Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutADMIN-20-00 , . . ~ THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON REPORT Meeting General Purpose and Administration Committee File # -Of) 3 Res. to'11T-6-3I5h-o 0 Date: September 5, 2000 Report # : Subject ADMIN-20-2000 File #: 5.3.7 B)'-law# GREA1ER TORONTO SERVICES BOARD REVIEW Reconunenclations: It is respectfully reconunended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. lHAT Report ADMIN.20-2000 be received. 2 lHAT Council approve Admin. Report ADMIN-20-2000 and provide same to the GTSB as our response to the Deloitte Consultants Phase 1 Report addressing GTA wide challenges. 3 That the GTSB and the Region of Durham be advised of Council's decision. 1. BACKGROUND AI. its meeting held on June 30, 2000, the Greater Toronto Services Board adopted the reconunendation of The Strategic Planning and Review Committee, which reconunends the Phase 1 Report Addressing GTA Wide Challenges prepared by Deloitte Consulting be circulated to member municipalities and other GTA stakeholders, with a request that conunents be forwarded to the GTSB office no later than September 30, 2000. 2. SYNOPSIS OF TIlE PHASE 1 REPORT The Phase 1 Report is a discussion paper representing the first step in the process of reviewing the GSlB with the objective of challenging all stakeholders in their thinking on the following two key ISsueS: 120i . REPORT ADMIN20-2000 PAGE 2 a) identify the challenges facing the GTA; and b) establish guiding principles and criteria for evaluating these options to meet the challenges. 2.1 GTA Policy Challenge The Consultant suggested that there are a number of policy challenges of a scope and magnitude that warrant a common focus by all GTA municipalities. Those include matters where the consequences of decisions may spill across municipal boundaries and affect the competitiveness of the GTA Region as a whole. These challenges are: . valuable fannland and environmentally sensitive areas lost to urban development . traffic congestion . public transit losing its market share . deterioration of air quality . losing competitiveness in the world market . affordable housing out of reach for increasing number of residents The report also went on to note that with the Ontario Government withdrawing from its historical role in inter-municipal coordination including its responsibility for land use compatibility, transportation policies, social cohesion and equity, urban infrastructure including water, sewer systems and transit that the municipality may not be able to fill the void without GTA-wide policies. In summary, the Consultants point out the causes of these problems facing the GTA and stress the emphasis for the need of financial resources and a coordinated approach to address these issues. 2.2 The Greater Toronto Services Board The mission and mandate of the GTSB are enshrined in Provincial legislation. On January 1, 1999 the Consultants provided a summary of the mandate of the Board and reported on the progress of the works of the GTSB since. This includes: UiJL '. . REPORT ADMIN20-2000 PAGE 3 . financial policies and operating procedures a committee based decision making structure responsibilities for GO Transit transportation policy countryside strategy protocol for best practices inter-municipal conflict resolution . . . . . 2.3 Criteria for Evaluation of Options Prior to developing options to deal with the GTA challenges, the Consultants proposed a number of guiding principles in the evaluation of future options. These principles are: . Urban, suburban and nua1 needs will be balanced to achieve sustainability and to offer a variety of living circumstances accompanied by a good quality of life; There will be capacity to identify and address the shared interests and challenges of the city- region and their relationship with local interests; Efficiency and inclusiveness in decision-making will be balanced to achieve public transparency and accountability; There will be a strong voice to advocate on behalf of the entire GTA; There will be capacity to monitor the economic, social and environmental performance of the GTA . . . . To be able to address these issues, the Consultants suggested that the future strncture and authority of the GTSB should be evaluated on its capacity to address GTA wide challenges and to achieve workable solutions. 3. COMMENfS The Phase 1 Report prepared by Delaitte Consultants appears to be an attempt to re-invent the GTSB, as the report clearly places heavy emphasis on the many challenges facing the GTA and that UU5 . . REPORT ADMIN2D-2000 PAGE 4 therefore the role and responsibi1ities of the GTSB should be redefined to allow it to meet these challenges. There would be little disagreement on the challenges identified by the Consultants, however, the Consultants appear to lean heavily on the GTSB as the panacea to all the challenges faced by the G.TA Municipalities, without looking at other options to deal with the GTA challenges, such as the Provincial Government assuming greater responsibility for co-ordination and re-investing provincial dollars to the critical area of transportation infrastructure. Although the challenges raised by the Consultants are valid, they are not new and should have been reviewed and discussed before the GTSB was established. The task at hand is not to dwell on these challenges but to examine all alternatives and find workable solutions, but not necessarily relying on the GTSB to solve all problems. Another weakness in the Report is Its apparent failure to deal with the GTSB structure, its weaknesses and strengths, its effectiveness, representation, geographical boundary and explore various options of its future mandate. For example, if the GTSB were charged with the responsibilities of many issues affecting the GT A municipalities, why is the current boundary of the GTA not even discussed by the Consultants? The geographical boundatyis a critical issue that must be addressed, as it would determine the appropriateness of the size and effectiveness of the GTSB. The Region of Durham Council has stated at its meeting of July 10, 2000 that among other concerns, it does not support having the GTSB review make recommendations that will interfere with or prejudice the governance discussion now occurring in Durham municipalities. The Municipality of datington generally concurs with the Region's position and would further urge the Consultants to be cognizant of regional differences within the GTA in developing their options and recommendations. liG4 . . . . REPORT ADMIN20-2000 PAGE 5 4. CONCLUSION We understand the Consultant's Phase I Report is intended to generate discussion and comments from the stakeholders. In this regard, representatives from Clarington will continue to work with the G.T.S.B. office to monitor the review process and will offer additional comments to the Consultants as necessary. Respectfully submitted, C\ ~--Sf~ Franklin Wu Chief Administrative Officer 1 L (jJ