GENERAL PRINCIPLES
Cities should not have to seek provincial permission to do municipal things.
A key goal of a City Charter will be to give the city the authority to act independently of the province on matters within the municipal sphere and without having to go to the province for permission to make decisions.
The city will be recognized as a mature level of government in its own right with the authority to act on its own on purely city matters.
The city will be recognized as a mature level of government in its own right with the authority to act on its own on purely city matters.
Any powers for the city that are outlined in the charter should be interpreted in the broadest possible way. However, Toronto remains a part of the province and therefore, the city will be subject to all provincial and federal legislation of general province-wide application. Where that legislation is contrary to the City Charter, the Charter will prevail. As well, the city should be entitled, using its own money, to increase or enhance any program or service standards set by the province or the federal government. |
There may be situations where powers over some aspect of city life has never been allocated to either the city or the province, particularly if the subject is a new one, not previously contemplated.
Ride-sharing and short-term rentals are two recent examples. In any such cases, the city should have jurisdiction over any such matters in the municipal sphere even without a specific amendment to the City Charter. Settling Disputes Despite everyone’s best efforts, there are bound to be disputes about the meaning of some sections of the charter, or about activities of the province or the city which either party objects to. In such cases, there should be an agreement to seek a resolution of the dispute by discussion and negotiations. |
If the disagreement persists the Arbitration Act should be used. It is very much hoped that parties will not take their disputes to the courts for resolution.
Starting PointAs a starting point, jurisdictions already allotted to the city under the City of Toronto Act will be exclusive powers of the city.
These include such things as: • licensing and standards
• economic development • water and waste services • fire services • paramedic services • emergency management • long-term senior care • children's services • shelters • court services • parks and recreation • urban forestry • parking enforcement • and others. Where there is any conflict between the City of Toronto Act and the City Charter, the charter will prevail.
The Charter will also return the powers taken from the city in 2018 to make decisions over the form and structure of its own governance. |
Exclusive JurisdictionsThe charter will recognize exclusive city jurisdictions in which the city has the irrevocable and sole authority to act alone, without provincial oversight or approval.
Essentially, any issue that affects only the city, or which applies only within the boundaries of the city will be the exclusive authority of the city. In addition to the areas listed at the left, we propose the city have exclusive authority over: • Land Use Planning
• Streets • Housing • Local Transit • Human Services • Public Health • Education up to Grade 12 • Selected Powers of Taxation. To guard against corruption and to ensure citizens have confidence in the city government, the city will be responsible, as it is now, to maintain oversight offices such as a city Ombud, Auditor, Integrity Commissioner, Lobbyist Registrar.
|
Shared JurisdictionsRecognizing that there are some areas that overlap municipal boundaries or which require a
co-operative and co-ordinated response, the charter will continue or establish areas of shared jurisdiction with the province. These areas of shared jurisdiction could include: • Selected Powers of Taxation • Environment • Health • Immigrant Settlement • Policing • the Waterfront • and others. The rules and parameters for the exercise of such shared authorities will be clearly delineated in the City Charter, including the role each level of government will play and the resources they will bring to the table.
Areas of critical oversight would be shared responsibilities, for example, oversight of policing through institutions such as the SIU and OIPRD. |
HOW TO READ THIS SECTION
We recognize there are many innovative ideas around the kind of authorities cities
should have which are not reflected in this proposal.
Some may wish to see fully transformative changes at the outset of adopting a City Charter.
For example, in the field of democratic governance, such tools as citizens' councils,
community councils, deliberative democracy, expanded citizen-based budgeting and the regular
use of referenda to decide city issues have all been floated in our consultations.
We believe the goal of adopting a City Charter should not be to transform
everything about the city in a single stroke, but to put the city into a position where the
city can transform itself by itself.
Loading the charter with controversial elements might endanger the
adoption of the Charter itself by distracting from the core goal: a constitutionally-protected
City Charter that puts the city at the heart of its own decision making.
We see the City Charter as a living document
that can evolve and improve over time through discussion by city residents. Indeed, we anticipate
that the adoption of a City Charter would provoke such welcome and healthy debate.
Therefore, the authorities/jurisdictions we're proposing below should be read as a
starting point for public discussion, not the end point. A final City Charter, negotiated
between the province and the city, may well look very different from the
one we're proposing at the outset. That's okay with us.
We recognize there are many innovative ideas around the kind of authorities cities
should have which are not reflected in this proposal.
Some may wish to see fully transformative changes at the outset of adopting a City Charter.
For example, in the field of democratic governance, such tools as citizens' councils,
community councils, deliberative democracy, expanded citizen-based budgeting and the regular
use of referenda to decide city issues have all been floated in our consultations.
We believe the goal of adopting a City Charter should not be to transform
everything about the city in a single stroke, but to put the city into a position where the
city can transform itself by itself.
Loading the charter with controversial elements might endanger the
adoption of the Charter itself by distracting from the core goal: a constitutionally-protected
City Charter that puts the city at the heart of its own decision making.
We see the City Charter as a living document
that can evolve and improve over time through discussion by city residents. Indeed, we anticipate
that the adoption of a City Charter would provoke such welcome and healthy debate.
Therefore, the authorities/jurisdictions we're proposing below should be read as a
starting point for public discussion, not the end point. A final City Charter, negotiated
between the province and the city, may well look very different from the
one we're proposing at the outset. That's okay with us.
EXCLUSIVE CITY JURISDICTIONS
Land Use PlanningLand use planning concerns all aspects of property development – rezoning, Official Plans, land severance, committee of adjustment and others.
Currently, most land use matters require approval by a provincial body, so that City Council is not in the position of being able to make final decisions. Ontario is one of the few provinces that does not allocate land use responsibilities solely to municipalities. |
• The city should have the exclusive power to deny, approve, or place restrictions on any land use planning application including Official Plans, zoning and rezoning, subdivisions, minor and major variances, and severance consents, without requiring the approval of any provincial body.
• To ensure Council decisions are appropriate and in keeping with the public interest, land use decisions should be reviewed by an independent, city-appointed body and its decision, after a fair hearing, will be reported to Council for a final determination. The city should be given the authority to establish and fund such an independent body.
• The city should be given the exclusive authority to establish and enforce development and intensification conditions such as minimum and maximum densities, heights, development charges, brown-field development goals, and controls to protect heritage and cultural features of structures and areas.
• To ensure Council decisions are appropriate and in keeping with the public interest, land use decisions should be reviewed by an independent, city-appointed body and its decision, after a fair hearing, will be reported to Council for a final determination. The city should be given the authority to establish and fund such an independent body.
• The city should be given the exclusive authority to establish and enforce development and intensification conditions such as minimum and maximum densities, heights, development charges, brown-field development goals, and controls to protect heritage and cultural features of structures and areas.
Streets
Many of the regulations and restrictions the city wishes to place on streets – stoplights, or the use of traffic wardens, for example - require provincial approval.
This creates unnecessary duplication and expense and there’s no good reason to think that provincial officials have a better handle on local traffic conditions than city officials. • The city should have the exclusive power to regulate the sidewalks, lanes, bicycle lanes, streets, roadways and non-provincial highways within its boundaries, including road design and construction, speed limits, traffic calming, congestion and climate change strategies, signals and signage, tolls, cameras, road closures, vehicle restrictions and all other traffic measures. |
Housing
The city has a great interest in housing supply and conditions, including temporary housing, housing the homeless, social and affordable housing, and rental housing. It’s not clear that the city has the power to exercise control over all these matters. There is also the problem of funding social and affordable housing: this can be done through cost-sharing programs but preferably, if the city secures the needed revenue tools, through its own financial resources. |
• The city should have the exclusive power to provide and regulate affordable and social housing, including setting rent/income levels.
• The city should have the power to enter into cost-sharing arrangements with private and public agencies, other municipalities, Ontario and Canada for the provision of social and affordable housing.
• The city should have the power to enter into agreements, including loans and mortgages, with various parties regarding the provision of social and affordable housing and to require certain levels of social and affordable housing be achieved in developments.
• The city should have the exclusive authority to provide temporary housing accommodation for immigrants and refugees, and for the homeless.
• The city should have the authority to control the demolition and conversion of rental housing, to control residential tenancies, to establish rent controls and to regulate short-term rentals.
• The city should have the power to enter into cost-sharing arrangements with private and public agencies, other municipalities, Ontario and Canada for the provision of social and affordable housing.
• The city should have the power to enter into agreements, including loans and mortgages, with various parties regarding the provision of social and affordable housing and to require certain levels of social and affordable housing be achieved in developments.
• The city should have the exclusive authority to provide temporary housing accommodation for immigrants and refugees, and for the homeless.
• The city should have the authority to control the demolition and conversion of rental housing, to control residential tenancies, to establish rent controls and to regulate short-term rentals.
Local Transit
Since the early 1920s, the city has always been a leader in public transit serving city and neighbouring residents. In the late 1940s it undertook the construction of Canada’s first subway without provincial subsidies, using the surpluses produced by the transit system during the Second World War. Transit fares provide the majority of the TTC’s revenue base, unlike other North American cities which receive much higher levels of government subsidies.
Despite the lack of support, the Toronto Transit Commission has often been voted as the best transit system in North America, an accolade bestowed as recently as 2017. Funding problems have hobbled the transit system as it was expanded to serve the lower density suburban areas of Metro Toronto from the mid-1970s. At that time, the city was supported by provincial subsidies for both operating and capital expenditures. But those arrangements meant the province had a major say in how transit would be structured and designed in the |
city, and often their demands did not advance the cause of good public transit or reflect Toronto’s priorities.
More recently, the province has decided that it will take over parts of the transit system. Serious questions have been asked about what the province’s plans entail and whether this change will be of any benefit to transit riders in the city. The system today integrates subways, buses, streetcars and LRTs into a fully-integrated network, providing advantages that could be lost if the system were to be split between multiple owners.
The best people to decide Toronto’s transit needs are transit users, city officials and city politicians accountable to city voters, not provincial officials and politicians, many of whom do not live in Toronto or use the TTC.
• The city should have the exclusive authority to provide and regulate public transit in the city. This should include Wheel-Trans, buses, streetcars, light rail transit, subways, other transit conveyances and ancillary properties including Union Station (which the city now owns.)
• The city should have the authority to enter into agreements with other municipalities and/or transit agencies in the GTA, the province and Canada to provide and improve service, share costs, and to create a seamless regional transit system.
More recently, the province has decided that it will take over parts of the transit system. Serious questions have been asked about what the province’s plans entail and whether this change will be of any benefit to transit riders in the city. The system today integrates subways, buses, streetcars and LRTs into a fully-integrated network, providing advantages that could be lost if the system were to be split between multiple owners.
The best people to decide Toronto’s transit needs are transit users, city officials and city politicians accountable to city voters, not provincial officials and politicians, many of whom do not live in Toronto or use the TTC.
• The city should have the exclusive authority to provide and regulate public transit in the city. This should include Wheel-Trans, buses, streetcars, light rail transit, subways, other transit conveyances and ancillary properties including Union Station (which the city now owns.)
• The city should have the authority to enter into agreements with other municipalities and/or transit agencies in the GTA, the province and Canada to provide and improve service, share costs, and to create a seamless regional transit system.
Education
Until 20 years ago, education in the city was entirely funded from the property tax system, giving local school boards considerable flexibility in creating and operating programs to educate children within the city. When the province took over the education system it seized control of about half the city’s property taxes for education funding purposes. Today, about one-third of Toronto's property taxes in Toronto go to the province. The result has been a provincial standardization of services and funding which has not served the city well: schools are falling into disrepair, and surplus school properties are not readily available for community purposes. |
Programs the school boards would like to fund are often cancelled when school boards are unable to find the needed money. The province dictates class sizes that are often seen as inappropriate. Trustees are grossly underpaid for their work.
The city needs to regain control of its education system.
• Education responsibilities, including funding and property tax allocations for education, should be in the exclusive control of the city and the local school boards. This should apply to pre-school, primary school and secondary school matters.
The city needs to regain control of its education system.
• Education responsibilities, including funding and property tax allocations for education, should be in the exclusive control of the city and the local school boards. This should apply to pre-school, primary school and secondary school matters.
• Local school boards should have the exclusive authority to determine the governance structure and elections of its boards. To ensure those decisions are appropriate and in keeping with the public interest, they should be reviewed by an independent, city-appointed body established and appointed by the boards and its decision, after a fair hearing, will be reported to the boards for a final determination. The boards should be given the authority to establish and fund such an independent body. • Pooling of equalization payments from Toronto’s property tax base for education purposes at the provincial level will be a matter of agreement between local boards, the city, and the province, and such agreement will respect the unique needs of educational expenditures in Toronto. |
Human Services
More than one quarter of children in Toronto live in poverty. There is a serious income distribution problem occurring it the city.
Responsibility for poverty-related issues is shared between the provincial and the federal governments, with the city playing a crucial role in delivering, and sometimes sharing in the cost of, programs that it has no role in developing. For instance, monthly payments may be appropriate for other municipalities in Ontario, but are much too low to meet the higher cost of living in Toronto. |
Current arrangements are unnecessarily complex and can result in people falling through the cracks and leaving families impoverished. The most vulnerable were further disadvantaged when the provincial government unilaterally decided to reduce welfare benefits.
The city is in the best position to provide human services at the local level in order to ensure that programs are adequately funded, supported, and coordinated.
It is recognized some human services may involve shared decision-making and shared expenditures.
ted
The city is in the best position to provide human services at the local level in order to ensure that programs are adequately funded, supported, and coordinated.
It is recognized some human services may involve shared decision-making and shared expenditures.
ted
• The city should have exclusive jurisdiction of all social services and child care programs in Toronto. • The city will require funding support for these services. It needs to ensure such funding is not arbitrarily reduced. This can occur in one of two ways: Through the city receiving block funding from the federal and provincial governments equal to the amount spent on those programs in Toronto, to be increased annually according to some fair formula, for example, based upon cost of living increases. |
Or, preferably, the province could determine the amount currently transferred to the city for these programs, establish it as a municipal revenue source representing a percentage of annual provincial revenue collected by the province, and transfer control of that revenue to the city.
SHARED JURISDICTIONS
HealthHealth policy and spending are matter of great importance to governments, particularly local governments.
The Romanow Commission in 2002 recommended that much more attention be given to preventing illness and injury in order to reduce the need for hospitals and emergency medical treatments. The province has made moves to provide a more local health focus by coordinating services at the local level and strengthening local decision-making through the Local Health Initiative Network (LHINs). |
LHINs were given control over all health expenditures at the local level, including hospitals, and were governed by provincially appointed boards. The province is now moving back to a more centralized health governance system without important local input and decision-making.
The province has also announced its intention to substantially reduce allocations to public health matters, even though a robust public health system is thought to be the optimal way to contain health expenditures through improving social factors which lead to good health outcomes.
It is recognized that some health matters involve shared jurisdictions in decision-making and expenditures.
• The city should be given exclusive powers and functions similar to those provided to a Local Heath Integration Network.
• The city should have the authority to enter into agreements with the province for coordinating health issues and spending within the city.
• The city should have exclusive responsibility for public health in the city.
The province has also announced its intention to substantially reduce allocations to public health matters, even though a robust public health system is thought to be the optimal way to contain health expenditures through improving social factors which lead to good health outcomes.
It is recognized that some health matters involve shared jurisdictions in decision-making and expenditures.
• The city should be given exclusive powers and functions similar to those provided to a Local Heath Integration Network.
• The city should have the authority to enter into agreements with the province for coordinating health issues and spending within the city.
• The city should have exclusive responsibility for public health in the city.
Immigrant and Refugee SettlementMore than 75 per cent of the immigrants and refugees coming to Ontario between 2011 and 2016 settled in the Toronto area.
As Toronto City Council recently learned, it does not have the resources to ensure that they are adequately housed. There are also strains on programs related to teaching English as a Second Language, job training, and as well as other resettlement needs. Successful immigrant settlement is important to the health and vibrancy of the city. |
It is recognized that these activities involve shared decision-making and shared funding.
Given that the city already plays a large role in providing many of the services required by newcomers, such as housing, social assistance and counselling, it makes sense for the city to be the lead and coordinating agency for newcomer settlement.
• The city should have the power to enter into agreements with the provincial and federal government to ensure it has the financial tools and ability to help immigrants and refugees to integrate into the city.
• The city must be involved as a partner with the provincial and federal governments in discussions about immigration and refugee levels and strategies.
Given that the city already plays a large role in providing many of the services required by newcomers, such as housing, social assistance and counselling, it makes sense for the city to be the lead and coordinating agency for newcomer settlement.
• The city should have the power to enter into agreements with the provincial and federal government to ensure it has the financial tools and ability to help immigrants and refugees to integrate into the city.
• The city must be involved as a partner with the provincial and federal governments in discussions about immigration and refugee levels and strategies.
Police and Security Services
Police governance in Toronto is provided by the Toronto Police Service Board, the size of which is constrained by provincial legislation which sets how members will be appointed. The seven-member board has three members appointed by the province. A larger police board would allow for much more diversity in police management and decision-making.
The province makes some small grants for specific policing matters, but almost the entire one billion dollar annual police budget is funded from city sources.
Policing involves shared responsibilities between the city and the province through the provincial Police Services Act.
The province makes some small grants for specific policing matters, but almost the entire one billion dollar annual police budget is funded from city sources.
Policing involves shared responsibilities between the city and the province through the provincial Police Services Act.
In the interests of ensuring independent oversight of Toronto’s police force, the province should continue to play its role in providing such oversight through such institutions as the Special Investigations Unit and the Office of the Independent Police Review Director. • The city should have exclusive power to determine the structure and size of the Police Services Board, including how members are appointed, while ensuring that the province may appoint one-third of the members of the board. |
CHARTER CITY PROPOSAL IN DETAIL
chartercitytoronto@gmail.com