provided or displayed, members of my staff have been advised by the General Manager, Toronto Licensing Commission, that it is her opinion that the most effective means of displaying this notice would be by requiring that the notice be posted in the cab of the tow truck such that it is visible to members of the public in the passenger seat of the tow truck. However, the wording of the notice may have to be revised to take into account space restrictions if the notice is to be posted in the cab of the vehicle.

Conclusions:

In my opinion, the proposed notice is inconsistent with subsection 40(3) of Schedule 37 to By-law No. 20-85 of the former Metropolitan Council in that it suggests that a tow truck operator may not recommend a body shop or other vehicle repair facility, regardless of any request by the vehicle owner for such a recommendation. Further, it is my opinion that a suspension of a licence in these circumstances prior to a hearing before the Tribunal would be contrary to the rules of natural justice and procedural fairness.

It is the opinion of the General Manager, Toronto Licensing Commission, that the most effective means of displaying the proposed notice would be by requiring that the notice be posited in the cab of the tow truck such that it is visible to members of the public in the passenger seat of the tow truck.

The General Manager, Toronto Licensing Commission, has reviewed this report and concurs with its contents.

Contact Name:

Ansuya Pachai 392-9074

The Emergency and Protective Services Committee also submits the following report (August26, 1998) from the General Manager, Toronto Licensing:

Recommendation:

That By-law 20-85, Schedule 37 Sub-section 40(3) be amended by deleting the clause "unless requested to do so by such person".

Sub-section 40(3) would then read "No owner or driver shall suggest or recommend to any hirer or other person requesting his services that any vehicle in respect of which his services are given or requested, be towed, conveyed, driven or delivered to any particular salvage yard, body shop, storage yard, or any other public garage, building or place".

Discussion:

The August 18, 1998 report from the City Solicitor recommends that the notice be displayed in the Tow Truck be made consistent with Sub-section 40(3) of Schedule 37 and the Solicitor offers two proposals for achieving this consistency. I suggest that Committee may also wish to have this portion of the Licensing By-law consistent with the restrictions placed on owners, operators and employees in Collision Reporting Centres who are prohibited from recommending repair facilities (Schedule 24, Part 6, Section 14[2]) and this can be accomplished by approving recommendation (b) of the Solicitor's report.

The Emergency and Protective Services Committee also submits the following report (August26, 1998) from the General Manager, Toronto Licensing:

Recommendation:

That this report be received for information.

Purpose:

To provide Committee with an update on the information currently available regarding a possible Provincial Accreditation Program for Collision Repair Facilities.

Discussion:

The minutes of the Council meeting of July 8, 9 and 10, 1998 reference the possibility of a Provincial initiative to establish a province wide accreditation program.

I have had an opportunity to discuss this matter with a representative of the Ministry of Finance and I can advise you of the following:

-representatives of the various Ministries have been meeting with an industry based group (Collision Industry Standards Council of Ontario) to develop standards and a code of ethics for the program and to develop a proposed work plan and budget for the administration of the program.

-if the Province decides to implement this program it will likely be through a regulation to the Insurance legislation that would provide that insurance claims be paid only to accredited repair facilities.

-the accreditation process, if approved, is targeted to start in January 1999, however, there is no date as to when the program and insurance restrictions would be triggered. The program implementation date will be influenced by the number of shops accredited and their geographic dispersal. Contrary to the assumptions of some industry participants the program does not start on January 1, 1999.

The various Provincial Ministries and the industry representatives (CISCO) appear to be committed to implementing an accreditation program, however, the magnitude of this endeavour with minimal grass roots development in place and the proposal that the operation be industry operated does not argue for an early implementation date.

Contact Name and Telephone Number:

Carol Ruddell-Foster, General Manager

416-392-3070

________

The Emergency and Protective Services Committee reports, for the information of Council, having also had before it during the consideration of the foregoing matter a communication (September 14, 1998) from the Mr. George Ching, Weston, Ontario, requesting an opportunity to address the Committee with regard to the practices of the towing companies, a copy of which was forwarded to all Members of Council with the Supplementary Agenda of the Emergency and Protective Services Committee meeting of October 6, 1998, and is on file in the Office of the CityClerk.

Mr. George Ching, Weston, Ontario, appeared before the Emergency and Protective Services Committee in connection with the foregoing matter.

Respectfully submitted,

DENNIS FOTINOS,

Chair

Toronto,- September 8 and 11, 1998 - Report No. 10

- October 6, 1998 - Report No. 11

(Report No. 12 of The Emergency and Protective Services Committee, was adopted, as amended, by City Council on November 25, 26 and 27, 1998.)