Who did what
- Councillor Gord Perks (Ward 4, Parkdale-High Park) movedMoved and carried Deputy Mayor Malik's motion on the item; asked several pressing questions of staff about whether a formal plan exists, corporate beneficiaries, and the city's red lines; summarized that city staff and public have not been given full plans and the beneficiaries remain hidden.
- Councillor Stephen Holyday (Ward 2, Etobicoke Centre) movedMoved two motions: (1) to understand city's response to rising demand for air travel and cargo given population growth, especially at Pearson; (2) to analyze impacts of Pearson Airport growth on housing, transportation, transit, noise, environment, and livability.
- Councillor Josh Matlow (Ward 12, Toronto-St. Paul's) movedMoved motion to have staff further explore publicly stated goals of provincial expansion and provide factual information to support public debate, citing staff's earlier success in documenting impacts.
- Councillor Ausma Malik (Ward 10, Spadina-Fort York) questioned staffRequested confirmation of land parcels covered by Bill 110 expropriation; noted legislation blocks city from entering new leases/agreements on designated lands; asked about waterfront revitalization plan impacts.
- Councillor Brad Bradford (Ward 19, Beaches-East York) questioned staffQuestioned Mayor Chow on when her office was lobbied by Billy Bishop Airport owners (citing lobbyist registry records showing meetings in Feb-March 2026 before province announced expansion); Mayor denied receiving any plan.
- Councillor Vincent Crisanti (Ward 1, Etobicoke North) questioned staffSought clarification on provincial action taken (Bill 110 legislation passed; regulations for land vesting not yet enacted) and the status of city encumbrance restrictions (currently enforced).
- Councillor Jamaal Myers (Ward 23, Scarborough North) questioned staffAsked about mitigation of $12B annual congestion costs if airport expanded; noted city has no indication of funding for TTC/road expansion to handle 10M new passengers; asked TTC about capacity.
From the floor
“The federal government has decided not to move forward with the proposed expansion at the Billy Bishop Airport. And I want to thank the prime minister, the Liberal 416 Toronto caucus, the federal minister of transport for listening to the people of Toronto. This victory belongs to everyone who stood up for our city.”Mayor Olivia Chow
“I have an urgent motion on this in front of you, second by deputy mayor Osma Malik, demanding that the province return the city's land and Little Norway Park and the Toronto Islands, including a very beloved Hanlon's Point Beach. This land belonged to the people of Toronto. And the province must also return Toronto to the tripartite agreement governing the airport so that the people who live here get a say once more in what happens to our waterfront.”Mayor Olivia Chow
“I've moved several motions along this journey to ask our staff to help us provide factual information to this public debate and to the federal government as they were going through their consultation process. Some asked in the early days, why are you going to the city when this is a conversation that the city has been removed from by the province, and ultimately, it would be a decision of the federal government. And the reason is because we advocate for our communities.”Councillor Josh Matlow (Ward 12, Toronto-St. Paul's)
“If you treat us like partners, be respectful. Stop calling people who live on the island squatters. Stop calling people who disagree with you fringe. Stop trying to remove the voices of Torontonians as you did with the tripartite agreement. Do not move forward with the expropriation of our parks. Come back to the table. Act like an adult. Treat us like partners.”Councillor Josh Matlow (Ward 12, Toronto-St. Paul's)
“Yesterday, I read some concerning news in the Toronto Star. There was a column from Peter Donolo, that pointed out and reported that your staff were lobbied by the owners of the airport terminal in the weeks before the province announced their intention to expand Billy Bishop Airport and expropriate our city lands. I know you were asked this question this morning in your press conference, but you were not able to give an answer, so I wanted to give you an opportunity to clear the air. When did you learn specifically from the province and the port authority that they wanted to expand the island airport?”Councillor Brad Bradford (Ward 19, Beaches-East York)
16 more people spoke
“That area is very tight in it's at the foot of Bathurst. This is the Billy Bishop Airport. It is at the foot of Bathurst, and the Bathurst is very not a very wide street. And it is the East West is Queens Quay. Yes. And there is not a lot of public transit that gets through it.”Councillor Paula Fletcher (Ward 14, Toronto-Danforth)
“So I can't imagine how cars are gonna be able like, it's fine now at this point. It's already fairly jammed up, but congestion will be if you go from 1,700,000 passengers to 10,000,000 passengers, I can't imagine the traffic congestion that would occur in that neighborhood.”Councillor Paula Fletcher (Ward 14, Toronto-Danforth)
“So the cost of airport expansion has been pegged at around $5,000,000,000. I'm assuming that doesn't include the cost of transit expansion to accommodate or road expansion to accommodate these 10,000,000 additional people?”Councillor Jamaal Myers (Ward 23, Scarborough North)
“Has there been any discussion as to how this could potentially be mitigated from a congestion perspective? Through the speaker, we have had, no conversations with the province that have touched on any sort of plan for the airport whatsoever.”Councillor Jamaal Myers (Ward 23, Scarborough North)
“Their role there is to support the organization as as as a whole. They are, to provide information back and forth. So sharing information, absolutely. But just to be clear, they're not there to advance our interest. They are placed on that board, and then they advance the interests of the Toronto Port Authority.”City-staff
“Committee asked us to reach out to Newport Aviation to invite them to provide any additional information or communication to council. We did write to them following planning committee and invited them to do that and advised them how they could go about providing a communication to council. There is no communication on the council agenda, so they haven't provided anything to council. But to you? I would note that they did provide a short email to staff. They did indicate a couple of things in those in that email, specifically that infrastructure investments funds holds a majority interest in Newport, but not a 100%, and that it's not registered in the Cayman Islands.”City-staff
“The federal government, the ports authority, hid its environmental assessment for nine years of the proposal that came out from Porter in 2013. But what is that the impact on Downtown Toronto would be enormously worse than they analyzed. It's completely different from the impact in Etobicoke, which is serious for sure.”Councillor Dianne Saxe (Ward 11, University-Rosedale)
“The environmental assessment that was done in '20 set really finished in 2017 about the island airport, first of all, assume that there were very few people around. Because if you remember, in 2017, there were very few people around. The waterfront in Toronto was mostly post industrial. So they didn't take into account the impacts of any of those people.”Councillor Dianne Saxe (Ward 11, University-Rosedale)
“The only reason it doesn't stink to high heaven and have dead fish floating on it is because the water gets flushed through the two gaps. And expanding the runway would block a lot of that flow. So you're talking about the inner harbor not only being impossible for small boats because of jet blast, but being stagnant and stinking because the water flow has been crushed cut off.”Councillor Dianne Saxe (Ward 11, University-Rosedale)
“The city of Toronto is blessed. We sit on Lake Ontario, which is part of the largest collection of, which is part of the Great Lakes, the largest collection of fresh water in the world. All over the world, people suffer, die, and go without because they don't have access to fresh water. And here we are, the largest city, the largest city on this unbelievable gift. And the we have, as a council, invested money, time, energy, organizing to try to better use that precious natural advantage and gift.”Councillor Gord Perks (Ward 4, Parkdale-High Park)
“The core issue we have is do we represent the public interest or do we represent private interests? And I can't think of an issue that's been in front of us that better crystallizes this fundamental decision each of us needs to make.”Councillor Gord Perks (Ward 4, Parkdale-High Park)
“It is the very engine of consuming and commodifying and destroying anything in its path in order to turn money into more money. It will commodify anything. It will commodify our work. It will commodify where we live. It will commodify the Great Lakes. It will commodify that beautiful treasure we have on our front doorstep.”Councillor Gord Perks (Ward 4, Parkdale-High Park)
“Torontonians have made themselves absolutely clear. This is our city and our waterfront, and that is what we have heard through this experience and this process. Clearly, Torontonians have rejected secret expansion. They've rejected backroom deals and back of napkin schemes.”Councillor Ausma Malik (Ward 10, Spadina-Fort York)
“Return the city's land, including Little Norway Park and the Toronto Island Park immediately, and restore our role in the tripartite agreement so Torontonians have a say over their city and their waterfront as they always have and they always should.”Councillor Ausma Malik (Ward 10, Spadina-Fort York)
“So what is in front of us right now is the Toronto Island Airport, but let me tell you that in your area, in Etobicoke, the president of Mimico Wrestling Association, chairs of Mimico Lakeshore Community Networks, the South Etobicoke Community Association, the long the chair of the Long Branch Neighborhood Association, chair of the New Toronto Lakeshore Village Wrestling Association, all collectively said, please do not approve this expansion.”Councillor Stephen Holyday (Ward 2, Etobicoke Centre)
“If the growth continues to occur, we're going to have to see more measures like that. And that's why I've asked these questions. They're important questions going forward for us to take a position on something like the Billy Bishop Toronto City Centre Airport.”Councillor Stephen Holyday (Ward 2, Etobicoke Centre)
Also in this item
• The federal government announced on the day of this council meeting (2026-07-29) that it will not support the proposed jet expansion at Billy Bishop Airport, limiting support to necessary runway safety measures only. This was the outcome of the federal government's consultation process, in which Toronto residents and council played a visible role by providing impact data the province had not disclosed.
• Bill 110, passed by the Ontario legislature in May 2026, gives the province power to expropriate Toronto Island, Little Norway Park, Hanlon's Point Beach, and Erin Quay. The legislation retroactively prevents the city from entering into new leases, licenses, or agreements on those lands (already in force), but the actual transfer of land to the province has not yet been enacted (awaiting regulations). The province has stated it will not take all of the expropriated area, but has not specified which parcels.
• Newport Aviation's ownership is partially controlled by Infrastructure Investments Funds (a majority stake but not 100%), not registered in the Cayman Islands as some had speculated. However, Newport did not provide documentation to support these claims, and JPMorgan Chase is a separate investor. The Toronto Port Authority has not disclosed a full business case or detailed plan for the expansion.
• The 2017 environmental assessment for the Billy Bishop expansion was conducted when the waterfront had few residents, did not study a full terminal or parking facilities, and assumed a decrease (not an increase) in flights. It did not account for the billions in public investment in waterfront revitalization that has since occurred.
• If Pearson Airport expands to 65 million passengers annually (as it has publicly stated), the noise exposure forecast contours would expand significantly over land in Etobicoke, North York, and surrounding areas, affecting building codes, planning decisions, and residents' quality of life. No equivalent analysis has been done for Pearson as was done for Billy Bishop.
• 87,000 residents responded to the city's survey on Billy Bishop expansion (would have been higher if left open longer). Residents across the city, including in Etobicoke waterfront communities, organized town halls and spoke against the expansion. Former mayors and chief planners also opposed it.
The journey
What happens next
Residents can contact their councillor before any future votes on related motions (e.g., on studying Pearson Airport growth impacts). Public consultation and deputation on future waterfront planning items remains open. The province's Bill 110 enabling expropriation is still in effect; residents can organize to demand its repeal.
Decision
The federal government announced it will not support the proposed expansion of Billy Bishop Airport to accommodate jets; instead, it will limit support to necessary runway safety measures. Council did not vote on this item as a decision but rather received the staff report and debated related motions about future action. The item was held and referred for further work by staff on specified topics.
The vote
Adopt Item as Amended · Carried, 25-1
For (25)Alejandra Bravo, Amber Morley, Anthony Perruzza, Ausma Malik, Brad Bradford, Chris Moise, Dianne Saxe, Frances Nunziata, Gord Perks, Jamaal Myers, James Pasternak, Josh Matlow, Lily Cheng, Michael Thompson, Mike Colle, Neethan Shan, Nick Mantas, Olivia Chow, Parthi Kandavel, Paul Ainslie, Paula Fletcher, Rachel Chernos Lin, Shelley Carroll, Stephen Holyday, Vincent Crisanti The whole record, all 26 members
Every name opens that member’s record.
On video
Jump to this item in the meeting video
Why is this story here?
StructuralThe province's Bill 110 removes the city's control over Toronto Island, Little Norway Park, and Hanlon's Point Beach. It blocks any future city decisions on leasing, licensing, or agreements on those lands, and it removes Toronto from the Tripartite Agreement governing the airport. Once these powers are transferred to the province via regulation, a future city council cannot reverse them without provincial consent. This closes doors for future councils on waterfront use and governance. The federal government's decision not to support expansion is external but the provincial legislation is a permanent institutional constraint on city authority.Felt nowResidents who live, work, or visit Toronto's waterfront (1.5 million annual visitors to Toronto Island Park; residents of Bathurst Quay, Mimico, Long Branch, New Toronto, Scarborough, Etobicoke, and North York neighborhoods) directly experience the effects: noise from airport operations (especially those near Billy Bishop or under flight paths to Pearson), air quality impacts from ultrafine particles, construction impacts on parks and beaches, road congestion, and constraints on planning and housing development near the waterfront. The noise exposure forecast contours show the present effect is concentrated over water for Billy Bishop but broadly affects land for Pearson. Waterfront residents are experiencing these effects now. Housing development is already constrained by noise mitigation requirements (triple-pane windows, special construction standards). This is a direct present-week effect for a large group.
Stories are ordered by how much weight a decision carries and how directly it reaches daily life. They rise as a decision date approaches and fall as they age.
