Item - 2017.AU10.11

Tracking Status

  • City Council adopted this item on November 7, 2017 without amendments.
  • This item was considered by the Audit Committee on October 27, 2017 and adopted without amendment. It will be considered by City Council on November 7, 2017.

AU10.11 - Auditor General's Office - Review of Complaint Regarding the June 29, 2016 Toronto Transit Commission Briefing Note

Decision Type:
ACTION
Status:
Adopted
Wards:
All

City Council Decision

City Council on November 7, 8 and 9, 2017, adopted the following:

  

1. City Council request the City Clerk to implement protocols defining when it is appropriate to share briefing notes, as well as an online public repository to house briefing notes, bulletins, announcements and similar communications issued by City divisions and agencies, similar to the one maintained by the City of Vancouver, and City Council direct the City Manager to ensure that City divisions and agencies submit copies of any such correspondence to the City Clerk for the register.

Background Information (Committee)

(October 13, 2017) Report from the Auditor General - Auditor General's Office - Review of Complaint Regarding the June 29, 2016 Toronto Transit Commission Briefing Note
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2017/au/bgrd/backgroundfile-107810.pdf
Attachment 1: Auditor General's Report - Review of Complaint Regarding the June 29, 2016 Toronto Transit Commission Briefing Note
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2017/au/bgrd/backgroundfile-107811.pdf

Communications (Committee)

(October 25, 2017) E-mail from Sharon Yetman, CEO Platform Technology Consultancy (AU.New.AU10.11.1)

Communications (City Council)

(November 6, 2017) E-mail from Hamish Wilson (CC.New.AU10.11.2)
(November 8, 2017) E-mail from Sharon Yetman (CC.New.AU10.11.3)

Motions (City Council)

1 - Motion to Amend Item (Additional) moved by Councillor Giorgio Mammoliti (Out of Order)

That City Council request Councillor Matlow to apologize to the Chief Executive Officer, Toronto Transit Commission, for the offending comments made on October 25, 2016, on the CBC Metro Morning program.

Ruling by Speaker Frances Nunziata
Speaker Nunziata made the following ruling:

I am ruling on Councillor Mammoliti's motion regarding Councillor Matlow. The Auditor General has made her report, made her findings and put them before Council and the public. In my opinion, Councillor Mammoliti's motion goes beyond the scope of the item. The Auditor General's report does not address comments Councillor Matlow may or may not have made.
Accordingly, I rule that the motion is out of order as it is not germane to the matter before us. A Member is free to challenging my ruling if you do not agree.


Motion to Adopt Item (Carried)

Vote (Adopt Item) Nov-08-2017 4:13 PM

Result: Carried Majority Required - AU10.11 - Adopt the item
Total members that voted Yes: 41 Members that voted Yes are Paul Ainslie, Maria Augimeri, Ana Bail„o, Jon Burnside, John Campbell, Christin Carmichael Greb, Shelley Carroll, Josh Colle, Gary Crawford, Joe Cressy, Vincent Crisanti, Janet Davis, Glenn De Baeremaeker, Justin J. Di Ciano, Frank Di Giorgio, Sarah Doucette, John Filion, Michael Ford, Mary Fragedakis, Mark Grimes, Jim Hart, Stephen Holyday, Jim Karygiannis, Norman Kelly, Mike Layton, Chin Lee, Giorgio Mammoliti, Josh Matlow, Mary-Margaret McMahon, Joe Mihevc, Denzil Minnan-Wong, Frances Nunziata (Chair), Cesar Palacio, James Pasternak, Gord Perks, Anthony Perruzza, Neethan Shan, David Shiner, John Tory, Lucy Troisi, Kristyn Wong-Tam
Total members that voted No: 0 Members that voted No are
Total members that were Absent: 4 Members that were absent are Paula Fletcher, Michelle Holland, Jaye Robinson, Michael Thompson

Point of Privilege by Councillor Josh Matlow

Councillor Matlow, rising on a Point of Privilege, stated that he only has five minutes to ask questions.


Point of Order by Councillor Giorgio Mammoliti

Councillor Mammoliti, rising on a Point of Order, stated that staff are trying to answer but Councillor Matlow is drowning out staff and not allowing them to answer.

Ruling by Speaker Frances Nunziata
Speaker Nunziata accepted the Points of Privilege and Order and ruled that Councillor Matlow should ask his question, wait for staff to respond and be respectful of staff.


Point of Privilege by Councillor Josh Matlow

Councillor Matlow, rising on a Point of Privilege stated that he has a number of questions and what would be helpful is getting an answer to his question so that he can then ask another question.  Councillor Matlow further stated he is getting answers from staff to questions he did not ask.


Point of Order by Councillor Glenn De Baeremaeker

Councillor De Baeremaeker, rising on a Point of Order, stated that he appreciates that staff give answers that Councillor Matlow or himself may not want but staff should be free from intimidation and not be cut off.   Councillor De Baeremaeker further stated that staff should be able to give answers they feel are appropriate.

 

Ruling by Speaker Frances Nunziata
Speaker Nunziata accepted the Points of Privilege and Order and asked Councillor Matlow if he had any further questions.


Point of Privilege by Councillor Josh Matlow

Councillor Matlow, rising on a Point of Privilege, stated he had several questions however he would like to be able to do so while not being constantly interrupted and disparaged by Members of Council.


Point of Privilege by Councillor Giorgio Mammoliti

Councillor Mammoliti, rising on a Point of Privilege, stated that when he rises to describe what he needs, the Speaker regularly cuts off his microphone but allows Councillor Matlow to do whatever he wants.

Ruling by Speaker Frances Nunziata
Speaker Nunziata accepted the Point of Privilege and ruled that she did not allow Councillor Matlow to do whatever he wanted as she had cut off Councillor Matlow's microphone.


Point of Privilege by Councillor Josh Matlow

Councillor Matlow, rising on a Point of Privilege, stated that Councillor McMahon had made comments regarding a radio interview he had given and asked for clarification on what comments he had made that impugned or disparaged staff.

Ruling by Speaker Frances Nunziata
Speaker Nunziata accepted the Point of Privilege and ruled that Councillor McMahon's questions were in regards to a radio interview and the Councillor had not used any names.


Point of Order by Councillor John Campbell

Councillor Campbell, rising on a Point of Order, stated that Councillor Karygiannis' questions of staff were not on the matter before Council.

Ruling by Speaker Frances Nunziata
Speaker Nunziata accepted the Point of Order and ruled that Councillor Karygiannis should ask questions on the Item before Council.


Point of Privilege by Councillor Josh Matlow

Councillor Matlow, rising on a Point of Privilege, stated that he would continue to rise on a Point of Privilege as his reputation continues to be impugned and his motivations are being challenged.

Ruling by Speaker Frances Nunziata
Speaker Nunziata ruled that Councillor Matlow has been raising the same Point of Privilege and that she had already ruled on his Point of Privilege. Speaker Nunziata further ruled that she would no longer acknowledge his Point of Privilege on the Item.


Point of Privilege by Councillor Josh Matlow

Councillor Matlow, rising on a Point of Privilege, asked the Speaker for her previous ruling.

Ruling by Speaker Frances Nunziata
Speaker Nunziata advised that she had previously ruled that no names were used by Members of Council in their questions of staff and that if Councillor Matlow felt guilty that was his problem.


Point of Privilege by Councillor Janet Davis

Councillor Davis, rising on a Point of Privilege, stated that the Speaker should withdraw her remark as it is totally unacceptable for the Speaker to make that remark.


Point of Privilege by Councillor Jim Karygiannis

Councillor Karygiannis, rising on a Point of Privilege, stated that the Speaker remarks are not acceptable and should be withdrawn.


Point of Privilege by Councillor Janet Davis

Councillor Davis, rising on a Point of Privilege, stated that the Speaker intervened, took a position and was biased, and requested the Speaker to reconsider and withdraw her remarks regarding Councillor Matlow.  Councillor Davis further stated that she would like the Speaker to recognize that Members of Council should be acknowledged on each instance a Point of Order or Privilege is made.

Ruling by Speaker Frances Nunziata
Speaker Nunziata accepted the Point of Privilege and ruled that every Member has the right to a Point of Order or Privilege, however when a Member gets up on the same Point after she has ruled then they do not have to be acknowledged.


Point of Privilege by Councillor Janet Davis

Councillor Davis, rising on a Point of Privilege, ask the Speaker if she would withdraw her remark.

Ruling by Speaker Frances Nunziata
Speaker Nunziata accepted the Point of Privilege and ruled that she would not withdraw her remark.


Point of Privilege by Councillor Janet Davis

Councillor Davis, rising on a Point of Privilege, stated that the Speaker's previous ruling was based on the fact that a certain Councillor's name was not used, however Councillor Mammoliti and the Chief Executive Officer, Toronto Transit Commission have referred to a particular Councillor.  Councillor Davis further stated that she hoped the Speaker's ruling does not stand, as comments about a certain Councillor are unacceptable and should stop.


Point of Privilege by Councillor Glenn De Baeremaeker

Councillor De Baeremaeker, rising on a Point of Privilege, stated that he is being misled by a Member of Council and asked that the Member use a figure that is accurate.


Point of Privilege by Councillor Gord Perks

Councillor Perks, rising on a Point of Privilege, stated that there is a long standing parliamentary tradition in this Chamber that Members may not accuse another Member of deliberately misleading another and asked that Councillor De Baeremaeker withdraw his remarks.

Ruling by Speaker Frances Nunziata
Speaker Nunziata accepted the Points of Privilege and asked Councillor De Baeremaeker to withdraw his remarks. Councillor De Baeremaeker withdrew his remarks.


Point of Order by Councillor Gord Perks

Councillor Perks, rising on a Point of Order, stated that Councillor De Baeremaeker had withdrawn his remarks but had then repeated them and ignored the Speaker's ruling. Councillor Perks further stated that Councillor De Baeremaeker should property withdraw his remarks.

Ruling by Speaker Frances Nunziata
Speaker Nunziata accepted the Point of Order and asked Councillor De Baeremaeker to withdraw his remarks. Councillor De Baeremaeker withdrew his remarks.


Point of Privilege by Councillor Josh Colle

Councillor Colle, rising on a Point of Privilege, stated that Councillor Matlow was impugning staff when he remarked that he did not believe what staff had said earlier.

Ruling by Speaker Frances Nunziata
Speaker Nunziata accepted the Point of Privilege and ruled that Councillor Matlow should apologize for calling staff a liar and asked Councillor Matlow to apologize to Andy Byford, Chief Executive Officer, Toronto Transit Commission.


Point of Privilege by Councillor Josh Matlow

Councillor Matlow, rising on a Point of Privilege, stated that he did not call staff a liar but had said that he was not persuaded by staff.

Ruling by Speaker Frances Nunziata
Speaker Nunziata ruled that Councillor Matlow should apologize. Councillor Matlow stated that he would not apologize.


Point of Privilege by Councillor Anthony Perruzza

Councillor Perruzza, rising on a Point of Privilege, stated that the Council Speaker is a highly recognized and respected position whose function is to safeguard the rights of the individual member.  Councillor Perruzza further stated that the Speaker should set the standard very, very high for herself.

Ruling by Speaker Frances Nunziata
Later in the meeting, Speaker Nunziata addressed City Council as follows:

Earlier today in debate in the midst of an exchange with Councillor Matlow I made comments which were inconsistent with my role as Speaker. I withdraw those comments and express my regret to City Council for making them.

11a - Toronto Transit Commission transmittal regarding the Auditor General's Office - Review of Complaint Regarding the June 29, 2016 Toronto Transit Commission Briefing Note

Background Information (Committee)
(October 17, 2017) Transmittal Letter from the Toronto Transit Commission regarding the Auditor General's Office - Review of Complaint Regarding the June 29, 2016 Toronto Transit Commission Briefing Note
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2017/au/bgrd/backgroundfile-108073.pdf

AU10.11 - Auditor General's Office - Review of Complaint Regarding the June 29, 2016 Toronto Transit Commission Briefing Note

Decision Type:
ACTION
Status:
Adopted
Wards:
All

Committee Recommendations

The Audit Committee recommends that:

  

1. City Council request the City Clerk to implement protocols defining when it is appropriate to share briefing notes, as well as an online public repository to house briefing notes, bulletins, announcements and similar communications issued by City divisions and agencies, similar to the one maintained by the City of Vancouver, and direct the City Manager to ensure that City divisions and agencies submit copies of any such correspondence to the City Clerk for the register.

Decision Advice and Other Information

Beverly Romeo-Beehler, Auditor General, gave a presentation to the Audit Committee on this Item.

Origin

(October 13, 2017) Report from the Auditor General

Summary

This report provides the Auditor General’s findings primarily in relation to whether there was any political interference involved in the crafting and dissemination of a particular briefing note about large transit project options for the City of Toronto. The title of this particular briefing note is “Issues Relating to Re-introduction of LRT Replacement for Line 3 (SRT)”

 

We found:

 

i. no evidence of any lack of integrity on the part of CEO Byford or other TTC personnel in its preparation.

 

ii. no evidence of a systemic problem of political interference or staff being pressured by elected officials, including the Mayor and his office, in relation to the development of the ridership numbers and the preparation and distribution of the note.

 

iii. in our view, the briefing note estimate was within an acceptable range given the stage of the project, the nature of a briefing note and the caveats contained therein. The briefing note highlights that the figures are "estimates only," intended for a "high level cost comparison".  After evaluating the reasonableness of the figures, it is our view that even if construction on the SLRT could have begun several years earlier, the potential difference between the briefing note figures and our calculated escalated cost is within an acceptable range for estimates at that stage of completion.

 

We made recommendations to prevent similar situations from arising in the future. This report contains 3 recommendations along with management's response to each. Management accepts all recommendations.

Background Information

(October 13, 2017) Report from the Auditor General - Auditor General's Office - Review of Complaint Regarding the June 29, 2016 Toronto Transit Commission Briefing Note
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2017/au/bgrd/backgroundfile-107810.pdf
Attachment 1: Auditor General's Report - Review of Complaint Regarding the June 29, 2016 Toronto Transit Commission Briefing Note
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2017/au/bgrd/backgroundfile-107811.pdf

Communications

(October 25, 2017) E-mail from Sharon Yetman, CEO Platform Technology Consultancy (AU.New.AU10.11.1)

Speakers

Brenda Thompson
Rosemary Frei
Derek Moran
Councillor Glenn De Baeremaeker

Motions

Motion to Extend Debate (Lost)

That the Audit Committee allow a second round of questions by non-committee Members.


1 - Motion to Adopt Item (Carried)

11a - Toronto Transit Commission transmittal regarding the Auditor General's Office - Review of Complaint Regarding the June 29, 2016 Toronto Transit Commission Briefing Note

Origin
(October 17, 2017) Letter from the Head of Commission Services, Toronto Transit Commission
Summary

At its meeting on October 16, 2017 the Toronto Transit Commission Board considered a report entitled, “Auditor General’s Report – Review of Complaint Regarding the June 29, 2016 Toronto Transit Commission Briefing Note”.

 

The Toronto Transit Commission Board adopted Recommendations 1 and 3 in the Auditor General’s report, as follows:

 

1.  The Board request the Chief Executive Officer, Toronto Transit Commission, to provide more clarity in relation to the assumptions being relied on when the information is used in briefing notes.

 

3.  The Board request the Chief Executive Officer, Toronto Transit Commission, to ensure its briefing note distribution protocols align with and integrate seamlessly with the City distribution protocols.

 

The foregoing is submitted to Toronto City Council through the City’s Audit Committee, for information.

Background Information
(October 17, 2017) Transmittal Letter from the Toronto Transit Commission regarding the Auditor General's Office - Review of Complaint Regarding the June 29, 2016 Toronto Transit Commission Briefing Note
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2017/au/bgrd/backgroundfile-108073.pdf
Source: Toronto City Clerk at www.toronto.ca/council