Should City Take Over Public Schools?

We know that the city has money problems attributable to covering costs that are provincial responsibilities. We know that the public school boards have funding model concerns with the province related to both operations and building renovation/maintenance and face shifting & declining student populations.

We hear about school closures and the "monetization" of public assets In short, sell them to raise money. In Toronto, the TDSB has many properties either on the market or going to the market within a couple of years. They expect to receive "market" prices.

But will selling off assets without public scrutiny and transparency be in the public good? Here's a story that you might like to read from the Mirror : Toronto and Region Conservation Authority steps up to purchase Heathercrest Park and from the Toronto Sun Endangered park saved by a swale

Since the province is far removed from the city is there a fundamental question that needs to be asked, especially in an election year: Should the City Take Over Public Schools?

Such a takeover would insure that city planning would encompass public assets that penetrate all neighbourhoods but whose misplaced sale could misdirect good urban design, that city schools receive more enlightened funding for capital needs, that a lot of green space now TDSB land would become City of Toronto green space and become under the city Parks and Forest management and maybe most important that compensation for our elected school trustees brings forth the fulltime talent and skills needed for public education.

Ideas - Naturalized Areas in City Parks

In one of the towns above above Steeles you can start to see that all city parks need not be acres of cut grass and weeds. If you drive up Don Mills past Steeles into Markham, on your left you can see how this town's Simonston Park (in German Mills) has combined natural growth areas along the park periphery with the main activity areas of cut grass.

The naturalized areas not only break the monotony of short grass but add an attractive and ecologically useful dimension to the park. Adding native species plants and grasses might be part of the plan. Going wild with nature seems a worthwhile idea.

Cutting back of grass cutting should reduce both maintenance costs and air pollution. It should improve the air quality. And improve park enjoyment.

In Ward 33 there are many areas where going more natural seems a natural fit. Stretches on slopes behind residential lots such as Dallington or Lescon Park look like good places to start.

Coupled with community gardens we could see our parks becoming more multi-dimensional.

What Should Toronto Be?

Last week the discussion of what Toronto should be was raised indirectly by a Conservative MPP from a rural constituency. He felt the rest of Ontario would be better off it became the 11th province. If you remember the pre-amalgamation debate, many in Toronto thought that this Harris imposed integration, combined with social cost downloading and school underfunding models reflected a need to see Toronto as a standalone government worthy to be a province.

This week's Star editorial opinion concluded "Rather than seeking provincial status for Toronto, or even the GTA, it would make more sense to expand the city's powers and give it access to new revenue sources, like road tolls. Efforts to foster more economic co-operation across the GTA would also be beneficial. The best way forward lies in wisely building on what we already have."

The City of Toronto Act 2007 did somewhat enhance the city's powers but only so far. The Star's road tolls idea might make more sense if it was a added to a consumptive tax.

Yes, maybe pragmatic reality says Toronto can't become a part of the Canadian confederation as province but it needs to be further uncoupled from the maternal strings of Ontario. Toronto cannot continue to treated as a child of the province: it must become more peer like.

Of course, we will hear none of this from the McQuinty folks. But hopefully, a 2010 city candidate or two will keep the idea going that the 2007 Act was just one step in an evolution of Toronto to another position of governance and freedom within Ontario . We need to hear about the next step.

Is it time to add "city states" within provinces to the confederation table_ add Montreal, Vancouver, ... ?

Pragmatism and Cost-Benefit Analysis Enter the City Election

In today's Star we find out that candidate for mayor Rocco Rossi is neither left or right but pragmatic. Hopefully, more elected politicians can adhere to the philosophy of pragmatism. Liberal Prime Minister, Pierre Trudeau was an admitted adherent. Whether Rossi is a practicing pragmatist or just a practical man, time will tell if he is elected although we might suspect based on education, work as a business consultant and charity/political fundraiser he should be more the former than the latter.

He proclaims to be an environmentalist, cyclist and progressive who knows that the financial house must be in order. He sees the city needing to stick to its "core business" but sees the value of Toronto Hydro (selling it off) only in debt reduction opportunity?

As Rossi tries to escape a "right" side of the political spectrum voter perception, we can also see in the Star a report of the burgeoning 6-figure, $100K police force: many of whom say they must live outside the city_Toronto's too expensive for them. It raises doubts about police cost effectiveness or deficient cost containment.

According to this story Toronto's previous budget chief David Soknacki is currently putting together a study for the Toronto Board of Trade on police service financial matters. We should expect it to be a big news item_especially, if he can find a situation with news legs.

The story gives examples of police pay procedure for court appearances_ not the stuff of heavy crime but everyday ticketing for driving or car use offenses. There does not seem much "cost-benefit" analysis or even a concern that the city deserves a greater share of the ticketing revenue stream rather than the ticketing officer making the court appearance. (That is to say, the "overtime" pay for the officer or cost seems high_ 4 pay hours versus say a $200 ticket or less or city benefit.) Broadly, speaking it seems the C-B analysis needs to find some adherents in the TPS.

Pragmaticism and cost-benefit analysis should be engrained in both elected political office holders and public servants. They should be words found in a worthy candidate's election platform and form part of a city political party's reason for being. Rossi might be on to something_ it's time to drop the "left and right" hat thing, especially in city politics.

Do you wonder what the plan is?

If you drive around this city, one of the first things that sticks out is the deteriorating road conditions. You wonder how long it will be before the city gets around to go from fixing the potholes to putting in a new road surface.

If you go to the city website, you can find out about current and planned road closures but even after looking at city budget documents you cannot find out when work in scheduled on that third world roadway you just drove over in TO - without reading an 8 page PDF file and then you aren't sure one way or the other: there is no simple lookup such as entering Leslie, Finch, Lawrence, Wilson and getting a fast response. With a 5 year capital budget, maybe we should be expecting more detailed and specific planning. Doesn't the city have a simple project database that allows workers, councillors and citizens to find out what is going on? (How is 311 going to work around this?)

Yesterday, the Star initiated a federal "stimulus" tracker program project by citizens to see if what is planned is being done_ are the shovels in the ground? They provided a list of Toronto projects. Some cover some roadways and parks.

(By the way, there doesn't seem to be much money allocated for any stimulus project on roads or parks in our ward_except for Victoria Park road work and Shawnee Park tennis.)

Many residents in our ward might be interested to know about work related to "basement flooding program". Yes, it's a chore to go to the city website and find anything unless you are a trained researcher or librarian.

Would you have tried looking under Get Involved then select Projects then scroll down to Basement Flooding then scrolled down and clicked Ward 33?

Bottom Line: the city doesn't make it easy to find out what's going on in. You must wonder how city staff get to know what those are planning to do or are working on in the room next door. You can understand why a road like Leith Hill gets prepped in late 2009 for road re-surfacing before the planned early 2010 sewer work! We live in the information age_ why is it so difficult for our council and city management to get their act together.

Public Transit Ideas Important in the Election Discussion

Yesterday, two important "idea" articles related to TTC - public transit from the Star's Opinion discussed: smartcards and LRT vs subways.

Both writers provide studied insight that is important to the election discussion and city operation.

It feels almost embarrassing to consider what PanAM games visitors might encounter in 2015 on the TTC.

Smartcards are long overdue as a means to improve both TTC operation and customer satisfaction. As the "LRT vs subways" writer points out they can assist the TTC to understand how its customers use it service much better than current fare methods.

This writer (an ex-councillor and a transportation consultant) also questions the lack of co-ordinated city planning and thinking required to ensure that the investments in public transit provide the payoff in city building or shaping. There is a major gap between the city's official plan and zoning and the Transit City plan (as well as current public transit projects).

If Smitherman needed the prudent rational to argue a pause on Miller's Transit City implementation he has found it.

And lest we forget, one of the mayoral candidates provided a solution on how to fund subway constructions: make users of the 404/DVP and Gardiner pay for driving access to and from the city. Maybe, forging a direct link of a road toll to a public transit project like that done for bridge tolls in the States rather than just another general revenue tax is a missing link to the city infrastructure financing scenario. Tolls end when subways are in place and paid for by law unlike the 407 hit.

Good stuff for talking but how do we see it become part of a vote by citizens. As suggested below, we need city political parties to ensure that when we vote we can direct what is going to happen by knowing where the candidates stand on big impact issues.

Chipmunk Suits, Movie Nights and Websites - Part of the Demcratic Deficit

Yesterday, the Star reported on Councillor Heaps use and defense of spending the people's money to entertain residents in his ward. Today the Star's editorial replies :While such spending is seemingly frivolous, it has a purpose: to boost the name recognition of councillors within their wards and enhance their chances of re-election. As such, it constitutes yet another advantage for city hall incumbents over any would-be challengers.

In Ward 33 are movie nights and councillor websites serving resident needs or purely "boosting the name recognition" thing and contributing to the democratic deficit?

Ideas and Parties

As we go deeper into this year of city elections, we are hearing many ideas (new and old) on how to change and hopefully improve our city. To make ideas become city policy and programmes and /or services requires consensus building and vote gathering_ both on election day and in the elected city parliament _ that is, city council.

A single councillor or even the mayor must have the support of council to see ideas go forward beyond being a nice or attractive notion or proposal.

This March 16 article, Porter: City council hopefuls are just what Toronto needs reflects some good ideas ( by councillor wanabees who likely won't win) yet are worthy of public and continued discussion.

Historically, the key role of a political party is to aid the process of an individual's idea becoming part of a group interest that in the elected assembly can propose and debate coherently and vigorously such ideas to enable enacting legislation. A party provides the "marketing" agency that can under its "brand" promote widely what an individual normally cannot. The media attention expands. The consensus building is broader and deeper when a group or coalition stands behind ideas or proposals. Parties become idea champions_ ideas that represent both non-elected and elected party membership and more of the general public.

For too long parties have not been allowed in city politics in Ontario. This might have been reasonable when cities were much smaller. But today, Toronto has a larger population than most provinces with a total budget well over $9 billion. No one councillor can grasp the totality of the urban governance or be on top of things _ across the city and maybe, even with a ward.

A party allows councillors to become needed and proven "specialists" as well as weak foundation generalists in city matters. We see this in Ottawa and at Queen's Park.

In Canada's two next in size cities, Montreal and Vancouver city party politics has been in place for decades. Maybe, there are reasons why both cities have had the "world class" experiences and events that Toronto has only seen from the sidelines.

City parties are not just city versions of the parties we see in Ottawa or at Queens Park. They group under shared and concrete ideas on the liveable city more than abstract and the left-right spectrum categories. They can become the mechanism to enhance civic participation by more people.

It is time that ideas on how to change and improve Toronto start with a focus on the role of city political parties and their ability to bring ideas forward and create consensus for voters to make on election day. No candidate so far has seen this void.

Putting Off Budget Reality to After the Election?

If you read some of the thoughts running the city operations with a $350 million surplus, some candidates for mayor and council have received a boost while Rossi and Smitherman have lost ammunition for their onslaught on the financial situation. Even Councillor Carroll (see Mirror Mar 12 , " Ski Hlls issue could lead to more open budget consultation") warns that "next year a more open policy for debate will likely be more essential as the city braces for more cuts still in 2011... the tough stuff's coming...".

Why as "budget chief" has she put off the reality check until next year?

Well where has the councillor been standing and shouting? Yes, _ shoulder to shoulder with Mayor Miller. She cannot have it both ways. Much more than most of us simple minded taxpayers, she is close to the city's financial operations. She has access to all the data and personnel. Why hasn't budget process been more open_ wasn't she aware of the surplus issues and the need to discuss the impact to the immediate future just after 2010 in this year's presentation?

Her soft warnings indicates a tendency to please for power rather than take a stand for what needs required and said, last year and now.

Without the unanticipated surplus would we taxpayers be facing a 8% or 12% or 16% or even 20% increase? And while the tax rate looks low, are we really paying less for services based on equivalent property to others in the GTA? Remember without the surplus, the increase to balance was about 16% at proposed service and fee levels!

Is there not a need to start building short term "reserves" in the property tax revenues to smoothly adjust_via keeping the rate at 4%? Can anyone really expect McQuinty to change and come up with a quarter billion for TTC operations by Dec 1 2010? (Was McQuinty given a heads up on the city's "lucky" surplus to forego its consideration in the 2010 Ontario budget?)

Contrary to what some think, Rossi and Smitherman likely have more dry ammo to fire broadsides at those in charge who are NOT speaking up strongly and forthrightly _ financially speaking.

The city child has been abandoned by its provincial mother and must consider looking after itself for some time_ no matter how much it contributes regularly to its family's upkeep.

More Thoughts on Our Magical Surplus

Yesterday, the Star's Royson James wrote a scathing and cynical followup to the Mayor's surplus announcement (see Surprise! City bolsters budget with surplus New money pushes excess funds to $350 million, cuts property tax increase by $23 per home).

His take is more damning than our post below but we seem to be sharing the same mindset

(UPDATE: in Friday's MIRROR, the previous budget chief, David Soknacki writes BEYOND THE HEADLINES: Vigorous debate needed on how to pay for services. He says "... residential property tax payers will continue to enjoy the lowest tax rate in the area with a reduced increase. And finally, $75 million will be used so that next year's anticipated deficit will start at about $400 million. These decisions illustrate clearly that next year's opening position for our city finances is not viable. " (italics added for emphasis on strangeness of reducing keeping tax rate down rather than starting next year with some money in the bank!)

We can see all of the city budget staff working extra time to put a new face on the "staff recommended" 2010 budget documents.

We should be asking whether the city will go through another round of public consultations. They seem needed due to the magnitude and directional change of the mayor's announcements.

So far the mayor, budget chief representing this ward or any member of the Executive Committee have NOT provided appropriate insight into the magical money hat that has been found in the city hall treasury.

We must wonder how any one can go into the budget process for the next year without having the results from the current year tied in to its budget line by line!

Instead of magic we thought that the city would invest in sound financial management and reporting systems to run our city and be able to report on the differences between city plan and its actual results. We must also wonder how the city can go so deep into the budget process without having good estimates of the year end results from city and ABC operations.

Granted the unexplained differences or surplus on a $9 billion budget of about $310 million is less than 3.5% of total budget and about 3.5 times the announced 4% residential property tax revenue increase of $87 million. Looked at in another way, the residential increase is less than 1% of total. Some might consider this balancing just a rounding error.

Should the early presentations pursue the legal requirement to "balance the budget"? This seems too rigid if the city cannot work out the final bottom line numbers with greater efficacy in time for public presentation.

Given that the city collects property taxes before setting the final budget based on last year's values the final balancing act should come after setting all other items and be the outcome of council's final decision.

But this digresses from the point made in the post below. The city needs an improved and more timely financial reporting system (that would also likely change the culture and character in the city's finance department and that of the ABC's). Such a system would allow the budgeting process across all departments and agencies to be on top of things by knowing how the state of finances is working out and to understand differences from the prior year's plan and results and make appropriate accommodations whether for a 1 year or multi-year operations cycle.

The next mayor should be pressing for this change and more.

We need to know the likelihood that the city could run a surplus or deficit_since forecasting to a "balance" position is problematical. We know that smart budgeting builds in contingencies (especially, for the downside). We know that historically, Toronto and its pre-amalgamation components managed to build reserve accounts.

We also need to know the list of projects for the future that did not make the current plan. Going to multi-year forecasts will help here. But why did Miller wait until the last 8 months before an election to introduce a notion of even a 2 year operations cycle and set up arrangements without a broader discussion?

Is it now out in the open that the so-called "Budget Committee" is just a remnant from the past and that the mayor's office directs all budget matters? Should this committee be abolished? Should professsional staff in the mayor's office assume responsibility for all the background preparation? Should an independent Council Budget Officer be set up to report to and aid council on budgetary and other fiscal matters_ such as the Parliamentary Budget Officer in Ottawa?

Maybe Miller has opened a pandora's box for change and improvement as his lasting legacy.

Feb Budget, $210 M - Today, $100M - Where is this"surplus" money coming from?

Why was Mayor Miller euphoric and being a spin doctor when he should be embarrassed? A good mayor would have the financial reporting system in place and be reporting in January how the city did in 2009 according to plan! This should be done before presenting the 2010 budget!

A surplus exists when Operating Revenue exceeds Operating Costs. So what major items in revenue and costs did not match your budget forecast and why?

Were the tax revenue estimates off_ that is, too low? Is staff not capable of putting the needed information systems in place? Did the city economy not suffer during the Great Recession? Do we have the right managerial qualifications on the city Budget Committee?

This is what Mayor Miller should have been speaking to. Instead he talks about reducing the rate of increase in the city property tax by 1% or about $40-50 a year and reviewing planned user fee increases. He need not bother about the 1% _ it is just too small. We need to be keeping our eye on the ball and apparently he and his budget team do not. What happened between February and March_ less than 3 weeks is the big question! What things of priority can now be done with the extra money but couldn't fit in under the budget cutoff?

Our mayor in February's presentation seems happy to talk about keeping the city tax rate lowest in the GTA! Then he complains about the lack of city awareness in the federal budget.

How is Toronto looking in the senior level finance offices when it finds "surplus" in a time of major deficits and claims lowest taxes while the senior levels squirm to lower costs as revenues dropped?

This is the stuff of political embarrassment. It will be hard to keep the hand out for the 1 Cent GST thingy anymore. It will be hard to argue for more infrastructure money when $300 million is pulled from the magic hat. It will be hard to understand why roads are crumbling, parks look shabby, the city justifies other revenue sources like Vehicle Licensing and Land Transfer taxes.

Let's hope this "surplus" magic becomes part of the election campaign discussion in our ward.

Note - in our February posts (Structural Deficits, Budget Discussion) there are links to "opinion" pieces that have sound suggestions on the needed changes to the city's financial reporting and budget preparation and when and how the mayor should the financial state of the city.

Ward 33 _ Its Facts and Figures

DRAFT

On this blog's sidebar you can access the Ward 33 profile that can tell you much about its residents in terms of facts and figures. In the next while we will use this post to bring out some of this data.

Trees, Tree Management, Neigbourhood Gardens

DRAFT

Along Sheppard Ave E (along the subway route) we can see a lot of tree additions since the subway opening. In time we might expect to see a tree lined Sheppard Avenue. Trees are important city assets and tools.

They improve the city aesthetics, air quality and street cooling by shading ground and buildings.

The city has tree planting programs for city boulevards on the inner streets as well as on private property (LEAF).

But we see many areas_ city boulevards, parks and private property where more trees would improve the cityscape. As well, we notice many trees on private property that don't receive appropriate care (pruning for shaping and dead branch removal)

How can more trees be planted to fill gaps and start a replacement program for those approaching their end of life?

Remember that many of our current trees were planted around the same time period and will die together at old age.

As well, we see large areas of our parks that are just fields of cut grass_ not used for play or other purpose. They are under-utilized lands that could become food production areas. We see a church land program on the Peanut. Should we see more on public lands, such as Dallington Park?

This falls under city greening.

Again, will the 2010 election in our ward discuss trees and food gardens?

Urban Design - Public Transit - Affordable Housing

The Sheppard E Subway line cuts through what has been mostly residential neighbourhoods. It takes people mostly to areas of work and of learning or play outside Ward 33. It brings in relatively few to work, learn or shop/consume. Most of the new development (done, in progress or planned) along this new public transit infrastructure is also residential in form. The city is more intensified (higher residential density , but not necessarily more compact_ don't walk to work or to shop).

The Sheppard E. line in short has dramatically altered the urban design of the landscape above Hwy 401 in the city wards (33 and 24)_from Bayview to the DVP/404. Most of the residences for sale have been to the higher income and younger demographic. They do not reflect the averages of Ward 33. Is this part of a plan or policy?

The north-south tie-ins bus route tie-ins to the subway are good on Don Mills but less so for those close to and along Leslie.

In both Wards 33 and 24 there is city run (THC) affordable housing. In fact, the Peanut area rental apartment towers as well as those in Parkway Forest might be considered private owned affordable housing.

The THC has indicated some redevelopment of one of its Ward 33 properties.

In this election year, we need to discuss the nexus of urban design, public transit and affordable housing in our ward. We might also adding "greening" the city.

Will there be any discussion?

What increase will we see on the city tax bill?

In 2009 we started to see the impact of the phase-in of the 2008 MPAC property assessment notice (which had overall assessments in Ward 33 going up in the mid 20 percent rate range). It appears that for many, maybe most in Ward 33 the increase in the city tax bill is higher than the city average.

Under Current Value Assessment, we expect our property taxes to rise if our property increases are over the averages and they have been for many or most houses in our ward.

The 2010 city budget under consideration has a 4% increase in the total residential tax. This is the same rate of increase as last year. In dollars, the 2010 residential increase will bring in about $87 million more.

We are left to ponder what would have been the situation for 2010 if the city had not had an unanticipated $210 million surplus from 2009! Would the increase be deep in double digits?

While the city tax rate went down in 2009 (from .61% to .60% or 1.33%) the assessment values increases in Ward 33 went up more than the city average of 5.39%. Many residential properties likely saw assessment rates increasing over 7%. The combined net effect for many households in our ward would be a city tax component increase in the 6% area_ 50% more than the city average of 4%!

The education component set by the province had a tax rate decrease of 4.55% that still resulted in the provincial take increasing by about 2.6%. (The combined tax rate was about .85%)

In 2010 we can likely predict that our household increases will be similar in percentage changes to 2009. That is, the total tax bill (city + education) will likely be in the range 5 to 6.5% depending if the province sets a lower education rate.

However, with the province reducing the education tax load (as well as corporate income tax rates) on businesses across the province, in times of deficits we should be expecting the province to take us closer to 6.5% total increase.

If the combined tax rate stays constant to 2012, many residential household (single family houses) will see a 2007-2012 increase of over 30%!

That is, under a storyline that was fortuitous for 2009-2010 we are likely going to see increases in our city tax bill that will make retaining your home more difficult (fixed to low increases in family income) to giving up on somethings. They could be worse. They unlikely will be better. The middle class squeeze remains.

Voting in the Internet Age

In the city election and other elections expected soon, most of us who vote will go on election day to a polling station. At that station we will be verified as a voter and given a piece of paper on which we check our candidate preference(s). An official will take our vote and place it in a box for counting after the polls close. Counting will proceed by methods known for centuries.

Machine processing and tabulating is happening in some jurisdictions (mainly American). Americans make many more decisions on their "vote" documents than Canadians.

We will wonder why isn't technology that most of us use daily being put to use and improving our democracy.

In the Internet Age where a majority of homes have computer/communications access the obvious question is why not make every home a polling station and for those who lack this set up polling stations with internet voting.

Benefits could be greater voter turnout, faster reporting of results and the ability to handle referendum type questions more readily and frequently and maybe, lower the cost of election voting.

You can find out why "the reliance on Internet voting could inadvertently place the validity of the election process at risk." in today's Star ("Geist: Hackers, viruses threaten online voting validity").

Giest explains why those who have tried using the Internet have suspended their actions.

Incumbency Advantages & Arrogance _ Budget 2010

This week at a public meeting on the staff recommended 2010 city budget one councillor stood out dramatically in the news _ Paula Fletcher. When a meeting attendee shouted out she "should be fired" she challenged the person to run for office. If running for councillor office were a level playing field that might be a fair play. But as pointed out in a Feb 2010 forum post on "incumbency" the incumbent runs at a strong advantage_ with the help of the people's money.

Fletcher's arrogance and the advantages of incumbency were taken up by the G&M's Christie Blatchford yesterday in a column well worth reading by all_ especially if you are not familiar with the incumbency advantages.

See our Feb 2010 for some DO & DON'TS to correct this city democratic deficit.

If you want to check out the facts and figures that Blatchford used go to city website page Councillor Office Expenses You can also check out the city's election year policy on use of corporate resources set in 2008. It is almost laughable on the lack of meaningful restrictions.

Even that councillor website and cellphone is paid for by the people's money.

Your City / My City - The Saturday Star

In this important city election year, we see The Star stepping up and stirring the pot with the type of dialogue needed to get needed change in our city. Yesterday, this "liberal democratic" newsmedia started its Your City/My City dialogue (this link points to the summary page). We hope such endeavours can percolate through the election platforms of candidates for mayor as well as ward councillors and maybe school board trustees.

Royson James's "Can-Do spirit works wonders" column concludes: "We know the current system is designed for perpetuation of the status quo. If only we could change it, there might be hope for more rapid change and the birth of new blood, new initiatives, ideas and solutions. As it stands now, Your City, My City is too closed, too exclusive.If it takes party politics at city hall; giving the vote to non-citizens; changes in our school curriculum to stress civics; term limits and other electoral reforms to usher in a new force, bring them on."

Previous posts in this forum have expressed a similar sentiment. We hope that candidates for office in this election year reflect on how to get change. We believe it starts with changing our city governance model and getting a handle on both our democratic and financial deficits.

Unwanted Federal Intrusion in Urban Design

The Toronto Port Authority is a federal agency that has power along the waterfront. It controls things such as the Island Airport and access to it. It sometimes is a willing partner with the city and sometimes not.

In today's G&M we have an example of this agency claiming a federal right to build a 400 car parking lot (underground) where there are structures (large concrete silos) from Toronto's past that the city wants to preserve and develop as an historical heritage site.

While the TPA chief officer sees nothing wrong with the city heritage statement he wants to maintain a federal right for something that seems to require the destruction of these structures.

Why the TPA would need a 400 space parking lot as public transit becomes more accessible along the Queen's Quay is not indicated in the G&M report.

But we see an unwanted federal finger poking into our urban design. While the city pushes for greater use of public transit as part of a greater city greening strategy we see a federal officer wanting the option to bring more cars to the waterfront at some future time_ more traffic and pollution. Dah & dah.

Monopoly Service Delivery vs Competitive Bidding

Candidate Rossi is starting to stir the pot on how to operate or manage a big city_ especially, a big city where the quality of city services has been declining while costs increase and worker unions create monopoly situations in terms of service delivery.

This is a necessary discussion during the 2010 election campaign and must be continued down to the wards by candidates for councillor office. It also makes good politics that is best handled under the mantle of a municipal political party.

Today, we see Rossi and Smitherman going at each other and vying to see who says it best. The Star editorial today Outsourcing worth a look provides a good introductory for city voters. Columnist James looks at the Candidates in a race to the right. The Star also provides a good backup story on Private transit less rare than you'd think.

The current cabal of city politicians supporting a status quo in service delivery must start to acknowledge the cost & quality disadvantages of monopoly delivery and look deeply at the market concept of private-public competitive bidding delivery. This is not necessarily a march to the right but a march to do it right. We see too much evidence of service delivery not being done well with the right social payoffs.

As a social democratic this writer feels that city and any governance must keep the eye on serving the citizenry well and not just keeping the public service better off than the citizenry they should be serving. Subsidize when necessary. Make money where it doesn't hurt. This is not a left of centre vs right of centre thing_ it is just being pragmatic and wise.

The bottom line is that we must start to seek cost containment on city service delivery and it starts with staffing and technology: labour is the biggest cost element. Technology added to the mix can provide the increases in work productivity leading to cost containment.

Moscoe's FREE Legal Services for Councillors

At one time multi-term Councillor Moscoe seemed to be a people's representative. Something you might expect from an admitted NDP social progressive. However, his latest proposal backed by the Executive Committee (presumably including our ward councillor's approval) would give our elected councillors a one-up over any citizen or organization that would dissent on a councillor's public or publicly important behaviour. That is, he proposes a special legal task force to protect members of council from the people paid for by the people's city imposed taxes.

Such is the behaviour of one who has spent too long in office and seems to validate the argument of incumbency advantage, need for term limits and the increasing democratic deficit in the politics of our city.

Check out this Star editorial slamming this undemocratic proposal, Council's Legal Hit Squad and the reader reaction.

Last August, we had a post on the Sandra Bossin affair. That and the recent Heaps affair seem to be causing Moscoe some angst.

S@DM Decision: Email from Don Mills Friends & Councillor Minnan-Wong

This post came as an email message: From: "Don Mills Friends" To: "Don Mills Friends" Subject: Communication from Councillor Minnan-Wong re Don Mills Settlement

Please see below the forwarded e-mail communication from Councillor Minnan-Wong regarding the Don Mills Settlement, with the previously confidential, but now public, settlement details attached in PDF format.

Please note that, although Appendix 2 of the Design Panel Commentary in the attachment shows Don Mills Friends as being one of the agreeing parties, we stated our strong disagreement as soon as we were made aware of the details and have since withdrawn from OMB party status (click here for more information).

---

Simone Gabbay, Founder

Don Mills Friends

416-446-0862

www.donmillsfriends.org

donmillsfriends@pathcom.com

---

Dear Don Mills Resident,

On February 23rd, 2010, City Council approved a settlement offer of $17 million by Cadillac Fairview for a community centre in return for proposed increases in height and density for Phase II of the redevelopment of the Don Mills Centre. I voted against the settlement offer and in favour of the Don Mills Community.

My vote was not against a community Centre. I have long been an advocate for a community centre for a deserving Don Mills community. Still, I was not prepared to support an application for development in exchange for a community centre at any cost.

I voted "no" for the following reasons:

Firstly, I disapproved of the secrecy of the details of the settlement. This confidentiality prevented me from holding another public meeting and releasing the specific details before City Council considered the item. I strongly objected to this secrecy at Council as the community should have been provided with all the facts first.

Secondly, the application included the kind of heights and densities found along the Sheppard subway line. I fear that these heights and densities will now be used in the future as precedent and will set the tone for new development in Don Mills. I remain very concerned that North America's first planned community is now destined to become a "Tall Building District."

Finally, I do not share in the view that a refusal by City Council would have "killed the deal." While it is true that Cadillac Fairview indicated as much, they had made this claim before. While it is true that the OMB may have approved the application anyway without a community centre, it is also possible that the OMB may not have approved the development in its proposed form. Should we as City Councillors make our decisions based upon what the OMB may decide? Or, should we decide an application based upon the merits of that application? I side with the latter.

I believe this application was defeated by City Council the first time on its merits and that it should have been a second time for the same reason. Intensification in Don Mills may be inevitable, but it should be managed and be appropriate for the neighbourhood, not fast tracked and dictated by developers using the practice of "chequebook planning."

Whether we agree or disagree on the settlement, I thank you for taking the time to communicate with me on the matter. This is an important community development and your input is essential to the decision making process.

The details of the settlement are now available to the public and have been attached for your convenience.

Thank you again for your feedback.

Sincerely,

Denzil Minnan-Wong

NOTE: you can use the City Council Updates (blog) or W33AC Docs OnLine links in the sidebar to connect to the city documents

TTC - Customer Amenities??

Given the recent customer satisfaction concerns about TTC performance, we thought some might find this post interesting.

While browsing an IT newspaper today, a headline stood out "Laval Gets Wireless Bus Updates" . According to this report "Webtech Wireless Inc of Vancouver announced this month (Feb 2010) the Societe de Transport de Laval (STL) has launched Nextbus, which includes the installation of 80 signs at bus stops." This GPS / cellular technology will "alert transit users of estimated bus arrival times". (Besides Laval, several other Canadian and American cities already have this arrival information service at their bus stops. Click the Nextbus link above to see how it works on the internet.)

The latest (Aug 2009) TTC Transit City Bus Plan on pages 22-23, Section 2.5 of this 59 page document covers "Improving Customer Amenities and Service Information". (We can't insert the text- they made the document "secure" although it appears written for ridership.) Under sub-section 2.5.2 (arrival times) the text refers to "plans" . A July 2008 CBC News story, reports "The Toronto Transit Commission's board has given its approval for Grey Island Systems International Inc. (part of Webtech) to develop a system that gives travellers constantly updated information on the arrival times of their TTC rides."

A Jan 2010, TTC news link says "in July, all 800 streetcar stops will have SMS capability whereby customers can send a text message to the TTC and get an immediate response about when the next streetcar will arrive at that particular stop. Select shelters and subway stations serviced by streetcars will also have LED readouts with next vehicle arrival information Bus stops will have the same capability in 2011 as the TTC upgrades the GPS units aboard all the buses in its fleet." (TTC committed to customer service excellence)

The question is "what has been holding back the TTC?" A Canadian firm has leading edge technology that has already been implemented in transit systems in many North American cities. We can pose some questions.

Why hasn't our transit system been more conscious of and responsive to customer needs for information on service status and arrivals? Will the customer service panel of outsiders find out and provide the path to changing the TTC focus? Will TTC be leading or only following after strong customer dissatisfaction feedback? Does our city council and TTC board share the same mindset about providing us with important and needed information?

UPDATE 2/3/10: The Star's Royson James considers if Mixing up TTC board is better way. He recognizes the problem of a TTC commission board stuffed with councillors without any outside experts_ the stagnant mindset problem

Bottom Line: Better late, than being world class?

Candidates for Councillor

You can find out from the city's website page, Toronto Votes 2010 all you might want to know about becoming a councillor and who is running as well as about being a voter and election worker.

In a previous blog, we talked about the "advantages of incumbency" leading to an inherent "democratic deficit" in our city. Is low voter turnout a result as well? Are the current level of nominations supporting this thesis?

As of Feb 28, 12 of the 44 city wards have received only ONE nomination for the office of councillor (2,5,6,13,16,16,21,22,23,33,39,41). For 4 other wards there are NO nominations (3,4,24,34). Click here to see the ward map and candidates.

Three wards in the North York district have only one nomination _ current councillor (Stintz, Filion, Carroll). Two wards with none (current holders - Shiner, Minnan-Wong)

There are many months to the September nomination deadline. However, in Friday's Mirror columnist Dave Nickle speculates on the impact of the current ward 33 councillor NOT running for mayor. Does he assume that she will win (by acclamation?) - journalist David is a Shelley Carroll fan and it shows in his columns.

Unlike the Star's Royson James ("flat earth" image -see an earlier post link), he lauds her budget balancing skills as "budget chief". (We must presume that she had been aware of the city's $200 million surplus _ but was silent and was able on her own to cut deeper and increase user fees substantially. But why was she apparently unaware of the large _$200-450 million unfunded sickpay/leave liability that wasn't on the city's books? If she had been, why wasn't it recognized in previous budgets?)

Would the allowance of municipal political parties bring out more candidates sooner? Have the new contribution restrictions hurt new candidate prospects more the current office holders?

Here are links to the 2006 Election some might want to review -

ELECTION FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE http://app.toronto.ca/EFD/main.do

RESULTS http://www.toronto.ca/elections/results/

Ward 33 at 34% had one of the lowest voter turnouts in the city in 2006!

Candidates for Mayor and Their Known Platforms

In the Friday Star we noted a SCRIBD DOC link to what all voters will need to make informed, comparative decisions. Hopefully, those putting together this internet document will keep it updated until the November decision and that Toronto's other media sources will contribute more to this public discussion and review.

To know more about the 2010 candidates click on Mayoral race: Where they stand

The Star's Bob Hepburn believes Bike lanes an election winner for Rossi

An Opinion writer in yesterday's Star says Now is the time to discuss city's massive police budget Mayoral candidates remain silent on police operating expenses of nearly $1 billion a year. This is an important topic: our police keep demanding more and more. Do they deliver the goods?

UPDATE 1/3/10: Here's a link to Toronto's Election News for interested voters: "TEN combs through mainstream news publications, blogs, candidate websites and news magazines to bring you only the best political content and commentary about the 2010 electoral races, candidates and the campaigns behind them."

We will keep this post updated as we get closer to Election Day.

Proposed 2010 City Budget _ Reactions & Impacts: More

Note - You can access what the staff recommends online here: Budget 2010. If the "proposed" budget is a staff recommendation what does the Budget Committee and its chair do?

In our post below on budget reactions, we pointed directly to concerns about how budget changes will impact neighbourhood recreational use of parks and other city facilities (see copy of a letter to editor below). A Saturday Star ParentCentral story reports on "structural deficit" impacts to those families using day care facilities: apparently city staff and the budget committee feel that parents should pick up the "rental" cost of space in public schools (now subsidized by city taxes). To its credit, city council has previously rejected passing on such costs: why is the budget chief bringing forth this issue again? Where is the "mature" discussion?

As the province implements full day schooling at a significant new cost, the Toronto school boards cut more to balance budgets and wonder how to fit in more youngsters and a federal day care grant program expires at March month end we see budget balancing dilemma passed on to the middle class family.

We expect more such stories arise as the city works towards its final 2010 budget decision. We wonder where the candidates for mayor sit on such impacts to middle class family life. How much more can the middle class afford to pay? If a 4% residential rate brings in $87 million, maybe we should ask what another raise of 1% (say, $22 million) could do to make city life better or how much pain to expect from a reduction to a 3% tax increase.

UPDATE: 2/3/10 - Specifics are starting to trickle out on the proposed cuts. Staff was asked to come from with areas: Privatize city-owned ski hills, staff urges Having private sector run ski hills, campsite would save money and chop 360 jobs (Star report). Toronto needs to look at its operating costs. It also needs to consider why it doesn't have total cost recovery on parks and recreational services. Focusing on a few elements should not be done without a comprehensive policy statement on aims and objectives of city services. Our budget leadership is failing.

Letter to Editor (name withheld, copyright unknown)

Re:City crackdown burns park pizza nights,

Column, Feb. 25

The real issue here is that the city apparently wishes to crush efforts by its residents to reclaim local parks as vibrant community gathering and activity spaces. As city residents, we already pay for the establishment, staffing and upkeep of these common spaces, so isn't it logical that we also be able to directly shape the kind of activities that take place in them, without interference from local government?

In their arrogance the city's political decision-makers apparently think otherwise. Local politicians appear bent on extinguishing vibrant, autonomous community efforts under the ludicrous pretext of "regularizing programming." (bold added)

In Christie Pits, an affordable, enjoyable community meal has already fallen victim to this foolishness. In Dufferin Grove Park the potential lost activities could run the gamut from women's hockey to community dinners to outdoor summer theatre and festivals.

The only possible outcome of this would be that our city parks will once again regress to the kind of socially unfriendly spaces where community members fear to tread and overly suspicious police officers question the motives of anyone who dares enter, especially after nightfall. City hall politicians need to cease this attempt to crush efforts by Toronto's residents to reclaim community green spaces.

Council Approval of Towers and Community Centre , S@DM

On Tuesday, City council by a vote of 37 to 3 decided to approve the proposal for tall towers and a community centre facility as part of the Don Mills Centre redevelopment, Shops at Don Mills. This is a game changing decision for those that believe that Secondary Plans established with community involvement, especially in a city area not part of the provincial intensification designation should carry some restrictive power.

(To see what's happening at council meetings, see the blog link in the sidebar)

But alas, this is not so. The city once again has proven unable or unwilling to thwart a strong developer and stand up for a neighbourhood and its residents.

Don Mills neighbourhood in the Lawrence Ave and Don Mills is essentially a low rise community. Yes, there are many apartment blocks. But they are less than 6 stories. The council decision will bring a 32 storey & 24 storey towers and others (10-16 stories).

With the council decision we can expect that existing rental apartment owners will be reviewing how they can redevelop their properties and gain the heights allotted to Cadillac Fairview (CF).

CF managed its feat simply because the residential component density was averaged over the mainly one storey commercial area. But as they have seemed to get away with something that is neighbourhood altering we should anticipate in the next 20 years to see the Lawrence and Don Mills intersection area to become a hub of condo highrises. We must wonder about the smarts of the councillors who sit on the North York Community Council as well as the residents running the local resodent association, DMRI. Why did no one see the need to revisit the land zoning as CF was working out its initial plans?

The deal (see link above) is not an easy read. The community centre (not managed or staffed by city staff or using city rates for facility use and programmes but open to the general public) and green land park components are not easy to grasp. There are land swaps, 49 year leases, city payments, CF payments, multi-if condition clauses, some funding for a new twin pad rink located elsewhere, etc.

There was an Urban Design Review Panel staffed by those who profit from working with developers. As you might expect this panel did not comment on the lack of adherence to the Don Mills secondary plan (part of the city's Official Plan). The panel worked as a bunch of technocrats who could not afford to offend a hand that might feed them someday.

It is likely that most on city council did not read the decision document closely. For example, there are no definitions for keywords like "affordable" as it applies to public use of the community centre, or "primarily" as it applies to tenant use and rental space in the community centre.

From a quick read (it's legalese torture), it is not apparent what the city got and will own 5o years from now.

Where is the city visionary when you need one? Councillor Minnan-Wong must be applauded for standing up_ he saw the future and he stood up with the Friends of Don Mills to protect the Don Mills neighbourhood.

Do We Pay Too Much or Too Little? DRAFT

Mayor Miller has bragged that Toronto's residential property taxpayers have the lowest taxes in the GTA. (He could also say more correctly that the city charges by far the lowest "development charges" too_ there is supporting evidence for this. Also, the city taxpayers contribute more to the province's educational kitty than others too.) Does this imply that we pay "too little" and the city should charge more (if politically and economically able/expedient)?

A while back we found a report from the city of Edmonton that might assist finding some answers. (We need to find it again.)

City property taxes (excluding province's education tax on property) are simply the assessment property value (by a provincial agency, MPAC) multiplied by city established tax rate (that varies somewhat by nature of property).

From this simple equation, we can look if the "value" component that will answer the "too much / too little" question. The tax rate is controlled by the city to help budget balancing and making tax increases palatable to residents..

As most who own a residential property in Toronto know they can get more building space if not land for less outside the city boundaries in the GTA than within. A similar and likely newer 2-story, 2000 sq.ft. plus structure north of Steeles can be a $100 to more than $200 thousand less (even with the much larger development charges.)

The average houseprice residence in Toronto, is quite uncommon outside the city boundaries but not its pricing.

So how can you look at this "objectively". Do you weigh/factor in the city services, proximity to a wider range of schools and culture, better shopping opportunities, shorter trips, better public transit, ... when equating value in the city to the rest of the GTA? But if so, you must also weigh in the increasing traffic congestion, city road and service deterioration, increasing intensification of city living (higher densities of homes and people) by provincial mandate.

Should you work out a standard measure of what Toronto residents get for their money? How about working out a city tax on a household square foot basis to start a meaningful comparison?

The only reasonable and quick conclusion (from the real estate market) is that you pay a purchase price premium (in addition to the city's land transfer tax and vehicle tax) in Toronto compared to the rest of the GTA. The real estate value maxim seems true "location, location, location."

But for a variety of reasons, some people like to stay and live in the big city and some want to stay outside in their bigger and newer homes. A choice of lifestyle compromised by income or just trading off the utililty of different things for different folks?

Bottom line: We doubt there is any answer. We pay what we pay. Some of us could afford to pay more. Many cannot without sacrificing lifestyle and many more basic needs. The city population seems to have adjusted to covering a Toronto price index inflation experience via property tax increases. That seems to be a fair tradeoff. But to suggest we have the lowest taxes is not fair by any measure.

City Budget Reactions

We start this post with a quote from the Star's Royson James. He refers to the City's Budget Committee Chair, our ward councillor, Shelley Carroll: "her "strength" has been the ability to tell you, with a straight face, that the budget earth is flat when all evidence suggests it is round". He makes this assertion in a review of the signed up and potential candidates for mayor: Joe Pantalone born again as tightwad.

He also states that "Carroll has been a loquacious budget chief who has defended each spending decision with vigour and resolve."

Yesterday, Councillor Carroll spoke about the latest city budget proposal to a breakfast gathering of 30 at the Board of Trade. (She followed up Wednesday night with a town hall presentation before 12).

The Star reports Budget boss defends city But Shelley Carroll admits police force and TTC could do more to slash their spending. According to this report she "scolds" the authors of a BOT column in the Star for their presentation of a continuing "structural deficit" faced Toronto (see our post down below that refers to BOT article). Click here for the Mirror's Dave Nichols report

Apparently, she feels that all will be well when the province like other jurisdictions starts to pay big share of the operating cost of public transit in the big city. Mayor Miller wants to settle the issue by Dec. 1 (McQuinty has only agreed to talk about talking. We are left to wonder even if the province will keep its word on putting more money into the city's social services budget_reminder of the Harris download burden.)

As we suggested in an earlier post asking for a TTC helping hand after the Mayor brags to Torontonians that they have the lowest taxes in the GTA will not go well over a few blocks north of City Hall at Queens Park_given the province's deficit situation even with the expected revenue boost from the HST, the ability of the city to run a surplus and find "service efficiencies and cost savings" and Caplan's exhortations on the TTC and water services. If Caplan feels that Ontarians can easily accommodate $50 a month more for water and sewage ("just like an average internet bill") then what does he or McQuinty think about a 4% rise in property taxes that adds less than $100 to the average annual residential tax bill in Toronto.

A wise person might conclude that the province does not or will not look at Toronto's financial situation kindly until the city pushes for property tax increases that will cause the residential ratepayers to scream in the streets and threaten the political lives of the Mayor and Council.

Our councillor has asked for a "mature" discussion. But when presented with a mayor who should know better and by experts who suggest changing how the city does it budgeting and financial reporting (see posts below) she tunes out the latter and says nothing contrary to the departing mayor about his inappropriate remarks.

We hope our councillor takes the opportunity to run for mayor so that there is one candidate who has been looking at the city finances closely for a few years and should be on top of suggestions for improving the city's financial future.

We would also hope that the "budget chief" can explain why using city recreational facilities is becoming more onerous. Is the city seeking to save a few "nickels and dimes" and forgetting about the quality of its neighbourhoods ?

Incumbency, Its Advantages and the Democratic Deficit

Once elected our city councillors can have a life time job with an indexed income (soon over 6 figures) and well above average pension. Election to this office is difficult due to the built-in advantages of incumbency of a sitting councillor: re-election is not.

Consider this set of advantages:

• councillors are being paid as they run for election.

• councillors can manage their time freely and open up large blocks of time to campaign: ABC or council meeting attendance is not obligatory
• councillors can deliver self-promoting newsletters at city expense (office budget) up to September in the election year
• councillors can get access to email addresses from personal website promotion
• councilors have access to city funds (office budgets) to stage and sponsor events
• councillors have loyal city paid staffers (most have 2-4) who can take a leave of absence or vacation time to help out the councillor's election campaign.
• councillors have four years to build up brand and fundraising connections in community

Consider this set of disadvantages:

• timed out: empty set.

The strong advantages of holding the office point to a democratic deficit:

Consider some ways to even the democratic imbalance:

DO NOT's

• do not allow city paid newsletters from the councillor's office in the election year: starting Jan 1.
• do not allow city staff to work in councillor's campaign

DO's

• set term limits (2 consecutive terms only)
• allow party politics in municipal elections.
• provide candidates a cost recovery (within current campaign expense limits) paid by the city at 50 cents per vote received
• get city citizen initiated referendum on the election ballot
  

How can we make correcting the democratic deficit imbalance an election topic in all the wards?

Tuesday Brought McQuinty Up to the Plate

Yesterday, we thought Caplan might be trying for a "three in a row". Instead his party leader and provincial premier came forth to bat on the "TTC-no strike option/essential service" motion that Caplan presented. McQuinty and the departing Mayor Miller seem to disagree on need and relevance to this as part of the current city and election agenda (See Star report).

We are perplexed like Miller about why the Premier and a party lieutenant are coming out in a city election year to classify the TTC as an "essential service".

What the city needs is money and a labour arbitration process that considers the ability of the city and its taxpayers to pay. McQuinty remains silent although last week he seemed to dismiss or discount any fruitful outcomes from any discussion on a TTC operating subsidy. Is he implying that Toronto must standalone on its revenue-service costs balancing act? Is he setting the stage for the province to detach itself further from the financing of this city?

This is the same premier that had a chance to offer the city a consumption/sales tax option as a revenue generator when the Toronto Act was being negotiated but said no way. Was he consumed by the HST negotiation with Ottawa as Mayor Miller pushed forward his One Cent GST campaign.

So we might find a candidate like Smitherman getting elected, then getting a phone call from McQuinty for you know what to do.

There is some intrigue here. But motives are opaque.

Sunday WATER, Monday TTC, Tuesday ???

Yes, we're hearing a lot all of a sudden from our multi-term DVE MPP after he seemed to go into hiding after resigning his seat in McQuinty's Cabinet. He seems to be poking a finger into the mayoral campaign_ and is it intentional?

Today's report (in Star) has him wanting to make the TTC an essential service (and revoke the union strike option). He says people do not want to see service disruptions. Maybe, somewhat. But why is he pressing this just after the city budget comes out (with a major TTC subsidy by Toronto's taxpayers) and the recent fare increase, and customer service concerns?

Is David making noise as a step back into cabinet? Is he trying out something for McQuinty as the Ontario Liberals prepare for the next provincial election?

But if so, he is ignoring the city financing concern of Toronto taxpayers, including TTC ridership. The city costs and user fees for the TTC go up with seemingly unstoppable union settlement increases as well as those for police, fire and the city staff_ regardless of the city ability to pay and of the questionable need to pay the highest rates because we are the largest city in Canada. They are creating the "structural deficit" that without last year's surplus, would have required well over a 12% tax rate increase to balance the books, instead of the 4% for residential property( without the hidden surplus and questionable service cutbacks, err inefficiencies who would have the guts to seek a 20% property increase to the lowest rates in the GTA according to the other David?).

The province has no money to hand out for the TTC, nor his bill 237 "water services". ( Is the thought: "Let the municipalities work out the money from their taxpayers"?)

And, at the same time with things like Caplan's bills is not building a policy on how to tie city employment settlements to the city's financial reality. Arbitration evidence indicates the employee union gets the favourable treatment, not the taxpayer.

So as Caplan does some brand building and kite flying, what is the bottom line?

What will Tuesday bring? With ex-cabinet seatmate Smitherman running, we shouldn't see Caplan dropping his name in the hat for mayor. Will he propose a bill to gut the OMB's power over land use in Toronto?

He is likely aware that along Sheppard Ave E., near Brian a certain developer has snubbed McQuinty's government and the city by seeking OMB approval to build more residential condos on prime land zoned as employment centre only.

Does Our MPP Caplan Want Us to Pay More for Water Services?

Our Don Valley East MPP, David Caplan is trying to get his private member Bill 237 passed to ensure all of Ontario has quality water services (supply and sewage) now and in the future. The Star reports his Proposal would add $50 to cost of tap water Paying full monthly cost of resource would boost conservation.

From this Star story, "Caplan, a former health and infrastructure minister, estimates the monthly drain of his plan on family finances would be similar to the price of high-speed Internet, about $50. "That's one of the challenges," he acknowledged Thursday after Bill 237 passed another hurdle in the Legislature with a second reading vote that sends it to a committee of MPPs for further study."

DVE residents must wonder if he expects us to pay this $50 on top of our current bills which seem to be approaching $50 per month already after a succession of annual 10% water rate increases in Toronto.

Surely he knows that not everyone can afford or needs hi-speed internet or even cellphone service. We could conclude that David is flying a trial kite for McQuinty given the tight financial times at Queen's Park and in our homes.

Here's the Council of Canadians reaction to Bill237.

What do you think? What do you want to say_ Click above for the email link to David?

Car Sharing and the compact, intensified Transit City

First came the Sheppard East subway line_from Yonge to Don Mills. The Sheppard East LRT has begun in east Scarborough and will arrive in Ward33 in a couple of years with a walk over connection at the Don Mills underground station.

With the subway line came much development: mostly high rise condos along Sheppard from Bayview to Don Mills and towards Vic Park. Included in this development is increased vehicle traffic and a lot of people coming to live here, mainly south of Sheppard. Canadian Tire has also announced its new Head Office tower building near the Leslie subway station. We expect to see more people walking the street as more commercial storefronts open up from Bayview to Don Mills outside of peak time for work and school activities.

Such is the compact, intensified Transit City_ more people per sq. km., more walking to the office or neighbourhood store or just strolling and better access to transit and transportation.

We also expect the condo towers to provide convenient built-in "green bin" handling in addition to the blue bin recycling and grey bin solid waste for these new ward residents and be greener than the older structures. They must catch up with single family dwellings.

What we aren't sure is whether the new residents will be able to live with fewer cars, have better transportation options and use public transit effectively and affordably.

As part of the Transit City strategy, we should expect our city government to work out how new households in the intensified city do not continue to add to traffic congestion and road busyness.

One way is to ensure that autosharing services (Autoshare, ZipCar) are built in to our malls, subway stations and new condo developments and other access points in our neighbourhoods.

Such a city strategy would also need to consider the imminent arrival of electric cars and the need for electric refill stations on city streets.

City council needs to legislate for these now. They need to be part of the Transit City strategy. If people can learn to live with fewer vehicles per household we will have a greener, cleaner and less congested city.

Today's Star features a column by Trevor Hamilton Sharing the road The number of drivers turning to car sharing is forecast to grow eightfold by 2016 and a report says automakers should be worried.

You should find this interesting reading_ things are changing. You might want to ask our 2010 candidates for office how they plan to get fewer vehicles on our ward roadways.

Getting the dope on that City Light Deal

You might remember a few years back that the city sold off the poles and lights it owned to Toronto Hydro for much needed cash. Today we found out why. And the costs to the city over the next 30 years.

Here's the background from today's Star Bill for Toronto street lights will top $400 million Toronto to pay $420 million to rent lights it sold for $60 million in last-minute 2005 budget deal

This scenario provides another reason why it would not make money sense to sell this city owned (100% of equity) asset.

Budget 2010_Day After City Presentation

Yesterday, Toronto found out how staff, budget committee and Mayor would do the "impossible" and show off a "balanced" budget for 2010 with only a 4% increase to the residential numbers. That is, after starting off with a yawning gap of $500-800 million, the city only needed us to provide $87,000,000 to cut out a gap after allowing for increases in union labour costs (TPS, TTC, CUPE, ...).

The Mayor did not sound creditable about keeping the Toronto rates at the lowest in the GTA. I guess he hasn't been driving around the city much this winter_ he hasn't seen the crumbling road surfaces. Maybe, the unused snow removal will be used for massive road work (& disruptions) this spring and summer.

If you really want the scoop or poop, you might consider these columns links from today 's Star
James Is Toronto really as broke as it says? and
Hume Queen's Park shares blame for city's troubles.

Please read beyond the column headline. Should the city negotiate for a TTC operating subsidy or rather, a regular city grant for operating and infrastructure needs_ not tied to the TTC? Would regular provincial TTC op grants just build in an allowance for rich wage & benefit increases?

For Discussion: World Class? World Leading _ NO!

In the last decade on so, some have pushed Toronto as a world class city brand. Toronto receives high accolades as a liveable and desirable city in which to live in global surveys. In some things, such as Green Bins and Enwave city core services it has shown an important leadership and role model.

But the reality likely is that we are falling back and that much momentum in making a liveable and progressive city has slowed dramatically or even stopped and reversed. TTC/public transit issues, road congestion and surface deterioration, labour concerns (union power and costs _TTC, TPC, CUPE,....) and financial duress due to senior government indifference stand out for users of city services.

In today's Star, there is a must-read "opinion" article, A Tale of Two Cities _ Toronto: Wakeup, sleeper ( Joe Betteridge, Urban Planner) we hear what others cities are doing on two of these fronts while our city leaders are asleep at the switch: TTC fare handling compared to innovations around the world and using more non-staff labour for city needs.

These are just 2 items for discussion by all candidates as the 2010 Election discussion heats up. Mr. Betteridge poses topics that are important as well as possessing urgency.

Long Term Structural Deficits and Budget Presentation Concerns

Today as budget day nears at City Hall we hear in the Star of a report by the Toronto Board of Trade, www.BOT.com (see Vote Toronto 2010 under Policy menu tab). Without heftier tax increases or new financial relationships with Ottawa or Queens Park, Toronto faces an annual structural deficit in the billion dollar range by the end of this decade.

While this is alarming in itself, another story in the Star today presents a concern that is just as remarkable but avoidable. Apparently, the budget presentations (operating and budget) do not allow you or even trained professionals to reconcile what was planned with what happened. The authors of this article Toronto needs a budget that speaks to its citizens Current process makes comparisons between targets and performance almost impossible. Benjamin Dachis and Colin Busby, policy analysts at the C.D. Howe Institute say:
"The city should incorporate performance-based budget measures that highlight objectives in the budget that city departments must deliver. Budget documents should incorporate output measures based on Ontario-wide – and preferably, city-wide – benchmarks aimed at increasing performance. A greater focus on performance budgeting would identify areas for cost cutting, and encourage departments to improve the value of their services.

A budget document should communicate city priorities to both city staff and the public.

A more transparent and accessible budget process will help identify forecasting struggles and missed targets. A forward-looking budget would also deal with looming budget issues, while bolstering public confidence and participation in the direction of financial planning and priorities."

The bottom line question: when will we see city council, budget committee and mayor discussing openly and creditably the tough financial issues of the city and how to present budget and financial data to improve city governance and its financial control? Hopefully we will before City Election Day, 2010.

Toronto Community Housing in Ward 33

This is a "heads up" type of post. Two TCH townhouse complexes have been identified for revitalization under the TCH's Investing in Building programme: Leslie Nymark and Allenbury Gardens. How imminent are the changes? We do not know.

But Ward 33 residents should be vigilant about the nature of any changes. The Leslie Nymark complex represents how not to do sustainable and community integrated public housing. The Allenbury Gardens represent what happens when maintenance and operating care is not adequate.

Click here for a map of Toronto Community Housing locations in Willowdale Don Valley We see a band north of Sheppard as well as on Finch from Leslie to Vic Park.

The rumour mill has started. The city and its housing agency must keep all residents informed and involved in planning for change.

How Safe is Ward 33?

We post on this subject after looking at crime maps published in the Star yesterday. You may not be aware the Toronto Police Service website has a "crime statistics" section that allows you to follow criminal activity by police station/division

Click here for the link on Division 33 Stats . You will see some interesting numbers that suggest crime numbers are up compared to last year.

From the Saturday Star online, we can find Criminal Charge Maps for Toronto by patrol area.

Ward 33 residents should be concerned. For violent, firearm and property charges the area south of the Peanut is in the high count ranges.

(The Star data provided this data as part of an investigative special report on race, crime and policing. Click here for its Data and Background Resources available on line.)

2010 Budget and Mayor Decisions Intertwined?

Our post, 2010 Budget Discussion _ Part 2 (see below) highlights two recent newspaper articles related to city financial control and planning (that is, the world of budgets and taxes). As well, they point to the strong and central role of the new and current mayor in setting the course for the tough journey ahead.

In today's Star Opinion section, Michael Warren ( Bring Toronto transit into the 21st century Regional amalgamation, cheaper labour and private investment are key ingredients for a modernized system) provides some further background worth our attention. He raises some strong discussion points. Here are some highlight excerpts to ponder:

Need for Private Sector Parity in Public Contracts:
"A recent study revealed that City of Toronto employees, including TTC and roads employees, are paid 11.6 per cent more on average than their private-sector counterparts. In addition, they have job security and guaranteed pensions rarely seen in the private sector. If their productivity were higher, that might help – but it isn't."

Role of Mayor & Province in GTA Public Transit
"The next mayor has to lead this move to operational amalgamation across the GTA. However, clear conditions should be set. The province must agree to return to providing a significant share of the operating costs for any new regional transit authority – and to keep its 25-year "Big Move" capital funding promises."

"The next mayor has to keep the socio-economic "value case" for enhanced transit in front of all the stakeholders, and orchestrate effective opposition if the possibility of cuts begins to surface"

UPDATE: ALSO SEE THIS FEB 21 Star Opinion Piece: First task for new mayor: Get spending under control

Smitherman for Mayor, Murrary as MPP and Cabinet Member ???

Yesterday, Glen Murray, the ex-mayor of Winnipeg and a defeated federal Liberal candidate in Manitoba became an elected representative in Toronto_ for the Liberal Party of Ontario. Some thought he would have made an excellent candidate for city mayor (see older posts) . Now it appears McQuinty will find a spot for Glen in his cabinet according to news rumours.

Glen has been an active resident in Toronto for about 6 years and some thought he might run for city mayor with his strong urban background and urban insights (head of urban study institute in Toronto).

When Smitherman decided to run, obviously things changed. And we might wonder if Murray taking over Smitherman's seats (as MPP and a Cabinet role) was a political tactic or just political serendipity.

The media has not yet looked at this angle.

City Parks and Dogs Off Leash

You've likely seen the issue of allowing dogs off leash in city parks in the news. There is a post below (see older posts) , "leash free dog park" (Nov 16, 2009) from a Ward 33 group advocating / requesting permit for an off leash area in local Ward 33 parks (email: area33@live.com).

(On the W33AC Election night, this group reported on its permit application. We will might anticipate our ward councillor to initiate a community consultation meeting on this contentious matter.)

An article by Dave Nickle in the Mirror (Feb 4, 2010) provides an update on what's happening downtown where our city councillors hang out.
http://www.insidetoronto.com/news/cityhall/article/546450--dog-park-policy-gets-overhaul

"The revised people, dogs and parks strategy is intended to streamline the decision-making procedures and take into ways to finance the construction of dog parks... The city's parks department has a more systematic approach, which city staff hope will make the process less political. The policy comes up with rules to limit off-leash areas in parks and parkettes that are two acres or less... And no longer will an off-leash area require that a local dog owner Association be established to police and manage the area."

So far there are no off leash dog area in our local parks although some parks in the North District/North York have off leash areas. Apparently, it costs $150,000 to modify (fence an area, etc) to provide an off leash area.

Given the condition of parks in our ward, many might think this money would be better spent on improving our local parks and street environments instead of providing a place to exercise dogs.

For parks with off leash areas go to this city link:
http://www.toronto.ca/parks/dogsoffleash_list.htm

On this page, you can also link to :

Proposed sites for off-leash areas.

Denied Applications for Off-Leash Area

People, Dogs and Parks Strategy main page

City bylaws requires all dogs and cats in the city to have a license (cost varies) and carry a tag:
http://www.toronto.ca/animal_services/licensing.htm