So, if you, like me, are still thinking about the ongoing court challenges related to the city's election on a Friday night, I have some updates: /1
Several applicants - candidates, voters, community groups - challenged the province's old legislation cutting council to 25 wards (Bill 5) in court. On Monday (I can't believe it was only Monday), Superior Court Justice Edward Belobaba ruled that legislation unconstitutional /2
On Wednesday, the province filed an appeal (thestar.com/news/city_hall…). They say Belobaba erred in his decision in several ways (see link) and asked for a lone Court of Appeal judge to hear a motion to essentially prevent ruling from taking immediate effect /3
The Court of Appeal has, interestingly, decided to hear this motion for what's called a stay with a panel of three judges. That hearing is on Tuesday at 10AM. Other parties are now filing their responses to the province's materials filed in court ahead of that date /4
One of the people responding in these unprecedented times is city clerk Ulli Watkiss, who has acting on her own with outside lawyer. She's asking to intervene in case, saying she will take no position on the stay but has an important role and information to offer the court: /5 
Watkiss submitted a new affidavit from Fiona Murray, the deputy city clerk of election services. To start, an election in our big city is a *lot* of work, as outlined by Murray: /6
We are now reaching the point, Murray outlines, where the clerk was planning to have a bunch of election prep done and locked down: /7
When the province introduced Bill 5, the clerk's office came up with contingency plan knowing they may need to switch gears and prepare a 25-ward election, Murray says, which they did when the bill received royal assent. But they also made sure they could go back to 47 wards: /8
"Due to uncertainty around the election," the clerk says clearly, through this affidavit, she has made sure she can proceed with either option - 25 or 47 wards: /9
Here is the crucial part: Clerk can't keep preparing for both elections. And at this point, she's not sure the things she will have to compromise won't cause "irregularities" in the results: /10
Written arguments from Goldblatt (representing @ChrisMoiseTO @IshAderonmu and @WomenWinTO) have also been filed: "Realistically," they read, "this court will not be able to entertain, let alone decide this appeal prior to ballots being cast" /11
Because of that, Goldblatt group argues, the Court of Appeal's decision on the stay motion "will effectively decide whether the mid-election changes to the pre-existing 47 ward structure imposed by Bill 5 - found to be unconstitutional . .. are to be reinstated." /12
Goldblatt group (@GPLLP, btw) also says the province has it all wrong when they say going back to 25-ward election is in the public interest and more convenient. I'll let them explain: /13
You can read whole Goldblatt factum if you're interested here: goldblattpartners.com/wp-content/upl…. More filings to come from @PaliareRoland, city and potentially others. But I can tell you confidently that Tuesday's hearing will be a very important next step in all of this. /end (Goodnight)
