Councillor calls for inquiry into 'dysfunctional' Scarborough subway planning

Councillor Josh Matlow is asking his colleagues to back a judicial inquiry after they were provided "inaccurate, misleading or incomplete" information about the subway ahead of a key vote.

Thestar.com
By Jennifer Pagliaro
April 18, 2018

A city councillor is calling for a public inquiry into the problematic Scarborough subway planning process.

The $3.35-billion Scarborough subway extension has been characterized by a lack of information and misinformation. Now, Councillor Josh Matlow says this type of "dysfunctional" transit planning needs to be put under a microscope.

"Our city has far too often neglected evidence-based transit priorities while approving proposals that serve the fewest people for the most money. The existing system has become overcrowded. The Spadina Extension and the Sheppard subway line have monopolized scarce resources, leaving most residents of Scarborough, North York and Etobicoke with long bus rides before being able to access rapid transit. These bloated projects are plagued by low ridership, requiring significant subsidies," the five-page request from Matlow says. "Now, City Council is on the verge of setting a new precedent by neglecting the public trust, and with such a gross misexpenditure of public finances."

Council, under Mayor John Tory, has voted to move ahead with a one-stop Scarborough subway extension from the existing Kennedy Station on the Bloor-Danforth line to a new stop at the Scarborough Town Centre. That plan was revised to a three-stop option approved by council in 2013 under former mayor Rob Ford. In making that decision, council scrapped a seven-stop LRT that would have replaced the Scarborough RT, be separated from traffic, and have been fully-funded by the province.

All Toronto homeowners are paying for the subway through a special tax that will continue to be collected for at least 30 years.

Matlow's request for a judicial review, which will be tabled at a council meeting next week, follows a Star story about how staff exaggerated the design of the subway, consultants rushed work and costs were based on hand-drawn sketches ahead of a key vote in July 2016.

The motion asks that council apply to the Superior Court under the City of Toronto Act - "similar to the Toronto computer leasing inquiry" called for in 2002 - to investigate what council was told about the subway extension and LRT alternative in the lead-up to that vote.

Matlow's motion includes details of how city staff claimed the design of the subway was at 5 per cent, while the LRT was at a similar stage of 5 to 10 per cent design - which cast the subway in a more favourable light at a time its cost was ballooning. The subway, internal reports provided to the Star show, was not that far along, and according to public reports, the LRT was actually at 30 per cent - putting it years ahead in the process.

His motion also outlines how a misleading TTC briefing note, which cast doubt on whether the LRT was still feasible, was distributed to only the mayor's office and that of TTC chair Councillor Josh Colle against council procedure. That briefing note was used to influence council ahead of the vote.

Significantly, the briefing note said the LRT would now cost nearly as much as the subway because of construction delays and other calculations. An investigation into the briefing note by the city's auditor general, who said she found no evidence staff deliberately misled council, also found the cost quoted was off by at least $570 million.

Staff also based cost estimates for the subway on a completion date in late 2025. That schedule was based on council approving the route for the subway at the meeting in July 2016 - a fact buried in a footnote below a chart on costs. But staff had not yet recommended a route for the subway, making it impossible for councillors to make a decision and for staff to meet that schedule.

"The evidence suggests that critical information presented to council by staff regarding the (Scarborough subway extension) and the (Scarborough LRT) in staff reports, briefing notes, and on the floor of council was at times inaccurate, misleading or incomplete," Matlow's motion concludes. "This is deeply troubling given that a decision on a multi-billion dollar infrastructure project was based on the information provided."

Matlow has frequently criticized the lack of evidence to justify a subway and has advocated for the return to an LRT plan that would put more people closer to rapid transit stops. His motion is seconded by Councillor Kristyn Wong-Tam.

The 6.2-kilometre Scarborough subway extension is projected to carry 34,000 fewer daily riders than the nearly six-kilometre Sheppard subway line, which has been called a "white elephant" because it failed to attract many riders. The Scarborough trains would be 70 to 80 per cent empty at rush hour by 2031. Taxpayers today pay a significant subsidy to keep the Sheppard line running due to the ridership shortfall.

Council has never seen a value-for-money comparison of the subway and LRT options. A majority of council members, including Tory, rejected earlier requests from Matlow to see that kind of study. A 2013 draft Metrolinx report concluded a subway was "not a worthwhile use of money" compared to the LRT. That report was never published.

On Tuesday, Tory tried to counter concerns the subway design was, as Matlow has said, "drawn on the back of a napkin."

"I think the votes we've taken, the reports they're based on, are sufficient to allow us to have the confidence that we can proceed," Tory told reporters.

He pointed to a 59-page staff report that was accompanied by seven attachments as evidence the Scarborough plan was on solid footing. But that report, tabled ahead of the July 2016 votes, was about multiple transit projects. Only nine of the pages and one of the attachments dealt with Scarborough specifically.

That report also contained the staff claim about the subway being at 5 per cent design and provided the impossible schedule.

On Wednesday, the mayor's office issued a statement calling Matlow's motion a "publicity stunt."

Council meets starting April 24.