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.