Minutes to the 16th Meeting of the
Accessible Transportation Standards Development Committee (T-SDC)
89 Chestnut St, Ballroom
Toronto, ON

September 10, 2008

Present 

• Druce Ayres Individual
• Valmay Barkey, Ontario Community Support Association
• Louise Bark, Individual
• Glenn Barnes, Tetra Society
• Jo-Ann Bentley, Canadian Hearing Society
• James Bisson, Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario
• Earl Black, Independent Living Resource Centre
• Mark Brose, Transportation Action Now
• Bob Brown, Individual
• Silvan Bruno, GO Transit, Ontario Public Transit Association/Canadian Urban Transit Association
• Katrina Carrera, l'Association française des municipalités de l'Ontario
• Joan Gallagher-Bell, Individual
• Julianne Hay, Community Living Ontario
• Blyth Helman, Ottawa-Carleton District School Board
• Glenn Johnston, Toronto Transit Commission
• Diann Krieger, Individual
• Chris McLean, CNIB National Office
• Alex Milojevic, Association of Municipalities of Ontario, City of Brampton, Ontario Public Transit Association/Canadian Urban Transit Association
• Bob Nunn, Creative Carriage Ltd.
• Kelly Paleczny, London Transit Commission, Ontario Public Transit Association/Canadian Urban Transit Association
• Maria Ann Pennacchietti, Individual
• Lloyd Pollock, Dignity Transportation Inc
• Bonnie Quesnel, London Ontario (via teleconference)
• Danielle Svec, Bloorview Kids Rehab

Regrets 

• Al Cormier, Chair Cor Al Services (G. Ansell Acting Chair for Meeting 16)
• Spiros Bastas Royal Taxi
• Brenda Deck, HAGI Community Services for Independence, City of Thunder Bay
• Sharon Hambleton, Ontario Federation of Labour
• Tim Nolan, Council of Ontario Universities, Inter-University Disabilities Issues Association
• Susan Picarello, Ministry of Health & Long-Term Care
• Ron Ross, Individual
• Vanissa Szeto, Ministry of Education

Advisors 

• Georges Ansell, Ministry of Northern Development and Mines (Acting Chair for Meeting 16)
• Terry Gilhen, Disabled Persons Community Resources
• Uzma Kahn, ASAC
• Linda McAusland, Ministry of Transportation (rep by Allan Moore)
• Mark Nagler, Individual
• Donna Simmonds, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing

Support Unit 

• Kevin Boehmer, Canadian Standards Association
• David Dilks, Lura Consulting
• Jim Dixon, Ministry of Community and Social Services
• Mike Dodd, Canadian Standards Association
• Dana Eilath, Ministry of Community and Social Services
• Sam Jama, Ministry of Community and Social Services
• Ido Monteiro, Ministry of Community and Social Services
• Nelly Tion, Ministry of Community and Social Services
• Scot Weeres, Ministry of Community and Social Services

M16.1 Call to Order
G. Ansell (Acting Chair) welcomed members and called the 16th meeting of the Accessible Transportation Standards Development Committee (T-SDC) meeting to order at 9:40 a.m. on September 10, 2008.

M16.2  Housekeeping and Facility Safety
The Support Unit advised the T-SDC members about housekeeping matters and emergency procedures for the meeting.

M16.3 Meeting Objectives
G. Ansell welcomed the participants and summarized meeting objectives:

• To review and comment on the recommendations of the training task force.
• To review the content of the letter that will be submitted to the minister with the final draft accessible standard.
• To review the voting procedure for moving the final draft to the next stage.
• To receive a report on the work of the integrated drafting task force.
• To review and comment on the recommendations of the fixed route task force.

M16.4 Administrative Matters

M16.4.1 Approval of the Meeting 16 Draft Agenda
K. Boehmer suggested that the following items be added:

• Approval of meeting communiqué; and
• Review of workplan.

The draft agenda was accepted with the suggested additions.

M16.4.2 Approval of the Meeting 15 Draft Minutes
K. Boehmer reported that no comments had been received regarding the minutes to Meeting 15.

The draft minutes were approved as presented.

M16.4.3 Membership Review (for information)
G. Ansell welcomed the two new members to the T-SDC and asked both B. Nunn and B. Quesnel to give a brief synopsis of their background.

M16.5 Report from the Training Task Force
D. Dilks reported, on behalf of the Training Task Force Chair E. Black, that the Task Force had completed their review of the content of Clause 4 and had reached consensus on a recommended revised clause for consideration by the T-SDC.

Discussion included:

• Some members felt that training courses should be accredited;
• Some members suggested that recommended timelines were too aggressive and should be harmonized with upcoming information and communications, built environment and employment standards.

The T-SDC agreed that the Training Task Force recommendation be integrated into next draft of the standard and asked the Integrated Drafting Task Force (IDTF) to clarify recommended implementation classes and schedules  G. Ansell, on behalf of the committee, thanked E. Black for successfully leading the task force.

M16.6 Content for the Letter to the Minister
A draft letter to the minister, circulated to the T-SDC as document N075, was tabled for discussion. K. Boehmer noted that the ADO and Minister’s office were interested in member’s views on whether the draft standard should be submitted for a second public review.  Some members suggested that the costs associated with a second public review would outweigh the benefits, others argued that the standard should be implemented as soon as possible and implementation lessons be the basis for improvements during the next revision cycle.  Other members suggested that a second public review period should be undertaken with results going to the ADO or Minister’s office for consideration – as opposed to the T-SDC.

The T-SDC members were asked to submit, by October 14, written comments on the content of the draft letter and to give an opinion as to whether the revised draft should be sent for a second public review.

M16.7 Voting Procedure
K. Boehmer advised the members of the recommended process leading to a recorded voted at Meeting 17, including:

• The integrated drafting Task Force (IDTF) will prepared a revised, consolidated draft standard based on the content of the task force recommendations;
• The T-SDC will be given an opportunity to submit written comments on the revised draft standard;
• T-SDC comments will be compiled and distributed to members  prior to the Meeting 17;
• Comments will be discussed on Day 1 of  Meeting 17; and
• A provision-by-provision recorded vote will be conduced to approve  the revised draft standard on Day 2 of Meeting 17;
• Members are encouraged to nominate alternates or proxies if they are unable to attend Meeting 17;
• Detailed voting rules and procedures are documented in T-SDC N025.

M16.8 Report from the Integrated Drafting Task Force
K. Boehmer recalled the Terms of Reference of the IDTF as documented in T-SDC N071.  K. Paleczny gave a progress report on the work of the IDTF distributed as T-SDC N077. She noted that the IDTF work was iterative and that the task force had significant work to complete in integrating the recommendations of the Training (Clause 4) and Fixed Route (Clauses 5 and 6) Task Forces.

M16.9 Report from the Fixed Route Task Force
G. Ansell asked K. Carrera to report on the recommendations of the Fixed Route Task Force and thanked her for successfully leading the task force.  K. Carrera reported that the Task Force had completed their review of the public review comments on Clauses 5 and 6 of the draft standard and prepared recommended revised provisions based on those comments.  Referring to the task force report distributed prior to the meeting, she noted that consensus had been achieved on most clauses and timelines (Section C of the task force report).  

Members noted that Fixed Route Task Force report was missing documentation on task force recommendations related to public review comments on clauses 5.28 to 5.39.

J. Bentley asked for clarification on how the fixed route task force dealt with public review comments asking for audio visual messaging.

After some discussion, the T-SDC agreed to integrate into the next version of the consolidate draft standard fixed route task force recommendations where task force consensus had been achieved.

K. Carrera reported that the Fixed Route Task Force had not reached consensus on Clauses 6.4 Area of Service, 6.5 Reservations, 6.8 Trip Restrictions, and 6.9 Eligibility.  She also noted that agreement had not been reached on several recommended implementation schedules (Section D of the task force report). 

The T-SDC reviewed the task force suggestions on Clauses 6.4, 6.5, 6.8 and 6.9 and, after significant discussion, agreed that:

• Clause 6.4 should be deleted noting in the Minster’s letter that the Province should consider standardizing the area of service while recognizing the diverse nature of service across the Province and ensuring that no existing areas of service are diminished;
• Clauses 6.5 and 6.8 should be included in the revised draft standard with the options as presented by the task force;
• Clause 6.9 should be accepted as presented by the task force; and
• Where timelines had not been agreed to, the IDTF would include the median year between the timeframes under consideration (eg, if the disagreement was between a: short” and “long” term implementation schedule, the IDTF should include a “medium” schedule for consideration).

The T-SDC asked the IDTF to incorporate the above decisions into next draft of the standard.

K. Paleczny noted concern that the ADO had hired a consultant to work with fixed route task force members representing people with disabilities to develop alternative wording for previously discussed sections of Clauses 5 and 6 very late in the process.

M16.10 Approval of Meeting Communiqué
D. DiIlks led a review of key Meeting 16 outcomes and the T-SDC agreed on the content of the committee communiqué.

M16.11 Review of Workplan
The T-SDC reviewed and revised the workplan as follows:
 

M16.13 Process Review
Some committee members noted confusion over the length (1 or 2 days) of Meeting 16 and urged the Support Unit to be clearer in the future.

M16.14 Comments on Meeting Accessibility
No issues were identified.

M16.15 Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 4:25 pm on September 10, 2008.

• Print this article
• Email this article