Talk:PortsToronto

Toronto Port Authority employees "sanitising" the article

Curious how the Toronto Port Authority employees can spend their working time "sanitising" the article on the TPA in Wikipedia.

Have a look at the following links, note the user name of the person making the edits and compare to the following info from the TPA website.

Trying to revert boosterism edit by TPA employee

Boosterism edit by User:kdickson

Keith Dickson,

Systems Manager, Information Technology

(Contact information removed. It's just unwiki to list a user's phone number and email address, especially as part of a dispute. - BanyanTree 14:40, 3 May 2006 (UTC))

I also note that you have used material verbatim from the Toronto Port Authority website, specificlly quotes from these pages. Port pageAirport page. This may constitute copyright infringement unless you can confirm that use of the material is permitted by the relevant TPA authorities. Dabbler 18:36, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I rather think that it is unfortunate that you want to identify individual authors. ID'ing authors, even POV-pushers, is not on. - Ta bu shi da yu 13:53, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Response

Responses to this personal attack can be found on the above author's discussion page.(Dabbler)I can confirm that the use of TPA material from www.torontoport.com is permitted by the relevant TPA authorities.Kdickson 03:31, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Edit war

Kdickson and Themepark How about you two agree to take a holiday from this frenzy of activity? It's getting really annoying. Dowlingm 18:27, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

-- It should be noted that I'm a public citizen - with no connection to this agency or any of the stakeholders mentioned in the article. Kdickson is a government funded employee who works for the Toronto Port Authority. I'm only concerned about truth - he's concerned about the future of the agency. User:Themepark -- Well, themepark, your spat with the TPA employee has made it to NOW magazine which was only too happy to crow about it, despite the fact that your views seem as NPOV as his. I live in East York and support the airport but because of the latter view I try and keep my edits to the published/technical facts and away from opinion and spin. So should you, so should kdickson. It's that, or there will have to be a request for a 30 day lock of the page because you guys can't keep a semblance of objectivity. Who wins then? Dowlingm 23:47, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Themepark -- TPA employees and every other employee of a Canadian Port Authority are not "government funded". They work for a government agency, yes, but every Port Authority has to be self-sustaining. They don't get their money from taxes.

Verifiable Data

I thank you for your neutrality Dowlingm. I heartily agree to remove or allow edits of any article I may contribute to the Toronto Port Authority page if any inaccuracy surfaces or a non-neutral point of view is displayed. Unfortunately Themepark's agenda seems to be to discredit the Port Authority at any cost, including the truth. I have asked several times for any verification that can be supplied for some of his edits. He refuses to comply. If anyone seeks verification of the data in any of my edits I will be most happy to provide them. The Port Authority in Toronto has been around in one form or another for over 200 years, it will exist long after any of us retire. My concern is not for the survival of the Port Authority, it for the truth. Too many people have perpetuated untruths about the Toronto Port Authority for too many years. Inaccurate information must be corrected. I do not do this as a representative of the Port Authority. I do this as my small contribution to the honour of the good people serving Canada through the Toronto Port Authority. Kdickson

Unfortunately, the TPA doesn't serve the people of Canada, it only serves itself. Atrian 04:59, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

 -- Do these sound like the comments of someone with NPOV contributions to make on this issue? --Duke 02:25, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

If that is your opinion you are entitled to it. If you have to misrepresent the truth to convince other people to believe you, you risk your credibility. --Kdickson 12:17, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

- This site isn't for corporate spin, it's designed to create an honest look at the TPA - and not sugarcoat their activities. This is encyclopedia - not a brochure for the agency, and I dislike an employee spending their day adding spin to a not-for profit website. - Themepark

As an encylopedia, shouldn't it contain facts rather speculation? By basing the majority of the "informative" TPA article on biased views and speculation, you are doing a dis-service to the internet community. Duke 15:36, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

POV

There seems to be some issues concerning who is correct on this page. It seems that Kdickson is biased towards the Toronto Port Authority, Themepark and a few others are biased against it, especially in the section on "Controversies". To me it doesn't seem fair to remove a complete section just because you disagree with it. I think everybody should just take a pill and calm down. So I am labelling this article in dispute until somebody can rule one way or the other. Bombycil 07:26, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you.--Kdickson 12:17, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

News article about this Wikipedia entry

It points out a number of errors: http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/reid050306.htm -- (unsigned comment by 70.130.150.31)

That's true. This article makes Wikipedia look bad. I fixed one of the factual errors earlier this week but there are others which need to be addressed. The trouble is that since this article apparently deals with a controversial topic all factual changes need references or citations. -- Derek Ross | Talk 14:50, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I would like to point out that the journalist who wrote this article shows obvious (if not overt) bias towards the TPA. I would take anything he says with a grain of salt. Atrian 15:10, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Maybe so. Journalists tend to be pro or anti. What's important is not which side of the fence he has chosen; it's whether what he says is true or not. If he says that there are errors in the article, we can and should check the errors he mentions. If he's spinning a line, we'll soon know. -- Derek Ross | Talk 17:56, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I have reviewed the article and the news item. I have made a couple of changes to the wording addressing some of his comments however, some of the assertions in the journalist's piece are either his (and the TPA's?) opinion or speculation (6, 9 and 10) or have already been changed since he noted them (the usual trouble with dead tree media). Dabbler 18:49, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

As always, if there is any question about the truth in any edit I have made please let me know and I will provide the verification.Kdickson 20:04, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, KD. One improvement that springs to mind: I know that there is some dispute on how "important" the port is in terms of cargo. In order to give a fair picture I think that it would be worthwhile including the tonnage figures and the dollar value for cargo in 2005 rather than just stating that the tonnage is "not as great as many other ports" and has "increased by 28% since 1999". Would that be possible ? -- Derek Ross | Talk 20:43, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Shipping and tonnage info

I've found StatCan links to domestic and international tonnage by port. These tables are only for Ontario; there is a national ranking, too (Toronto is 39th). Other tables can be found here. (I don't have the time to make the edits myself right now.) By tonnage, it's clear that Toronto is a small port. Mindmatrix 14:00, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Extensive quotations from politicians

It seems weird to see so many quotations from David Miller in this article. Since he's not a neutral player in this, his words shouldn't be treated as NPOV "facts". -- Writen by K. Dickson - a Toronto Port Authority Employee.

I agree with this article, however, I did not write it. Thanks to the author .Kdickson 14:51, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

The TPA is a highly politicized organization, it's suing people that seek to shut it down. To present quotes from politicians shows to ill informed readers of the political issues involved with the agency. Were not talking about apples here, but what is considered a rouge agencey (- that a politician quote). The future of the TPA will be determined by POLITICIANS therefore having quotes about what they think makes sense!!!! - Unless your a TPA employee trying to save the organization with spin (see Advertising). - themepark.

You are making an arrogant claim that Wikipedia readers are ill informed. Most Wikipedia readers are well aware that you are using politics to promote your personal agenda. This article should have been devoid of the politics and "controversy" that has come to represent the dark side of Wikipedia. Kdickson 14:51, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I wrote the observation re David Miller's quotes. FChE 19:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Crown Corporation vs Crown Agency

A Canadian Port Authority is a type of federal agency that does not fall within the category of a Crown Corporation.

Reminder of Wikipedia rules

K. Dickson is a Toronto Port Authority employee, it's against Wikipedia code of conduct for companies to edit their own pages - to maintain a POV.

To state categorically that my editing is against Wikipedia code of conduct is itself an untruth and a non-neutral POV. As long as you distort the truth to further your own personal interests at the expense of the public's interests, I will continue to edit this article. Kdickson 14:35, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Ferry terminal 2006 use

The article currently states "The terminal will continue to be used as a docking station for Great Lakes cruise ships.". Does anyone know if the terminal was used for this purpose in 2006? Atrian 16:00, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

The C. Columbus and Nantucket are two of the cruise ships that used the IMPT facilities extensively in 2006. Kdickson 16:39, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

signature error

My apologies for failing to login before my last spate of editing. Recent edits with an IP address of 204.50.185.67 are mine. Kdickson 18:36, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Whitewashing vs Politics

Alaney2k you have spent an incredible amount of time and effort editing this article, you have rewritten a document authored by more than a dozen people. Unfortunately your political slant is showing through and you seem determined to denigrate the Port Authority at the cost of your integrity. You incessantly repeat and move to the forefront statements that have been disproven time and time again through endless government investigations, audits and court judgements. You are an extremely good writer and should be well aware of the slant your rewrite has taken. Wikipedia does not have any rules about whitewashing, it does have rules about obtaining consensus and maintaining a neutral point of view. Your writing has gone past the NPOV status and your complete rewrite of everyone elses entries has removed that hard fought consensus.If you wish to make changes, do so as part of the team, regardless of which side you are on. You are not the historian for the Toronto Port Authority and there are facts others know that you do not. If you continue on this path the article will again be marked as disputed and locked. Kdickson (talk) 13:59, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not a member of any political party. I do live in Toronto. I see the TPA in the newspapers every month, it seems. About you, if you want to rewrite, that's part of Wikipedia. But don't just delete the matters of public record. I have tried to put cites to everything I have added. Most of the Creation part, which you seem to object to, is from the Tasse report. The rest of the controversies are a matter of public record. As mentioned above on this article, you are not supposed to be editing the article. Mostly, you seem to want to push the company line. Take a look at the Nestle article if you want to see a company with a bad corporate record, in the chocolate business. I have tried to make the TPA article complete, nothing more. Maybe we differ on the meaning of the word controversy, but if you are involved in lawsuits, have community groups against you, the toronto city council against you, well, the agency is going to be considered controversial. I moved the article around to put the controversy stuff lower in the article. This would be considered making it less prominent. I've mentioned in the lead that the TPA recently became profitable. If you have facts with cites, add them, don't just yank what you or the TPA doesn't like. Mark the article disputed or whatever, that's ok. I'd welcome a review of the article. Alaney2k (talk) 12:15, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

You claim to be neutral however your actions would indicate otherwise. You copy and paste controversial statements out of the controversy area. You post the facts you want and remove facts that do not support your agenda. The article is now marked that the NPOV is disputed. Further action will be taken. Kdickson (talk) 14:38, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I am trying to make a timeline-based history section. The Creation section which you kept removing, is from the Tasse report. I've cited numerous pages. The creation with its reference to Mills, was pretty thin on the creation of the agency.

Some of the controversy section belongs in a history section, which at this point, is not complete. A timeline-based history section is normal for a company article. What is missing is what the TPA did after creation, (I think it did a review) and after the rochester ferry -- that is the 2006 porter launch. The controversy section could be then entitled 'Disputes' or something like that. I don't work for TPA so of course I am working from newspaper articles, press release and the like. There is room for TPA achievements in the article. However, coverage of the TPA has been mostly of the controversies. The TPA is pretty unique, created through politics and has been in several lawsuits in its time. Since the launch of the TPA, the City has not paid fees for the ferries and the TPA has not paid PILTs. And Jazz has a suit against the TPA. So I am not inventing the controversy surrounding the TPA. The TPA launched a lawsuit against the City for the portlands. The City opposed the creation of the TPA. These are facts based on cites. If you have positive, citeable facts about the activities of the TPA, they belong in the article. I have moved Operations and Governance to the beginning of the article. If I was a TPA-hater, I would not have done that. I expanded the lead according to guidelines to three paragraphs. It ends on a positive note that the TPA has achieved a profit. If I was a TPA-hater, I would not have done that.

Now, about myself. I am not a member of any party. I do live in Toronto in the Roncesvalles area. The airport bridge was an issue in our area. The local community associations came out against the bridge, as does our councillor. But I am not a member of an association. I have not used Porter, but I don't use airplanes much. My last flight was last century. I generally edit hockey articles, and Toronto neighbourhood articles.

My chief complaint about you is that you just yank stuff out. You don't edit. To me, that looks like white-washing. I think you are not serving the TPA's best interest. You should be citing more of what the TPA does. I don't know my way around all of Wikipedia's rules and procedures. There probably is a procedure to have a neutral editor look over what I've done. That is what I'd prefer rather than your blanket removals. And I hope you should consider that. You are certainly not a neutral observer here. I mean, between you and Robert Deluce, I don't think either of you can say "island airport". :-) (Really, I am looking for a cite with Deluce saying those words, but not luck yet :0-) ) I am trying to be a good writer, and I admit, I can write in a 'liberal' way, that may be objectionable to a conservative. But I try to follow the cites. I use TPA's releases, and the Tasse report to beef up the article. Those should not be a problem. Let the story tell itself.

I'd like to hear an explanation about what is wrong with what I wrote. I could go along with that. The article is not near finished, it's a 'C', so there is going to be stuff missing. There is no intent to give undue prominence to any section. We can work out a plan where the controversies are covered, and the TPA achievements are covered too. I'd prefer a timeline-based History section and a separate Disputes section. That would be most readable in my opinion. There is no reason to jump all over me. I don't work for Olivia Chow or Adam Vaughan or Miller. Those people oppose the TPA out and out. Me, I'm trying to understand. There is still a good article on the THC to be written and I'd like to do that. The THC did a lot of work on Sunnyside in my area, and that is covered in the Sunnyside, Toronto article. And the TPA sort of followed on in my interest. Alaney2k (talk) 05:42, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

--- It's clear that employees of the Toronto Port Authority shouldn't be editing articles on their own organization, as there's a loss of objectivity. I'm rather surprised that the TPA uses taxpayer funds to pay for someone to edit a not-for-profit open source encyclopedia. User Kdickson has frequently shown a bias in what's been written on this page.

But it's clear a massive whitewash of this page has been taking place - anything remotely critical of the TPA has been removed - such as this entry that's been deleted:

"In 2005, the Port Authority completed a passenger terminal for a high-speed Toronto to Rochester ferry, Spirit of Ontario I. It included a Canada Customs station, the first new border crossing between Canada and the United States in over 40 years. In 2004, Canadian American Transportation Systems (CATS) had started the ferry service using a temporary terminal. Owing to unexpected costs and under-capitalization, CATS was not able to survive. In 2005, the city of Rochester purchased the ferry and hired Bay Ferries Great Lakes to run the service. Ferry service was halted in January 2006 when a newly elected city council in Rochester canceled funding. The terminal is now referred to as the 'Cruise Ship Facility' and is used as a docking station for Great Lakes cruise ships."

Stop making edits because you don't want people to read about the organizational history. Facts are facts, stick to them and don't delete what you disagree with because of your political bias. -- (section from Themepark (talk )

--- That's in the History section. Not removed. Alaney2k (talk) 12:34, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

References

Disambiguate John Baird

I am a veteran editor of Wikipedia and am a member of both the Toronto and the disambiguation WikiProjects. I am prevented from disambiguating John Baird to John Baird (Canadian politician). Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 15:16, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

The article is locked to only admin edits for a week by an admin. Alaney2k (talk) 16:06, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I just posted that complaint to the administrator in question's talk page and disambiguated the link. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 19:13, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Rfc: Is this article POV and unfair to the Toronto Port Authority?

It is contended that this article portrays an unfair and biased point of view of the Toronto Port Authority. Alaney2k (talk) 17:14, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

From what I can see the Djsasso revision is less pov than the Kdickson one. Neither is perfect. Would suggest a compromise version incorporating the information from the KDickson revision blanked in the DJasso one but otherwise following the DJasso template.Simonm223 (talk) 17:59, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for looking it over. Yeah, it's not perfect. I've been trying to move it up in quality, following Wiki guidelines. The problem is that Kdickson objects to my creating a History section. The reversions he makes are basically to an old version, not edits to what I've been doing. I believe it was a mess before, and my intent is to be comprehensive and readable. I've tried not to put undue weight on the controversies. I've even moved the controversies section lower in the article. I think that a 'Controversies and disputes' section could hold the info on the ongoing lawsuits, while the parts about the airport, tasse review should be in the 'History' section. The History section would be chronological, and the Controversies, in alpha order. Alaney2k (talk) 14:26, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

So, to be clear, historical controversies would be in the History section and current controversies would be in a controversies section? Watch to make sure you aren't giving undue weight to controversies but I don't see a problem in general terms.Simonm223 (talk) 14:51, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

At one point in the past, there was a separate creation section. I could revive that using the content of the Creation section of the History and put the airport and terminal back in the Controversies section. In company articles, do you separate controversies and company history? Alaney2k (talk) 15:08, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't know.Simonm223 (talk) 15:39, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

The controversy section just goes on and on and seems way too long. How controversial can it really be? Section after section. I have no familiarity other than what I have read in this article and my admittedly subjective opinion is that it is written by some one with an axe to grind. Elmmapleoakpine (talk) 22:53, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for looking it over. That section has been around for a few years now. I moved it down in the page to counter some of that. I was thinking of moving the review to the History section. The review, other than being declared a 'whitewash' was not that much of a controversy. I think that the TPA has its standard critics who attack it at all times. I'm not sure how to cover that, for example the BoD conflict-of-interest, and not give it too much weight. Alaney2k (talk) 18:52, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

I am going to take off the npov template, unless anyone wants to object. Alaney2k (talk) 20:49, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I have no objection. I agree that the controversy section is way too long, however, i cannot see anyway of shortening it at this time. Most of the statements regarding controversy have been countered with the truth, so the article is relatively NPOV at this time.Kdickson (talk) 21:22, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Toronto Port Authority fact-fix proposal

Total full disclosure, I'm a contract employee of the Toronto Port Authority who noticed some factual issues--(mostly things like dates, numbers, and laws) with this page and would like to propose that someone who can act as a neutral third party double check the follow and then make some or all of these edits if they deem this new information to be correct and objective.

The Toronto Port Authority (TPA) is a Canadian port authority, under the Canada Marine Act, responsible for management of the harbour of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, including the Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport. The Authority is a government business enterprise, with directors appointed by the Government of Canada, through the Minister of Transport, Government of Ontario and the City of Toronto. The Authority is the successor agency of the Toronto Harbour Commissioners (THC), which managed Toronto Harbour from 1911 to 1999. As part of a broad scheme of the federal government to modernize the administration of ports, operate ports in a business-like manner and divest itself of smaller ports, the TPA was set up in 1999 to operate the harbour and the airport. Toronto City Council, then developing its own plans for the harbour and waterfront, opposed the creation of the TPA, wishing to take over the harbour administration as a city function. The requirement, under the Canada Marine Act, that the TPA be self-sufficient, led the TPA to pursue opportunities to increase its revenues, including investing in the airport, and the building of the Cruise Ship Terminal. The airport’s growth and popularity with travellers s placed it in opposition to various community groups and Toronto City Council, which in 2003 cancelled a TPA-planned bridge to the Airport. Additionally, the TPA has been involved in several disputes, including a land dispute, harbour fees and property fees with the City, and lawsuits over the operation of the airport with Air Canada. In 2008, the TPA returned its first-ever profit, mostly from revenues on fees charged to passengers utilizing the airport, which has seen an increase of traffic since the 2006 launch of Porter Airlines.

Toronto Port Authority Formation 1999 Type Port district

Headquarters 60 Harbour Street, Toronto Location Toronto Region served City of Toronto Chief Executive Officer Geoffrey A. Wilson Staff 160 full-time equivalent employees Website www.torontoport.com

Operations

The TPA operates the Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport, Billy Bishop Toronto City Water Aerodrome, Marine Terminals 51 and 52, the International Marine Passenger Terminal and the Outer Harbour Marina. The TPA also provides regulatory controls and public works for marine and air navigation in the port and harbour of Toronto. The TPA grants operator's permits to recreational boaters in the harbour of Toronto, oversees land development, engages in trade development for its terminals, and appoints the Harbour Master. The TPA has a staff of 160 full time equivalent employees. As of December 2012, the TPA has $104.850 million CAD in capital assets.

Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport

Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport, formerly Toronto Island Airport, is located at the western end of Toronto Islands. Operation of the airport is governed by a 1983 tripartite agreement between the Toronto Harbour Commission (now TPA), the Government of Canada and the City of Toronto. The TPA owns the majority of the airport land with two small sections owned by the Government of Canada and the city. The land is leased to the TPA for a nominal amount until 2033 under the 1983 Tripartite Agreement. Access to the airport is currently by a ferry operated by the TPA. A pedestrian tunnel, which will be completed in Winter 2014/2015, is being built to the airport. Built in 1939 on land dredged from the harbour, it has three runways that can accommodate regional scheduled airlines and general aviation aircraft. The 1983 agreement prohibits jet airplanes except in emergencies. In 2011, the number of landings and take-offs at the airport was 113,715 <add citation - http://www1.toronto.ca/staticfiles/City%20Of%20Toronto/Waterfront%20Secretariat/Shared%20Content/Files/BBTCA/Draft_MasterPlan.pdf>. Because of its location near downtown and its tall buildings, industrial smokestacks and a wind turbine, air traffic into and out of the airport is controlled with approaches and departures routed over the lake. A seaplane base is located just east of the main apron. The airport is also used for medical flights. The airport has been the site of operations of several regional airlines since the 1980s. The first airline was City Express, until 1990, followed by Air Ontario and Air Canada Jazz. Since 2006, Porter Airlines has operated out of the airport. The airline currently flies to several regional destinations including Ottawa, Montreal and Newark, Chicago, Boston, Halifax and Quebec City. The airport handled over 2 million passengers in 2012

Port of Toronto

Toronto Harbour is roughly 3.2 kilometres (2.0 mi) by 1.6 kilometres (0.99 mi) and is sheltered by a string of offshore islands. The TPA operates a 20-hectare (49-acre) paved facility consisting of Marine Terminal 51 and Warehouse 52 on the east side of the harbour. There are 3 miles (4.8 km) of deep-water wharfage for the loading and unloading of bulk products. Marine terminals include inside and outside storage, and some 6,000 square feet (560 m2) of berthing space for ships carrying general cargo.[3] The port facilities include a Cruise Ship Facility, the International Marine Passenger Terminal, which was built as a passenger terminal for a ferry to Rochester, New York. It was later used as the main setting for the CBC crime drama The Border.[4] The lands of the Port of Toronto used to be significantly larger. The Port Lands surrounding the TPA facility were created by infilling the delta of the Don River by the Toronto Harbour Commissioners in the 1910s, and were owned and controlled by the Harbour Commissioners until the 1990s, when they were transferred to the City of Toronto. The lands are expected to be redeveloped into a new neighbourhood, by the Waterfront Toronto partnership. The north-east corner of the harbour, formerly housing marine terminals, is being redeveloped into the East Bayfront residential neighbourhood. The Don River mouth is planned to be 're-naturalized'. At one time, the entire inner harbour waterfront was used as a transfer station for cargo, with rail lines connected directly to the wharfs. Changes in mode of transport and relocation of factories have meant the port transfers a relatively small amount of cargo today. The tonnage of cargo passing through the port is made up mostly of sugar to the Redpath refinery and aggregate materials such as sand, gravel and salt. • In 2012, the port handled 1.86 million tonnes of cargo, a five per cent increase over 2011 <add citation – TPA release 2012 results> • In 2011, the port handled 1.8 million tonnes of cargo <TPA’s 2011 Annual Report> • In 2010, the port handled 1.5 million tonnes, a 0.3% share of nationwide tonnage and ranked 13th of 17 Canadian port Authorities by cargo handled <Table M23 http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/policy/anre-menu-3043.htm> • In 2009, the port handled 1.6 million tonnes of cargo, a 0.4% share of nationwide tonnage and 13th our of 17 Canadian Port Authorities by cargo handled <Table M23 http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/policy/anre-menu-3043.htm> • In 2008, the port handled 2 million tonnes, a 0.4% share of nationwide tonnage and 14th of 17 Canadian Port Authorities by cargo numbers < http://www.tc.gc.ca/media/documents/policy/addendum2010.pdf>

Other Facilities

Other facilities operated by the Toronto Port Authority include Outer Harbour Marina, which is located on the Leslie Street Spit in a protected channel with access to Lake Ontario and Toronto's Outer Harbour and has 636 slips. The Port Authority also offers a variety of services which include harbour maintenance, engineering services, lakefilling, shoreline protection, facility maintenance, marine services (power, water and dry dock facilities for ships), special cargo handling, dredging, topographic and hydrographic surveys, port security and many others. The management offices are located in the Toronto Harbor Commission Building, located in downtown Toronto, just south of the Air Canada Centre.

Governance

The Toronto Port Authority is a government business enterprise. As such, it has a Board of Directors, appointed under regulations of the Canada Marine Act and the Letters Patent of the TPA. As originally set up, the Board was seven members, and was made up of one member appointed by the Government of Canada, one by the City, one by the Province of Ontario, and four by the federal government in consultation with the classes of users mentioned in the letters patent.[9] The federal government changed the Letters Patent of the TPA in 2008 to modify this to nine members.[10] The federal Minister of Transport now nominates seven of the nine members, one as the federal government representative and six "in consultation with the users selected by the Minister, or the classes of users mentioned in Schedule D of these Letters Patent."[10] The current structure replaces the older Toronto Harbour Commissioners that had a five-member board including three City of Toronto councillors. Under the Letters Patent, no City of Toronto Councillor, Ontario Member of Parliament or Canadian Member of Parliament can be a director and no employee of the City of Toronto, Province of Ontario, or Government of Canada (or related agencies) can be a director.[11] The 'users directors' are to be nominated by the businesses operating in the port,[12] the airport,[13] commercial users[14] or recreational businesses.[15][16] Like all port authorities created from harbour commissions, the aim was to update port operations so that it worked more like a business than a government agency.[17] This model of organization has been criticized for excluding persons or organizations that utilize the services in a non-commercial manner.[18] The TPA has had to defend the choice and composition of the board of directors. Lisa Raitt, former TPA CEO has stated: "It's a community-based board of directors".[19] In 2008, Board members were paid between $13,000 and $18,000 each for their services.[1]

Senior management

The current Chief Executive Officer (CEO) is Geoffrey A. Wilson, who joined the TPA on December 11, 2009. Wilson was previously the chief operating officer of Cartel Communications Systems Inc. and was an executive with various transportation firms.[20] The current senior management team includes: • Gene Cabral - Executive Vice President, TPA and Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport • Alan Paul - Vice president and Chief Financial Officer • J. Mark Richardson – Vice President and General Counsel • Deborah Wilson - Vice President, Communications and Public Affairs • Angus Armstrong - Harbourmaster and Chief of Security • Ken Lundy - Director of Infrastructure, Planning and Environment

Board of Directors

Current members of the board:

• Jeremy Adams - a director of government relations for a tobacco company and a past president of his university's alumni association, appointed January 2009 by then-Minister of Transport John Baird. He is a long-time Conservative Party member, having worked for Ontario minister Elizabeth Witmer, former Ontario premier Mike Harris and former provincial and current (as of 2009) federal finance minister Jim Flaherty.[22] Adams was nominated as a 'user' representative on the board.[23]
• G. Mark Curry - appointed September 2009 by Minister Baird. Curry is the president of Revmar Inc., an investment-consulting firm located in Toronto, since 1980. He is a director of EGI Financial Holdings and Sargasso Capital Corporation.[24]
• Mark McQueen (chair)- Appointed March 2008. Mark McQueen is President & CEO of Wellington Financial LP, a Toronto-based specialty finance firm. He was a banker from 1993 until December 2004 when he joined Wellington Financial full-time. He serves on the boards of the Canadian Venture Capital & Private Equity Association, and Nexient Learning Inc. He is also a past member of the board of governors of the University of Western Ontario and the board of directors of EnGlobe Corp., Intrinsyc Software and Top Aces Inc. McQueen was nominated as a 'users director' on the board.[23] McQueen was paid $16,000 in 2008.[1] McQueen is a Conservative Party member and worked as Hugh Segal's executive assistant in the Prime Minister Office of Brian Mulroney.[27] McQueen donates his fees to charity.[28]
• Sean L. Morley - A partner in the Business Law section of the law firm Fasken Martineau, appointed December 23, 2008 by Minister of Transport Baird.[29] He is a long-time Conservative Party member, and has worked in the past for former provincial and current (as of 2009) federal finance minister Jim Flaherty.[22] Morley was nominated as a 'users director' on the board.[23]
• Robert Poirier - Appointed September 2009 by Minister Baird. He is a vice-president and corporate officer, relationship management and sales, with State Street Financial in Toronto.[24] Poirier has been a Conservative Party fundraiser since 2005.[30]
• Craig Stuart Rix - Rix is the federal government representative on the board of directors.[23] A partner with the law firm of Hicks Morley where he works out of their Toronto offices. He serves on several boards, including the Canadian Association of Counsel to Employers, the Ontario Chamber of Commerce, The Dominion Institute and the Ontario Economic Summit Steering Council. Rix spent three years (1996–1999) as a senior political policy advisor with the Mike Harris Ontario government.[31] He was appointed by Minister Lawrence Cannon in 2008. Rix was paid $13,000 in 2008.[1]
• Colin D. Watson - He was appointed to the board in August 2006 by Minister Cannon.[32] Until 2006, he was president and CEO of Rogers Cable and had earlier been the CEO of Spar Aerospace Limited from 1996 until 2002, and President & CEO of Vector Aerospace Corp from 2003 until 2005.[33] One of Vector Aerospace's directors during that period was Robert Deluce, the CEO of Porter Airlines. Watson was nominated as a 'users director' on the board.[23]
• Jan Innes – Appointed by the province in 2010 <Link to - https://www.pas.gov.on.ca/scripts/en/BoardDetails.asp?boardID=127102>. She is Vice President, Public Affairs for Rogers Communications <Link to Rogers>. She also currently sits on the board of Directors of the Toronto International Film Festival.
• Jim Ginou – He is Chairman and CEO of Art Printing Company of Toronto and has served on several boards including the Toronto Raptor’s Foundation, the Toronto General and Western Hospital Foundation Board and the George Brown College Foundation.

Past members of the board have included:

• David Gurin - representative of City of Toronto, appointed December 2008. He was the former commissioner of planning for the former Metro Toronto, and a deputy commissioner of transportation in New York.[25][26]
• Christopher M. Henley - He was appointed to the board in August 2006 by Minister of Transport Lawrence Cannon.[32] At the time of his appointment to the board, he was president of Henley Capital Corp. and has previously served as CEO of British Petroleum Canada. Henley had 24 years of experience in industry and investment banking.[33] Henley was paid $16,000 in 2008.[1] He served from August 2006 until August 2009.
• Douglas Reid - Teacher in business strategy at Queen's University School of Business, recently concluded a 6-year job working for an Alberta-based energy firm. Appointed by Minister Cannon in August 2006.[32] Reid was paid $14,000 in 2008.[1] He served from August 2006 until August 2009.
• Cameron J. Turner - A Canadian partner of Corporate Development International and a member of the Toronto Board of Trade. Appointed by Minister Cannon in August 2006.[32] Served from 2006 until August 22, 2007.[1]
• Krista L. Scaldwell - Serves as director of consumer healthcare at Pfizer. Appointed by Minister Cannon in August 2006.[32] Served from 2006 until August 1, 2007, but attended meetings in 2008 for which she was paid $3,000.[1]
• Michele McCarthy - A lawyer at McCarthy Tétrault, appointed 2004 by the Ontario government. McCarthy has served as chairwoman for the board. At one point in 2006, McCarthy was the only member of the board of directors.[34] McCarthy was paid $18,000 in 2008.[1]
• Paul Hayes — President of AeroCan Aviation Specialists Inc.
• Henry Pankratz — President of CavanCore Capital
• Steve Mirkopoulos — President of Cinespace Film Studios

Previous CEOs/GMs include:

• John Morand
• Lisa Raitt

Financial status

Like other port authorities in Canada, the TPA is required to be financially self-sufficient. From its inception until 2008, the TPA failed to turn a profit. Self-sufficiency tests conducted on behalf of Transport Canada in both 2003 and 2004 looked at the TPA's business plan for the future, allowing them to maintain their port authority status as long as they could project a profit. The TPA introduced a $15 Airport Improvement Fee in October 2006 for passengers departing on scheduled flights from the airport, which, by 2008, generated enough revenues for the TPA to make a profit for the first time. The fee generated $1.983 million in 2007 and $3.877 million in 2008.[1] The TPA increased the Airport Improvement Fee in April 2010 <add link to 2011 financials – page 16:AIF>. In its 2008 financial report, the TPA's Statement of Revenue and Expenses showed an income from operations of $2.251 million, with overall net income of $863,000, compared to a loss on operations of $1.877 million in 2007.[1] For the first six months of 2009, the TPA had a net income of $1.154 million, 34% more than the net income reported for all of fiscal 2008.[35] Since then, the TPA has reported positive net income each year: of $1.34 million in 2009, $7.1 million in 2010, $13.9 million in 2011 and a record $19.7 million in 2012.

History

Creation

Prior to 1999, Toronto's harbour was managed by the Toronto Harbour Commissioners (THC), created by a federal act in 1911. At first, the Commissioners managed the harbour as well as waterfront lands across the then City of Toronto beyond the harbour area, including the Sunnyside waterfront area, east of the Humber River. Over time, the facilities and lands other than the inner and outer harbour and the airport were transferred to the management of the City of Toronto and other authorities, leaving the THC to manage the airport and harbour. The THC received lease revenues and subsidies from the various governments to carry on its activities.[36][37]

Starting in December 1994, the Canadian House of Commons Standing Committee on Transportation initiated a study of Canada's marine transportation sector. After consultations across the country, the Committee produced its National Marine Strategy in May 1995. In December 1995, the federal government announced a new National Marine Policy to reform the governance of ports, harbours and the St. Lawrence Seaway. The plan was to modernize the system, and divest the government of port operations and make the ports financially self-sufficient where possible.[38] At the time, there were 2,700 ports under federal government authority. The vast majority were reclassified as regional or local. Under the divestiture, the government was to offer the Transport Canada harbours to other federal departments, then provinces and territories, and finally to industries or municipalities.[39] Similar divestitures had taken place previously in the field of airport management.[40]

In June 1996, the government introduced the Canada Marine Act. The Act would enable the creation of port authorities, commercialize the St. Lawrence Seaway and divest ports and harbours. A schedule of the Act listed eight ports to be covered and did not include Toronto. Transport Canada held consultations on the plan and the City of Toronto did not participate, expecting that Toronto Harbour would not be covered by the Act. From July to October 1996, a study was done by accounting firm Nesbitt Burns of other possible ports, including Toronto. Nesbitt Burns concluded that Toronto was not self-sufficient and should not be included.[41] In April 1997, the Act was approved by Parliament with an amendment to add eight other ports, including Toronto.[42]

At the Senate, Jack Layton, then the Chair of the City Planning and Transportation Committee of Metro Council, and Martin Silva, a THC commissioner appeared to argue against the inclusion of Toronto under the Act, as it would make it difficult for the City to harmonize its waterfront plans with a port authority. THC chairman Charles Parmelee and Howard Joy, THC vice-chairmen appeared to argue that the Toronto Port should be included.[41] The federal election of 1997 intervened and the bill died. The Act was re-introduced by Minister of Transport David Collenette in October 1997. The list included Toronto. Collenette spoke to the inclusion of Toronto, stating:

“While there had been some degree of controversy about the designation of Toronto as a Canadian Port Authority, this certainly was not from the Members of Parliament from the Toronto area, who insisted on this being included in the last Bill. The provincial government and most municipal leaders, business leaders and others in the Toronto area, supported this designation. The harbour could attract new business and grow from just being where it was and that a port authority representing users, more reflective of a commercial approach, taking the matter out of the hands of local politicians and indeed even, I suppose, other politicians would be a better way to develop the port.”[42]

In February 1998, Toronto City Council passed a resolution opposing the bill. The City opposed the bill because the Port of Toronto did not qualify under the criteria proposed by the Act, the diminishing role of the City, difficulties in the planning of land development and the exclusion of elected Councillors serving on the TPA Board of Directors. This was brought to the Senate's attention in an appearance of Toronto's Chief Planner at a Senate hearing in April 1998.[43] The Act was passed in May 1998 with the only amendment being the addition of Hamilton to the Schedule.[36] The Toronto Port Authority (TPA) came into being on June 8, 1999 and the THC was dissolved. The Letters Patent for the new organization provided for it to be governed as an independent agency, with seven directors, one each to be chosen by the federal, provincial and municipal governments, and the others to be representative of the commercial users of the harbour. The TPA received the harbour assets of the former Commission, including inner and outer harbour lands, the airport and the Harbor Commission building. Like the other port authorities, it was to be financially self-sufficient in its activities, charging fees to the users of the harbour and airport.

2001–2004 Lands dispute and airport bridge plan

In 2001, the TPA filed a $1 billion CAD lawsuit over 600 acres (240 ha) of land that was transferred in the 1990s to the City of Toronto's Toronto Economic Development Corporation (TEDCO) by the Toronto Harbour Commission.[44] The disputed lands, mostly the infill lands of the Don River delta, constituted around 85% of the THC's land assets as of the early 1990s. The lands had been transferred in two separate agreements, in 1991 and 1994 in exchange for a permanent subsidy for the THC. The TPA's legal claim was that the transfer had been done while the majority of directors of the THC were City-appointed, and who had acted in the City's interest and not in the Commission's 'fiduciary interest'. They added that the deals crippled the THC's ability to be self-sufficient by ending any potential revenues from those lands. As the TPA was inheriting the role and activities of the THC, it was thus crippled itself.[45]

TEDCO and the City had earmarked the lands for waterfront revitalization upon the recommendations of the Crombie Commission on the Waterfront. Thus, while the TPA was seeking approval of the Island Airport bridge, it potentially threatened the ability of the City to proceed on waterfront revitalization. City Council, leading up to the debate on the bridge plan, made the settlement of the lawsuit a condition of the approval of the fixed link. On November 28, 2002, Council in a day-long debate, made two votes to settle the issue. First, Council voted 32–9 to accept a settlement to end the TPA port-lands lawsuit in exchange for an immediate payment of $5.5 million and an annual subsidy of $5.5 million to the TPA until 2012.[46] Council then voted 29–11 to approve the amendment of the tripartite agreement to permit the construction of a lift bridge.[46] In return, the TPA dropped its claim to the lands and the permanent subsidy in exchange for money and permission to build the fixed link. In its estimation, the TPA would thus be able to be self-sufficient and contribute to waterfront revitalization.[47]

In 2002, the TPA made plans to link the airport to the mainland with a new bridge to support an expansion of services. At the time, a TPA-sponsored public opinion poll showed that Torontonians supported maintaining the airport over converting it to a park. On November 28, 2002, Toronto City Council, led by then-mayor Mel Lastman, approved the amendment of the tripartite agreement to permit a the construction of a lift bridge.[48]

The next year, a municipal election year, saw public opinion change to oppose the bridge.[49] In October 2003, a Toronto Star poll listed 53% of residents city-wide opposed the airport bridge, while 36% supported it.[50] Councillor David Miller ran for Mayor on a platform to stop the building of the bridge, a position supported by Community Air and other local community groups. Other mayoral candidates Barbara Hall and John Tory supported the bridge. Despite the bridge being an election issue, the Port Authority continued developing the project, progressing to the point that contracts were signed with major participants (including companies operating from the airport).

On November 10, 2003, Mr. Miller was elected Mayor of Toronto with 44% of the vote.[51] While construction workers prepared the construction site, Miller immediately started the process to cancel the bridge project, sparking threats of a lawsuit from the TPA.[52] The incoming City Council voted 26–18 on December 3, 2003 to withdraw its support of the bridge project[53] and federal Transport Minister David Collenette announced that the federal government accepted the Council's position on the bridge and withdrew its support.[54]

In January 2004, the federal government put approval of the project on hold, preventing its construction.[55] Immediately, regional airline proponent Robert Deluce filed a $505 million lawsuit against the City of Toronto, claiming that Miller "abused his powers", by threatening councillors, had Toronto Fire Services and Toronto Hydro "interfere with the construction of a fixed link" and lobbying the federal government to "withhold certain permits."[55] The federal government later transferred $35 million to the TPA in May 2005 to settle claims arising from the cancellation from Deluce, Aecon Construction and Stolport Corp.[56] Compensation terms were not disclosed.[56] Lisa Raitt, Port Authority CEO was quoted as saying "You will never hear about the bridge again." and "We have been working very hard since December of 2003 to deal with the request of the City of Toronto not to build a bridge, and we are very happy that the matter has been dealt with."[57] New federal regulations were introduced to ban any future plans to build a fixed link to the airport.[57]

2003-2006: Ferry to Rochester[edit]

As the bridge dispute was ending, the TPA was embarking on a plan to bring a fast ferry service between Toronto and Rochester. By December 2003, the ferry terminal was already built in Rochester. The TPA agreed to use $8 million in funds from the City of Toronto lands dispute settlement to build a terminal near Cherry Beach on TPA land. Using a temporary terminal, the ferry, named the Spirit of Ontario I, started the service in June 2004, operated by Canadian American Transportation Systems (CATS) while the permanent terminal was being constructed. Although popular with Rochester visitors to Toronto, carrying 130,000 passengers,[58] CATS failed after only a few months in September 2004, $2.1 million in debt.[59] The failure was attributed to unexpected costs of Canada Customs fees, US border security not allowing transport trucks onto the ferry and CATS' under-capitalization.[60]

The TPA stopped construction of the terminal, which had increased in price to $10.5 million,[61] but restarted construction after the City of Rochester made plans to purchase the ferry and restart the service. The new passenger terminal building opened in June 2005. It included a Canada Customs station. It was the first new border crossing between Canada and the United States in over 40 years.[58] It would be the only year of service for the station. Ferry service was halted in January 2006 when a newly elected city council in Rochester cancelled funding, after incurring costs of $10 million (USD) in 2005.[62] The terminal was closed down and is sometimes used as a docking station for cruise ships.[63]

2006 Federal review[edit]

On May 1, 2006 the Federal Government's Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon announced that a review of the agency would be conducted. The review was carried out by Roger Tassé (a former deputy Minister of Justice). The review looked into the history and operations of the government agency, including the contracts it signed for the airport bridge. The report was completed in October 2006. The review found that "the TPA has in all respects complied with due diligence requirements and the generally respected principles of good governance".[64]

The report made four recommendations: • (on transparency and accountability) - That the TPA adopt changes to its organization, produce an annual report and fulfil its reporting in a timely manner. • (on community relations) - That the TPA be more pro-active in its approach to community consultations. • (on board of directors vacancies) - That the agreement be amended to allow the continuation of Board membership past expiry. • (on federal interest in the Toronto Port and Airport) - That the federal government, in particular, elected members, participate in discussions as to the federal interest. Source: "Review of the Toronto Port Authority Report, General Observations and Recommendations". Retrieved 2008-09-12.[dead link] Critics of the airport were less than enthusiastic about the report. NDP MP Olivia Chow, a frequent critic, called it a "total whitewash" while Toronto Mayor David Miller said the document is "not worth the paper it's written on".[65] In responding to the criticism, Mr. Tassé defended the report and questioned whether critics such as Miller and Chow had even read it.[66]

2006-present: Launch of Porter and TPA profitability

In 2006, Porter Airlines started service at the airport. Porter had purchased the island terminal, which was then used by an Air Canada budget operation called Jazz, and evicted the competitor from the airport. The TPA banned Jazz from using other airport facilities without a contract and Jazz abandoned the airport and filed a lawsuit. During this time, the TPA was under the Tassé review, and had only one member on its board of directors, Michele McCarthy, the Ontario representative on the board. Ottawa did not appoint directors during the review, and Toronto refused to name a director, in opposition to the TPA's existence.[67]

That same year, the TPA invested $15 million in upgrades to the island airport, including a new ferry, the TCCA1, to replace the old ferry to the airport.[68] The TPA also imposed a $15 airport improvement fee, which along with the increase in passengers for Porter's service has increased the TPA's revenues to the point where in 2008, it reported its first profit on revenues. The TPA has reported profitable income every year since <add citation>

In April 2010, the TPA increased the Airport Improvement Fee to $20 <add link to 2011 financials – page 16:AIF>. The same year, the TPA purchased a new ferry (the Marilyn Bell I <add citation – link to 2010 TPA release>) for the airport using the airport improvement fees. The ferry purchase lead o a TPA Board of Directors dispute and conflict-of-interest investigation.

Although the fast ferry to Rochester had failed, the TPA continued to receive money from the City of Rochester for rent of the cruise ship terminal. This ended in December 2009 in a settlement between the TPA and Rochester, where the TPA received $90,000 to terminate the lease. The TPA had been renting the terminal for use in a television series.[72]

In April 2013, Porter announced a conditional purchase of 12 Bombardier CS100 <add cross-article link> passenger jets, with an option to purchase 18 more. Porter president Robert Deluce announced that the airline would seek an extension of the main runway by 336 metres, 168 metres (551 ft.) at either end,[86] to accommodate the longer take-off requirements of the aircraft. The airline would also seek an exemption for the CS100 aircraft from the jet ban at the airport imposed by the 1983 Tripartite Agreement of the airport.[87] These changes would require the agreement of the Government of Canada, the Toronto Port Authority and the City of Toronto. The TPA announced that it would await the direction of Toronto City Council on the potential expansion.[88]

The City of Toronto began reviewing the proposal and hired consultants to aid in its assessment. At City Council’s direction, the TPA footed the $1.2 million dollar bill for consultant fees. As part of the assessment, the City of Toronto also received online comments and held “town hall” sessions starting in September 2013, to produce a report from staff for presentation to Council.

On September 24, 2013, the City of Toronto published the results of an Environs poll which stated "A telephone survey commissioned by the city concluded that “half of Torontonians say that an expanded airport with jets does not fit with the revitalized waterfront, and Toronto residents living in the waterfront area are most likely to say that the airport does not fit.” [75] In October 2013, TPA Chairman Mark McQueen outlined the factors that would be considered as part during its review process if City Council approved Porter’s request.<link to Oct 21 release>In In November, the Toronto and Region Board of Trade conducted a survey of its members. Of those who responded to the survey, 77 per cent supported the use of jets at the airport provided the jets make no more noise than the airport’s current noise limits. Eighty-four per cent believed Billy Bishop Airport should help fund improvements that improve traffic flow near the airport. Ninety two per cent viewed the airport as a valuable asset for the Toronto region, while 86 per cent viewed it as an important part of the Toronto region’s future economic growth.

On November 28, 2013, the City released a staff report where staff recommended putting off consideration of the plan until 2015, due to incomplete information and the various unresolved issues, including the CS100 noise information, Transport Canada regulations, and Toronto Port Authority requirements. The plan is to be discussed by the City Council Executive Committee in March 2014 <Citation needed – newspaper article>. Executive Committee of Council agreed to defer its consideration of the proposal until January 2014.

In December 2013, Waterfront Toronto released a statement about the proposal that said it believed “that expansion has the potential to create significant risks for waterfront revitalization” and “No decision on expansion should proceed without the information required to make this generational decision” <add citation WTO release (Dec 03)>. A day later, the Toronto and Region Board of Trade issued a statement urging City Council to amend the Tripartite Agreement to allow for runway expansion and the use of jets.

Pedestrian Tunnel

See also: Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport pedestrian tunnel In 2009, the TPA proposed a new $38 million pedestrian tunnel to the airport. The TPA sought to have the project paid for out of federal and provincial governments economic stimulus program funds. TPA critics Olivia Chow, David Miller and Adam Vaughan publicly stated their opposition to the tunnel. The TPA released a poll showing that 62% of Toronto residents support the tunnel.[70] The tunnel project has also garnered the support of the Toronto Board of Trade and Economic Club of Canada business associations and Ornge, the medevac provider.[71] The TPA abandoned the project in October 2009, when it determined it could not finish the project on time to qualify for stimulus funds.

In late 2009, the TPA relaunched its plan to build the pedestrian tunnel to the island airport. According to the new plan, the tunnel would be funded by passenger user fees and be built in a commercial partnership. In July 2010, the TPA announced that it would start an environmental assessment of its own on the project and hoped to start construction of the tunnel in 2011.[73] The TPA also announced that a poll conducted on behalf of the TPA suggested that "a majority (56%) of Torontonians support a pedestrian tunnel to the island airport."[74]

On November 25, 2011, the TPA announced that it had chosen Forum Infrastructure Partners to build the pedestrian tunnel under a public-private partnership model. In March 2012, the TPA began building a pedestrian tunnel to the airport. The $82.5 million tunnel is being financed through a public-private partnership model and paid for through the Airport Improvement Fee <add citation – March 9 TPA media kit>. According to the TPA four factors increased the construction cost i) the length of the tunnel increased by 50 per cent because it would connect to the airport terminal rather than the ferry terminal on the island. (ii) the TPA was advised that the tunnel should be built deeper than originally expected (iii) construction associated with the Pan Am Games <add cross-article link> put upward pressure on trade costs in 2013; and iv) the selected proponent (Forum Infrastructure Partners) assumed all liability for cost overages under the proposed contract <add citation - http://www.torontoport.com/TorontoPortAuthority/media/TPASiteAssets/news/English-Public-Materials.pdf>.

Controversies[edit]

Since its inception, the TPA has been involved in various disputes with the City of Toronto, Air Canada, Community Air and local community groups. These battles mostly are about the Island airport. In 2009, it became public knowledge that the directors of the agency were divided. Several of the dissident directors, appointed by the federal government, were replaced by new federal government appointees. 2009 Board of Directors dispute[edit]

In June 2009, it became public knowledge that four members (Mr. David Gurin, Mr. Chris Henley, Ms. Michele McCarthy and Mr. Doug Reid) of the TPA Board of Directors sent a letter in March 2009 to Minister of Transport John Baird on the topics of "Conflict of Interest, Expenses, Procurement policy, Information Flow, Audit Committee access, Board counsel termination and Illegal chair election" at the TPA, according to a June 8, 2009 press release from Board Chair Mark McQueen.[76] McQueen termed the letter as: "nothing more than an effort by a disgruntled minority of our Board to smear the reputation of those members of the Board who support the existence of the Toronto City Centre Airport ("TCCA") and who voted in favour of a new, larger passenger ferry in January 2009"[76]

The press release was in response to Olivia Chow, MP for Trinity-Spadina, holding a press conference to release the letter, which Chow characterized as "explosive allegations of misconduct against some Toronto Port Authority Board members and staff."[77] Chow wrote to the Auditor General of Canada Sheila Fraser on June 5, 2009 to ask for an audit of the Authority.[77] At the news conference, the contents of the letter were released. The practices that the directors objected to included annual expenses of $50,000 on meals at the Harbour 60 restaurant, $80,000 in expenses by Lisa Raitt and $65,000 paid to a legal firm whose legal opinion was with-held from other board members. Chow called for an immediate investigation into the agency.[78]

In November 2009, the Toronto Star published its investigation of Chow's charges. The Star found that the election of Mark McQueen as chair of the TPA was contested. McQueen was elected chair at the March 2008 directors' meeting, replacing Michelle McCarthy, the Province of Ontario representative. Only five of the six board members were present, and no notice was given to the directors that a vote to replace McCarthy would take place. The election was disputed, with the TPA's own legal firm stating that the regulations were not followed, and the election "unlawful". Under the direction of McQueen and Raitt, another law firm was engaged to provide a second legal opinion. The second opinion dissented from the first, stating that the election was lawful. The December 2008 meeting of the TPA was held under the chairmanship of McQueen, although this was contested by McCarthy. The Star published the minutes as taken at the meeting, which were signed by Henley, listing McQueen as only attending. However, a revised minutes document was made that listed McQueen as chair, with controversial material removed, such as complaints over the interference of the Minister of Transport Lawrence Cannon and his staff. According to McQueen, the original minutes were an attempt to embarrass certain board members, and the 'unnecessary verbiage' removed. A January 21, 2009 meeting of the TPA board, with its three new directors (two appointed by the federal government and the third by the City of Toronto) subsequently voted for a second time to name McQueen as chair by a 5-4 vote.[79]

The TPA took issue with the Toronto Star investigation, declaring it "rife with errors and falsehoods", having a "lack of balance" and "Linda Diebel had information and documents in hand which demonstrated that she was being misled by biased sources, she inexplicably proceeded to publish serious and false accusations."[80] On November 6, the TPA published several budget documents to document the inaccuracies in the investigation. As part of the 2008 budget, the TPA had pre-approved a trip to London by Raitt, which director McCarthy said was not approved, and that Raitt had signed off on. The Star had incorrectly noted that Alan Paul had approved the minutes, when in fact it was Ron Paul, a legal trainee, however the TPA did not dispute that the minutes had been changed.[81] The Star published a notice of correction.[82] In a November 2009 press release, the TPA noted that "the Star has yet to acknowledge the failings in the series nor has it apologized for the false accusations made in the first two articles."[80] The opposition Liberals and NDP both demanded that Ottawa conduct an investigation of the TPA and Raitt's expenses.[83][84] Raitt declared that she is in caught in the middle of a dispute between two groups of directors on the TPA board.[85] After delaying a final part of its investigation, the Star published its final part of its investigation, detailing the use of public relations firms by the TPA to counter its critics. One of the firms used for strategic communications purposes is Liberal strategist Warren Kinsella's Daisy Consulting Group.[86]

Conflict of interest probe[edit]

In April 2009, Federal Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson began investigating the TPA Board of Directors over conflict of interest. The probe revolved around the TPA's controversial vote to purchase a new island airport ferry in January 2009, a vote of 5-4 in favour. The ethics commission did not name the board member under investigation, but the Ottawa Citizen reported that board members were asked about director Colin Watson and his relationship with Porter Airlines' CEO Robert Deluce. Watson contended that the investigation "was a result of political tensions on the Port Authority's board of directors".[87] On June 25, 2009, Dawson's report was released, revealing that it was Watson who was under investigation. Dawson specifically cleared board member Watson of conflict of interest. Ms. Dawson stated: “I believe that Mr. Watson exercised his duties both as a Director of the Toronto Port Authority and as Chair of the Audit & Finance Committee with the genuine conviction that the new ferry was a good thing for the TPA as a whole and for the Airport’s primary user, Porter Airlines. I do not believe that Mr. Watson was motivated by a desire to further the private interests of Mr. Deluce. I am therefore satisfied that Mr. Watson did not ‘improperly’ further the private interests of Mr. Deluce.”[88]

2008–09 Board Appointments[edit]

In December 2008 and January 2009, the Government of Canada, appointed two new members to the board of directors of the Authority, expanding the number of directors to nine. This was done after the City of Toronto named a representative to the board, and the existing board voted against expanding the board size.[26] The Letters Patent were modified in December 2008 to raise the number of directors to nine, it was originally seven. The Harper government then named two new directors.[89] The new members, both having ties to the Conservative Party of Canada, were criticized on their merits and the appearance of patronage. Toronto Councillor Adam Vaughan, whose ward includes the Island Airport, and who has been critical of the TPA in the past, called Jeremy Adams's appointment "absolutely unacceptable", and the two appointments amounting to the federal government "stacking" the board with pro-Airport members. Chris Day, a spokesman for federal Transport Minister John Baird was quoted as stating that "is taking steps to preserve the Island Airport's continued status as an important catalyst for Toronto's economic competitiveness". The number of board members now totals nine, which is two more than the seaports of Montreal and Halifax and one fewer than Vancouver.[22]

Lobbying efforts[edit]

In 2006, the TPA was criticized for its use of lobbyists by Olivia Chow, NDP MP for the riding including the Airport. Chow accused the governing Harper government of backing down on a promise to slay cronyism in Ottawa because Tory-connected lobbyists were pushing the expansion of Toronto's controversial island airport. Then-CEO Lisa Raitt stated that the Port Authority spends around CDN $50,000 a year on lobbyists, and confirmed that their lobbyists are: Peter Naglik (a former speech writer for Prime Minister Stephen Harper), Vic Gupta(Ontario PC Party treasurer, former deputy campaign manager for John Tory's 2003 failed bid for Toronto Mayor, and until June 2006 on Jane Pitfield's election team) and Bill Hearn (lawyer).[18]

Breaches of Landing Curfew Times[edit]

The airport has a strict 11:00 PM curfew set out by the Tripartite Agreement. Curfew breaches are handled on a case by case basis by the TPA. If an aircraft is found to have breached the curfew parameters, the TPA may impose a fine for each such landing.

Lawsuits

Dispute over payments in lieu of taxes to the City of Toronto[edit]

Federal agencies such as the TPA do not pay property taxes as such, but instead some negotiated amount to account for municipal services, known as 'Payments in lieu of taxes' (PILTs).[90] For the period from 1999 until 2008, the Toronto Port Authority did not make payments in lieu of property tax to the City of Toronto on the Island Airport in a dispute over the amount of the payment. In April 2006, the City applied to the Federal PILTs Dispute Advisory Panel. The City withheld $10 million in contractual payments owed to the TPA pending the dispute resolution.[91]

By 2009, the City estimated that the port authority owed $37 million in unpaid payments in lieu of property tax. This value was based on the land value of the property, its assessed value as calculated by the Ontario government assessment agency. In 2008, the City and TPA submitted their case to the Dispute Advisory Panel. On January 26, 2009, the Dispute Advisory Panel recommended an amount of $5 million that the Port Authority must pay. This value was based on similar payments made by other airports, which make the payments based on passenger numbers. Pearson Airport, at the time of the ruling paid 94 cents per passenger. The ruling by the Dispute Panel works out to 80 cents per passenger.[92] On February 10, 2009, the City applied for a judicial review to the Federal Court of Canada.[91]

On November 25, 2009, the City and the TPA came to an agreement in principle to settle all outstanding legal issues. Both sides agreed to accept the other's estimate of monies owned. The City agreed to pay $11.4 million owing on payments related to the 2002 property settlement and $380,559 owing on harbour user fees. The TPA agreed to pay the City $6.4 million owed to resolve the dispute over the PILTs. The agreement, which was ratified by Toronto City Council in 2010, was made in conjunction with the transfer of 18 acres (7.3 ha) of land at Leslie Street and Lake Shore Boulevard for a proposed Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) light rail storage facility.[93][94] The settlement still left the airport, 80 Cherry Street and the Outer Harbour to be settled.

In April 2013, Toronto Council voted against adopting a tax agreement over the airport, under which the TPA would have paid PILTs for the airport on a per passenger basis at a rate of 94 cents per passenger, the same rate paid by Pearson Airport.[95] In January 2014, the two sides agreed to the rate of 94 cents per passenger, settling the dispute over the airport. The settlement left other TPA properties on Cherry Street and the Outer Harbour Marina still in dispute.[96]

Air Canada Jazz vs. TPA and Porter[edit]

On February 15, 2006, Air Canada announced that their lease for use of terminal space controlled by City Centre Aviation (CCAL) at the Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport was terminated by CCAL. CCAL had been bought out by REGCO Holdings (now Porter Aviation Holdings) as a precursor to the terminal facility being used for Porter Airlines. On February 27, 2006, Air Canada lost a court appeal against REGCO and eventually abandoned its legal case against REGCO in August 2006.[97]

However Air Canada Jazz was not completely finished. In July 2006, Jazz announced that it would resume operations at the airport as of August 2006. However the TPA countered that Jazz could not operate without a 'commercial carrier operating agreement', which Jazz refused to sign, because it would "unfairly limit its access to the facilities."[98] Unable to fly without the TPA authority, Jazz discontinued its plans to resume flights one month later.[97]

Jazz filed a $11.5 million lawsuit against the TPA and later, Porter, in the Ontario Superior Court in February 2006, alleging that the TPA signed contracts forcing Jazz out of the airport, causing a monopoly at the airport, and were anti-competitive. Jazz later filed a suit in Federal Court.[1] On October 20, 2009, Jazz formally dropped its suit in Ontario Court. According to the announcement, Jazz dropped the matter in provincial court as the TPA is a federal agency, and the Airport is a federal facility. Damages in the federal case are not specified.[99] Porter filed a counter-claim to Jazz' lawsuit citing damages of $850 million, based on Jazz agreement with Air Canada, and Porter has not dropped its counter-claim.[99]

Air Canada abandoned its legal actions in the Federal Court, but pursued a judicial review of TPA's plans to open the airport to other airlines. The action was heard in Federal Court in July 2010, and the Court dismissed Air Canada's claims against the TPA's decisions of December 2009 and April 2010 with respect to the airport slot allocations.[100]

2006 TPA vs. Community Air lawsuit[edit]

In 2006, the TPA launched a lawsuit against the Community Air community group for $3.4 million CAD. The lawsuit claimed that the group and its directors were "zealous and unbalanced" in their waterfront advocacy. TPA CEO Lisa Raitt stated in the media that: "We are not going to allow untruths and personal attacks to go unchallenged". The suit demanded that each pay $500,000 in damages for defamation, $250,000 in aggravated damages and another $100,000 in punitive damages to the port authority, its president Lisa Raitt and two others.[101][102] "We really view this as being a 'SLAPP suit' and that's a type of lawsuit that is carried out against community groups and individuals to prevent them from speaking their minds about issues of public importance," said Community Air's lawyer Louis Sokolov in conversation with CBC reporters.[103] According to the National Post, the complaint stemmed from a Community Air memo sent to then Minister of Transport Lawrence Cannon, describing the TPA as a "painful thorn in the side of the city". Cannon later initiated the Tassé review of the TPA.[104]

In May 2007, the lawsuit was settled out of court. Community Air agreed to retract their statements and apologize. A spokesperson for Community Air said that it hoped that would foster a better relationship with the TPA.[105] Since the settlement, Community Air continues to criticize the agency.

2008 TPA vs. City of Toronto Lawsuit[edit]

In 2008, the TPA launched a lawsuit against the City of Toronto to prevent a 'no-stopping' bylaw for the roadway in front of the ferry dock. The City intended to build a sidewalk for a nearby school, according to Councillor Adam Vaughan. Lawyers for the TPA and Porter Airlines characterized the bylaw as "guerrilla tactics" to disrupt the Airport's operations.[106] In a December 23, 2008 Ontario Superior Court decision a Judge dismissed the City's arguments as "unreasonable" and directed the City to immediately approve the TPA's early 2006 request to perform basic work to the TPA’s Bathurst Street lot.<citation needed>

Political positions on the Port Authority[edit]

The various political positions on the future of the Port Authority and the island airport:

Conservative Party of Canada — Federal Party position Conservative Party of Canada

The Party is a big supporter of the TPA and the operation of Porter Airlines. In the 2006 federal election, Steven Harper chose not to comment on the airport expansion, however, after the election, the government appointed several Tory party members to the Board.[107] In December 2008 and January 2009, the Party nominated two further Party members to the TPA board after the City of Toronto named its representative to the TPA board. Former TPA CEO Lisa Raitt became the Conservative MP for Halton Region, and was named Minister of Natural Resources. She was appointed Minister of Transport in July 2013. In September 2009, Minister of Transport John Baird named a Party fund-raiser to the board.

Liberal Party of Canada — Federal Party position

The TPA was created while the Liberal Party was in power (1999). Several Toronto Liberal MPs were strong supporters of the TPA including Dennis Mills, Tony Ianno and David Collenette. Under Prime Minister Paul Martin, the Liberals cancelled construction of the airport bridge at the request of City Council after the 2003 municipal election. This marked the second time that a Liberal Prime Minister cancelled a link to the airport. In the 1930s, the Liberals were the government in power that cancelled a tunnel linking the airport. In the 2006 federal election, several local Liberal MPs went on the record as opposing the airport expansion. The Liberals publicly criticized the appointment of Tory fundraiser Robert Poirier to the TPA Board as a 'patronage appointment.'[108]

New Democratic Party — Federal Party position

The NDP wants the agency shut down. Toronto Member of Parliament Olivia Chow, is the prime critic of the TPA and the airport expansion. Chow, whose riding includes the airport, wants control of the port passed to the city and has introduced a private member's bill to do so. Federal party leader Jack Layton, who represented a nearby riding, had stated that he wanted the Auditor-General to investigate the settlement surrounding the failed airport bridge.

Mayor David Miller

The former mayor of Toronto, David Miller won his 2003 election partly on the campaign pledge to prevent "airport expansion" - the construction of a bridge connecting the airport to the mainland. Miller has stated publicly that he wants Toronto to regain control over the Port Authority: "I've never believed we needed a port authority," and "It doesn't really perform any function. Shipping is not at a level that it needs it."[19] When discussing the creation of a new airline the mayor was quoted as saying: "This is a federal agency that is under federal control that has never respected the wishes of the people of the City of Toronto, and it's the federal government that will have to bring it to heel."[109] Miller has publicly stated his opposition to the proposed pedestrian tunnel to the airport.

Canadian Auto Workers Union (CAW) position

The labour union supports the expansion of flights at Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport and appeared at the press conference to announce the start up of Porter Airlines' and its initial order of planes. The union represents employees of the Toronto Bombardier aircraft factory, which builds the Q400 planes used by Porter Airlines.

Toronto Region Board of Trade

The Toronto Region Board of Trade <cross-article link> produced a report in 2006 appealing to the City and to the TPA to start working together, citing an estimated positive economic impact of over $135 million from the Airport. To quote Glen Stone, a Board of Trade spokesman: “There are two facts that are inescapable: Number one, there is an airport on the island. Number two, just a few hundred metres away there is a city. Neither of them are about to go away. So the two sides can continue fighting and feuding or they can realize that they can benefit from each other through a bit of compromise and co-operation. Both sides could be winners instead of dragging each other down.” Among the recommendations were increasing the number of Toronto-appointed board members, operating the airport without any subsidies and resolving any back tax disputes. The TPA welcomed the report, but Mayor Miller noted that the plan "falls short of identifying a fundamental change that needs to be made."[110]

Toronto City Council

Prior to the formation of the TPA, City Council voted twice in favour of a bridge to the airport. On the TPA, Council was in favour of bringing the Port under the city's umbrella. When the TPA sued the city, City Council voted again to support the bridge. However, after the retirement of former Mayor Mel Lastman, who supported the expansion of the Airport, the Council changed. The Council elected in 2003 along with Mayor Miller, voted to cancel the bridge project. A municipal election was held in 2006 and a majority of councillors supporting Mayor Miller were elected. After Trinity-Spadina Councillor Olivia Chow moved to federal politics, Adam Vaughan was elected in her place to Council, and he is a vocal opponent of Airport expansion.

Local Community Opposition

As of 2009, local community associations and the main opposition group "Community Air" remain opposed to the Island Airport. When Porter Airlines first started flights, protests and boycotts were called for, however the actual amount of active protest has died down. As recently as April 24, 2009, the vice-chair of Community Air stated "The fight to shutter the airport is far from over."[111]

Overall Toronto residents

In 2009, a TPA-sponsored poll showed that 58% of Toronto residents supported the TPA remaining independent.[70]

Heatherlabonte tpa (talk) 13:32, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Toronto Port Authority Rebrands as PortsToronto

PortsToronto, formerly known as the Toronto Port Authority (TPA), proudly owns and operates Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport, which welcomes more than two million passengers each year; the Outer Harbour Marina, one of Canada's largest freshwater marinas; and Terminals 51 and 52, which provide transportation, distribution, storage and container services to businesses at the Port of Toronto.

Building on its rich history of public-service, PortsToronto ensures Toronto's Harbour is safe for boaters and visitors, and is responsible for protecting the environment in the Harbour. PortsToronto works with the surrounding community to shape a balanced, thriving and sustainable waterfront where Torontonians and visitors alike can work and enjoy for generations to come.

PortsToronto connects Toronto to the world, whether it be welcoming travellers to and from Toronto through the airport, importing and exporting goods through the port, connecting the airport to the mainland through the new pedestrian tunnel, or the connection made with one's natural surroundings at the Outer Harbour Marina or the Leslie Street Spit, which is also managed by PortsToronto.

Established in 1911 as the Toronto Harbour Commissioners (THC), the TPA was renamed in 1999 as part of a broader federal government restructuring strategy to modernize the administration and operation of Canadian ports. The TPA rebranded as PortsToronto in January 2015, to better reflect the modern priorities of the organization, which are grounded in customer/community service, innovation, modernization and collaboration.

PortsToronto is a financially self-sufficient government business enterprise which operates in accordance with the Canada Marine Act and is guided by a nine-member board with representation from all three levels of government.

References

Ports Toronto or PortsToronto

I guess is is terribly nitpicky but all the agency's material spells the name as PortsToronto with no space. I would think the article name should reflect that. Will go ahead and make the change.

Source: About Us: http://www.portstoronto.com/About-TPA/About-Us.aspx TastyPoutine ^{talk (if you dare)} 14:29, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on PortsToronto. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110728065639/http://www.cbc.ca/fp/story/2009/10/20/2123574.html to http://www.cbc.ca/fp/story/2009/10/20/2123574.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060623071716/http://www.cbc.ca:80/toronto/story/to-lawsuit20060621.html? to http://www.cbc.ca/toronto/story/to-lawsuit20060621.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:13, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on PortsToronto. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080517024613/http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20061103.TASSE03/TPStory/TPNational/Ontario/ to http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20061103.TASSE03/TPStory/TPNational/Ontario/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090610170420/http://www.cbc.ca:80/canada/story/2009/06/08/baird-raitt-portauthority.html to http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/06/08/baird-raitt-portauthority.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090905022418/http://www.liberal.ca:80/en/newsroom/media-releases/16259_patronage-king-stephen-harper-strikes-again-another-conservative-loyalist-receives-plum-post to http://www.liberal.ca/en/newsroom/media-releases/16259_patronage-king-stephen-harper-strikes-again-another-conservative-loyalist-receives-plum-post

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:14, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 16 external links on PortsToronto. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090223072227/http://torontoport.com:80/PortAuthority/port_information.asp?id=93 to http://www.torontoport.com/PortAuthority/port_information.asp?id=93
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091219195716/http://gazette.gc.ca:80/rp-pr/p1/2008/2008-12-20/html/notice-avis-eng.html to http://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2008/2008-12-20/html/notice-avis-eng.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.tc.gc.ca/pol/en/acf/cma/menu_e.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.eye.net/eye/issue/issue_09.22.05/city/portauthority.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080617102246/http://occ.on.ca:80/About%20Us/Board%20of%20Directors/17 to http://occ.on.ca/About%20Us/Board%20of%20Directors/17
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110706205722/http://www.torontoport.ca/PortAuthority/REPORTS/FinResultsQ2_2009.pdf to http://www.torontoport.ca/PortAuthority/REPORTS/FinResultsQ2_2009.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061006000404/http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/2006/cities/rochesterff.pdf to http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/audits/2006/cities/rochesterff.pdf
• Replaced archive link http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.torontoport.com%2FPort%2FCruising%2FGetting-To.aspx&date=2012-04-23 with http://www.webcitation.org/679EOgQQS?url=http://www.torontoport.com/Port/Cruising/Getting-To.aspx on http://www.torontoport.com/Port/Cruising/Getting-To.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110706205630/http://www.torontoport.ca/notices/4049%20TPA%20Interview%20Schedule.pdf to http://www.torontoport.ca/notices/4049%20TPA%20Interview%20Schedule.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110706205649/http://www.torontoport.ca/PortAuthority/notices/Letter%20to%20Adam%20Vaughan%20Aug2809.pdf to http://www.torontoport.ca/PortAuthority/notices/Letter%20to%20Adam%20Vaughan%20Aug2809.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110611172243/http://www.torontoport.com/notices/TPA_Report_2010.pdf to http://www.torontoport.com/notices/TPA_Report_2010.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101201084508/http://torontoport.com/PortAuthority/notices/TPA%20-%20Release%20-%20Response%20to%20Star%20-%20Nov%209%20-%20.pdf to http://www.torontoport.com/PortAuthority/notices/TPA%20-%20Release%20-%20Response%20to%20Star%20-%20Nov%209%20-%20.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100309040431/http://www.torontoport.com:80/PortAuthority/media_content.asp?id=404 to http://www.torontoport.com/PortAuthority/media_content.asp?id=404
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100309040441/http://www.torontoport.com:80/PortAuthority/media_content.asp?id=410 to http://www.torontoport.com/PortAuthority/media_content.asp?id=410
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091128115116/http://www.insidetoronto.com:80/news/cityhall/article/217647--ttc-toronto-port-authority-reach-deal-on-land-for-light-rail-vehicle-storage to http://www.insidetoronto.com/news/cityhall/article/217647--ttc-toronto-port-authority-reach-deal-on-land-for-light-rail-vehicle-storage
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110611172116/http://www.torontoport.com/notices/CertificateJudgment.pdf to http://www.torontoport.com/notices/CertificateJudgment.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081104055736/http://www.votetoronto.ca:80/test/htdocs/issue_airport.html to http://www.votetoronto.ca/test/htdocs/issue_airport.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:52, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on PortsToronto. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.torontoport.com/PortAuthority/port_information.asp?id=93
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2008/2008-12-20/html/notice-avis-eng.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110611185201/http://www.torontoport.com/PortAuthority/corporate_senior.asp?id=35 to http://www.torontoport.com/PortAuthority/corporate_senior.asp?id=35
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.ctl.ca/issues/ISArticle.asp?id=93933&issue=12232008
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://occ.on.ca/About%20Us/Board%20of%20Directors/17
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100215203248/http://www.torontoport.com/PortAuthority/REPORTS/Finance_2008_ENG.PDF to http://www.torontoport.com/PortAuthority/REPORTS/Finance_2008_Eng.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar%2FLayout%2FArticle_Type1&call_pageid=971358637177&c=Article&cid=1162507817264
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.torontoport.com/PortAuthority/media_content.asp?id=404
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.torontoport.com/PortAuthority/media_content.asp?id=410
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.insidetoronto.com/news/cityhall/article/217647--ttc-toronto-port-authority-reach-deal-on-land-for-light-rail-vehicle-storage
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cbc.ca/toronto/story/to-lawsuit20060621.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.votetoronto.ca/test/htdocs/issue_airport.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:01, 10 September 2017 (UTC)