Article content continued

City legal staff suggest they are on slim ground legally with respect to concerns over the lack of consultation, the sudden changes made in the middle of an election or any violation of the Charter of Rights.

We apologize, but this video has failed to load.

tap here to see other videos from our team. Try refreshing your browser, or

The opinion says because the city is a creature of the province, “there is no constitutionally recognized obligation” on the province’s part to consult with the city or its residents “prior to restructuring a municipal government.”

Wahlberg’s report says while consultation on changes to the City of Toronto Act should have been done in “good faith,” the Act does not “impose any clear legal obligations” to do so either.

The legal opinion nixes the Charter of Rights argument too — noting “the actions taken by the province do not violate the Charter.”

She also advises that any fight based on the grounds that such a change violates the “rule of law” given that the election period had already commenced is treading on thin ice because there is no prior case law that sets a precedent.

“The argument would require the court to apply certain legal principles to a very new and unique context,” she writes,

The opinion notes that the province crossed its t’s and dotted all the i’s when it came to the “wording” of Bill 5 and there is no opportunity to challenge it on any sort of technical arguments either.

Given all of this, it will be interesting to see what council decides on Monday.

I guarantee the debate will be a real sideshow.

Too bad it will occur in camera.

SLevy@postmedia.com