Save Union Station

Bulletin

SAVE UNION STATION, Bulletin No. 16, June 10, 2003.

*****

In this issue:

1. ACTIONS - what you can do right now

2. Our letter to the Administration Committee

3. Resignation from the Steering Committee

*****

1. Actions - what you can do right now.

A special meeting of the city's Administration Committee has been called for Tuesday June 17, 1 pm, Committee Room 2, second floor, City Hall.

This meeting will deal with Union Station matters, including the report of Judge Osborne (see the analysis of this report in the May 27 Bulletin No. 14) and the next steps regarding the future of Union Station. Councillor Doug Holyday, who chairs the Administration Committee, has said that he believes that council has already decided to award the contract to the Union Pearson Group - that's the 100 year contract recommended by city staff - and that a special vote of council would be needed to reconsider that decision. We expect there will be much pressure from some members of the committee to simply proceed as though it is business-as-usual, and finalize the proposed contract with the Union Pearson Group.

It is critical that all those interested in the future of the Station send a letter to the committee indicating their objection to the city simply proceeding with the recommended contract to the Union Pearson Group. Our brief, which follows, suggests a more reasonable course of action, namely to affirm the over-riding principles which must apply to whatever city council does - including giving a strong role to the public, ensuring that Union Station is the downtown's key transportation hub, and ensuring the contracts rest on sound business footings.

Please write to the committee - and, please ask to speak to the committee when it meets on the afternoon of June 17. The best chance of influencing the committee will occur if it hears from a number of speakers.

The Committee secretary is Patsy Morris, pmorris@toronto.ca, telephone 416 392 9151. Send a letter, and if possible, list yourself as a speaker to express your views. (Remember: you probably are as well informed on this issue as any member of the committee.)

It is unclear what will happen after the committee meeting. The committee might decide to forward this matter directly for the council meeting of June 24, meaning we have only a small window of time to act effectively.

2. Our letter to the Administration Committee

The following is the text of the letter we have sent to the Committee, requesting the opportunity of addressing the committee:

Our group has very strong reservations concerning the process that has been used to reach the current situation with respect to Union Station. The flaws in the process are well identified in the report of Mr. Osborne, and these are outlined in our Bulletin dated May 27, which is attached. We believe there are strong and compelling reasons to abandon the current bid process and start again.

But whatever disagreements there might be about the interpretation of the Osborne report, we must not lose sight of the fundamentals at issue - what happens to Union Station in the short, medium, and long term. The Station must be seen as the key transportation hub in the downtown. Addressing this issue is most critical. We ask committee and council to endorse the following principles to shape the process and the way in which the Station is improved:

A. A Strong Role for the Public

1) All materials relating to the bids, in the past and in the future, must be made public before decisions are taken, and the decision-making process must be conducted in public, with public input.

2) All heritage decisions respecting Union Station, including those in the purview of the Federal Government and its agencies, must be made in public, with public notice and input.

B. Strengthening the Downtown's Key Transportation Hub

3) Council must be provided with a professional report outlining the number of Station users resulting from the expected increases in regional and intercity rail travel over the next three decades, and confirming that the design agreed to provides the flexibility needed to reconfigure the tracks and the platforms to meet this demand.

4) Since Union Station is the hub of different modes of transportation, council must establish some means of informed co-ordination - perhaps an advisory board of expert citizens, perhaps a strong designated city staff person expert in transportation issues - capable of requiring agencies to work together for the public good.

5) Train platforms must be brought into compliance with reasonable standards of safety no later than 2013.

6) Escalator access from the concourses to the platforms serving most passengers, must be installed no later than 2013.

7) To enhance the experience of train travel in and out of Toronto, improvements to the roof over the tracks must be undertaken to make it attractive and structurally safe, or it must be replaced in whole or in part, by 2013.

C. Making Sound Business Contracts

8) Any lease term for Union Station should be commensurate with normal commercial practise for return on capital, that is, for a term no more than a maximum of 20 years including any right of renewal.

9) Any lease must provide the city a reasonable return on its asset, Union Station.

Without these kinds of principles underlying the process and any contract, we believe the public interest will be poorly served. Whatever decisions are made about the process so far, we urge council to adopt these principles regarding the disposition of Union Station.

3. Resignation from the Steering Committee

On June 9, Lawrence David's lawyer wrote to Judge Osborne noting that his report "suggests and creates the impression that Mr. David is a conspiracy theorist. This occurs by the placement of the discussion [of] Mr. David's concerns under the title of 'Conspiracy Theories.' This, together with the language used, is defamatory. The term conspiracy theorist connotes something beyond the words themselves: it suggests that Mr. David is paranoid and/or that his concerns are not grounded in reality." The letter asks that the report be withdrawn and that the libelous remarks be retracted.

On learning of this action, the Steering Committee agreed that Mr. David should withdraw from the committee so that there would be no confusion between his personal action and the actions of the committee regarding the future of Union Station. Mr. David has accordingly withdrawn from the Steering Committee, but we are sure he will continue to be very active - it was his action which resulted in it becoming public that the scoring documents from the second vote - the one which gave the Union Pearson Group the edge after LP Heritage + had handily won the first vote - had been destroyed.

*********

This Bulletin is numbered as 16, since it appears by accident that the two previous Bulletins were both sent out as No. 14 - one on March 16, one of May 27. The May 27 Bulletin is shown on the web site as No. 15. You will be pleased to know that none of the documents which led to this confusion have been destroyed.

Please consider sending this Bulletin to a friend. If you have not received this Bulletin directly from the site and wish to subscribe, send a short note to to signup@saveunionstation.ca, and please visit our website at http://www.saveunionstation.ca