Council has committed to the creation of 18,000 new supportive housing units over the next 10 years as the city looks to deal with an ongoing crisis of available shelter space and recognize a shortage of mental health services.

Most of the recommendations approved at a meeting Monday followed earlier motions from downtown councillors Joe Cressy and Kristyn Wong-Tam after they and city staff scrambled to find space for vulnerable residents during a record-breaking cold snap.

“There was a wall of resistance, some of it at the staff level, some of it at the political level, that refused to take a look at the crisis before us,” Wong-Tam said. “We had to have a coming to terms and a coming to the truth moment where the political leadership had to rethink what was happening and think about what a proper response would be to a crisis that was not named.”

Today, the city has space for 6,600 people, including motel rooms. The system is consistently over 90 per cent capacity, a target set by council that has never been met.

The city now plans to create 1,000 more shelter beds over three years after frontline advocates and prominent Torontonians demanded leaders do better in responding to the lack of available space and open at least 1,000 beds immediately.

On Monday, Wong-Tam thanked those on the ground for holding officials’ “feet to the fire.”

Council also heard from the city’s ombudsman on Monday after she tabled a report that outlined how misinformation about available space in winter respite services caused some people to be told there was no space. Emails obtained by the Star showed behind-the-scenes officials struggled to deal with that communication breakdown while blaming journalists and “activists.”

City staff have accepted all of ombudsman Susan Opler’s recommendations and are currently working to implement them.

Earlier in the day, Councillor Gord Perks moved that council debate a long-awaited report from outgoing city manager Peter Wallace on a long-term financial plan. That report was tabled at Mayor John Tory’s executive committee earlier this month and then punted to the new term for further discussion.

“I can think of no more urgent conversation for this council to have,” said Perks. “I can think of no more important debate for Torontonians to have then whether we are a bare-bones government that just delivers services to property like sewer hook-ups and fire trucks and police and that’s about it, or whether we deliver the suite of services that a modern city has to deliver to be inclusive, to be fair, to be livable.”

By moving the procedural motion to take the item from executive committee and place it on the council agenda this week, Perks created the opportunity for members of council to speak on the issue.

His allies took that opening to take both the mayor and his executive team to task.

“Some people have criticized this mayor for kicking the can down the road,” said Councillor Josh Matlow, who tried to get council to prioritize infrastructure projects based on value for money. “I think what this mayor has done is far worse. No other city is spending over $3 billion on one subway stop. No other city in the world is rebuilding elevated expressways.”

In five years time, Wallace’s report said, the operating gap council would have to close to balance the budget would reach $1.42 billion — a significant challenge for a council which yearly approves a nearly $15-billion budget and has frequently closed the gap using one-time, unsustainable strategies like pulling money out of shrinking reserve funds.

An attempt by Councillor Stephen Holyday to end the discussion failed. The debate on the motion lasted an hour and a half.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

In the end, council voted down Perks’ motion, 13 to 27, meaning the decision of executive to have a new city manager, who has yet to be selected, return with an implementation plan in 2019 stands. Tory and every member of executive voted against Perks’ motion. That meant that city councillors not on executive were not able to ask staff any questions or move motions related to that future report.

The direction is not binding on a future term of council. If a plan was brought forward, it is likely it would not have any effect until the 2020 budget process.