feature — Comments Off on For whom the road tolls
01
Jun 11

For whom the road tolls

So only days after Gordon Chong got caught by Royson James musing about the necessity for road tolls to fund Ford’s much-ballyhooed Sheppard subway, the mayor shut down the idea. “It’s nonsense,” he said. “I don’t support road tolls.”

(Later, Ontario’s Environment Commissioner would champion the idea of road pricing in a report. “We need to reduce the number of single-passenger vehicle trips in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton area,” he said.)

Ford’s unwillingness to consider road pricing isn’t surprising. At the very least, however, Chong’s suggestion of tolls seemed to trigger a bit of reflection from other councillors about the reality of the transit funding situation. Even the Ford-allied Peter Milczyn, who chairs the Planning & Growth committee, told the Toronto Star’s Daniel Dale and Paul Moloney that “development charges are not going to pay for a subway.”

The transit debate continued at City Hall on Monday, as the Planning committee debated two motions relating to transit on Sheppard and Finch.

Over at his blog, Steve Munro does a hell of a job with a blow-by-blow recap of the meeting:

Councillor Joe Mihevc (former TTC Vice-Chair) argued that avoiding discussion now would lead to a finished product being presented for an up-or-down decision with no time for debate or public input.  He argued that people affected by the cancellation of Transit City want input into alternative plans now.  Stintz replied that Metrolinx is running a series of meetings regarding the Eglinton line, but what these have to do with service on Sheppard and Finch is hard to fathom.

…

As the debate continued, it was clear that Stintz was being too clever for her own good by trying to treat work-to-date as not part of “Transit City”.  This is an example of the gyrations through which Mayor Ford’s team will go to warp history to fit their agenda.

via Think About Transit on Finch and Sheppard, But Not Yet | Steve Munro.

Munro’s summary suggests that Stintz, even as TTC chair, still isn’t playing a significant role in defining the future of transit expansion in the city. It’s not overly surprising that she wouldn’t be able to provide concrete answers on the future of “Transportation City” given that, a couple of months ago, the mayor surprised her by floating the idea of a new subway line on Finch.

So what next? Nobody really knows. Chong has since backpedaled on his earlier comments, telling the CBC that “tolls would be one of the last things that would be considered” to fund subway expansion. He says he’ll have a business case for the privately-funded Sheppard project in a few months. They’ll get some P3 money from the feds, most likely, but that will amount to less than a quarter of the needed funds.

As for Finch? Buses. Fancy buses, maybe. I’d suggest painting a racing stripe on the side to make them look faster.

feature — Comments Off on When will council get to vote on transit plans?
30
May 11

When will council get to vote on transit plans?

As part of the last council meeting, Councillor Janet Davis brought forward an administrative inquiry, asking several pointed questions about the supposed ‘death’ of Transit City, the new transit plan cooked up by the province and the mayor’s office, and the TTIL organization headed by Gordon Chong.

City Manager Joe Pennachetti penned a response to Davis’ inquiries and, though its rather light on detail, the document does contain confirmation of something that’s been an open question since this whole transit mess began: council does indeed get a vote on this. Ford cannot act unilaterally.

Pennachetti outlines several areas where a council vote will be required. First, council must officially adopt the memorandum of understanding signed by the mayor and the province:

The TTC is not a signatory to the Memorandum. The Memorandum is a non-binding framework for the negotiation of agreements to be approved by Council. Therefore the Mayor signed the Memorandum as indicating his desire that the parties give consideration to the new Transportation Plan. Any agreements to implement the Memorandum will require Council approval.

Council will also get to debate and vote on any financial penalties that arise from the cancellation of contracts relating to Transit City:

Any liabilities associated with the agreements necessary to implement the provisions contained in the Memorandum will be set out in the report or reports seeking Council approval.

Lastly, council will also have to approve any funding arrangement drawn from the Federal Government’s P3 fund:

It is anticipated that any federal P3 funding agreement will be conditional on Council approval.

So council must vote. The question still lingering is when will council vote? At the very least, why hasn’t the memo outlining the new agreement between the city and the province/Metrolinx — which was released in March — come before council for approval? What’s the delay?

link — Comments Off on For Ford, credit when credit is due
30
May 11

For Ford, credit when credit is due

The Toronto Sun’s Don Peat scored an actual, honest-to-goodness interview with Rob Ford. It’s rather light on detail and hard-hitting questions, but it’s worth reading anyway.

I liked this part:

Ford laughs when he’s reminded that retiring councillor Kyle Rae predicted, if elected, Ford would be mayor in name only. Retiring councillor Howard Moscoe said Ford wouldn’t be able to pass gas without council’s permission.

“Well, I’ve done a lot,” he says, shaking his head and smiling. “I’ve done everything we’ve said we were going to do.”

via Six months in: Ford is large and in charge | Home | Toronto Sun.

I already said this last week, but I find it incredibly disconcerting that Ford believes he’s nearing the end of his political agenda. Not only because the agenda is so light on ambitious — though it is: rescind a tax or two, eliminate potential for annoying strikes, kill some council perks, and he’s done? — but because it’s not even accurate.

The Sun also has a list of Ford’s supposed accomplishments. But here are some things Ford hasn’t actually done, despite claims to the contrary:

  • reduced the city’s overall operating budget, or “reined in spending.”
  • secured funding — much less broken ground — on any new subway project
  • privatized garbage collection, or done anything that has ‘reined in’ public sector unions or reduced labour costs

His actual accomplishments so far are actually relatively meagre, typified more by the city’s new lack of ambition, and a handful of spite-based initiatives, instead of some kind of Brave New World of fiscal conservatism.

If Ford can succeed in delivering on his promises for a reduced operating budget, high-quality/low-cost privately-delivered services and a funded subway extension (The Eglinton LRT is a David Miller legacy, and does not count), then he can realistically crow about his accomplishments. But that hasn’t happened yet.

Also from Peat’s article is a bit from Deputy Mayor Doug Holyday:

Asked why the Ford administration has targeted so many of Miller’s legacy projects, Holyday says it’s due to necessity.

“So many things we couldn’t afford to do in the way he planned to do them,” Holyday says.

He pointed to the $24-million Fort York pedestrian bridge blown up by the public works committee.

“We would have had to borrow every cent to build it,” Holyday says.

I’m very confused by fiscal conservatives who savage the idea of debt, as if it’s some terrible way to finance capital projects. How are they suggesting the city invest in infrastructure, if not through financing? Is the province supposed to fund everything for us? Or is this just another private-sector magic beans thing?

feature — Comments Off on Ford will have to institute road tolls to pay for promised subway
30
May 11

Ford will have to institute road tolls to pay for promised subway

The Toronto Star’s Royson James:

It will likely take new road tolls and congestion charges and other revenue tools to help deliver “the biggest transit deal in North America, or perhaps the world,” says the man hired to pave the path toward the $4 billion Sheppard Subway.

As such, claims that the private sector will step in and build the line on their own are not realistic, says Gordon Chong, ex-city councillor, ex-chair of GO Transit, ex-TTC commissioner and now chair of the Toronto Transit Infrastructure Ltd., the dormant investment arm of the transit company.

via James: Ford’s subways will require tolls and grants – thestar.com.

In other words: this subway will never happen. Not with this mayor.

The sad part of all of this is that road pricing is a good and necessary thing. It’s an inevitable part of every major urban centre in this country finally getting their financial shit together.

But road pricing to fund a subway extension on Sheppard is a terrible idea. It’s the kind of thing that dooms tolls and congestion charges to the same dustbin of political third rails that currently houses photo radar, religious school funding and the Ontario NDP.

Here’s why: there is no report anywhere that shows projected subway-level ridership on Sheppard. Not now and not decades from now. Not enough people want to ride this train. It’s a black hole, dooming the TTC to spiralling operating costs for little network benefit.

The worst part is that this isn’t a case where Ford traded one far-off, conceptual transit plan for another. The Sheppard East LRT — an alternative that would have provided rapid, high-capacity transit for a quarter of the cost of the proposed subway, and covered more kilometres — was under construction. It would have opened before the next municipal election.

We traded real, shovels-in-the-ground transit for magic, private-sector beans. And now this administration must reap the results.

link — Comments Off on Jim Flaherty praises “boondoggle” waterfront development
27
May 11

Jim Flaherty praises “boondoggle” waterfront development

Federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty was put in a bit of an akwkward position yesterday, as he attended the official groundbreaking for Waterfront Toronto’s anticipated Underpass Park. Flaherty, a long-time family friend of the Fords, expressed his support for the project, which is part of a larger plan by Waterfront Toronto that the Fords and their council allies have been highly critical of in recent times.

The Toronto Star’s Christopher Hume:

“This is transformative,” declared federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty. “It’s important not just for Toronto, but for Canada.”

On hand for the ceremonial shovelling of the earth Thursday, Flaherty joined a gaggle of dignitaries that included provincial Minister of Research and Innovation, Glen Murray, and local municipal councillor Pam McConnell.

Conspicuous in his absence was Toronto Mayor Rob Ford, whose doppelganger, Doug Ford, has been happy to share his thoughts about the waterfront, as half-baked as they may be.

via Hume: Underpass Park will change the city forever – thestar.com.

If even someone like Jim Flaherty can understand the importance of public investment along the waterfront, why can’t Rob and Doug Ford?

link — Comments Off on The mayor laughed heartily
27
May 11

The mayor laughed heartily

The Toronto Star’s Daniel Dale attended a fundraiser for the man who would be Councillor Maria Augimeri’s challenger on Wednesday night. Also in attendance was Mayor Rob Ford, whose star power burned bright enough to draw some 50 attendees to the $300-a-head event.

Dale got a great quote from Ford in a brief interview:

In a brief but unmistakably campaign-style speech, Ford called the appeal “just a temporary setback” and [Gus] Cusimano “the next councillor in Ward 9.”

Asked later whether the speech was appropriate given that a new election has not been called, Ford paused, then said, “I can pretty much say what I want, right?” He then laughed heartily.

via No Ward 9 byelection? Doesn’t matter to Mayor Ford – thestar.com. (Emphasis added.)

I really do wish he talked to the media more often. It’d be fun.

link — Comments Off on Mammoliti pretends city can withhold Pride funding if QuAIA participates
27
May 11

Mammoliti pretends city can withhold Pride funding if QuAIA participates

On Tuesday, the city’s Executive Committee — after a really awkward and largely unnecessary meeting — decided to accept the City Manager’s report that the phrase “Queers Against Israeli Apartheid” does not violate the city’s anti-discrimination policy. Despite rumours and threats, Councillor Giorgio Mammoliti did not move some kind of ridiculous and hard-to-enforce motion that would require Pride Toronto to write a letter promising that QuAIA would not take part in the parade.

Afterwards, Mammoliti played tough with his warnings, as reported by the Toronto Sun’s Don Peat:

“If QuAIA surfaces and does their thing and if Pride doesn’t attempt to squash them, then I will be moving forward, as some others, to hold the funding,” Mammoliti said.

The decision means the status quo stays in place but allows councillors the option of going after funding if the group takes place, Mammoliti said.

Council agreed last yeart to withhold Pride funding until after the parade in case QuAIA participated.

via Pride Toronto clears city hurdle | Toronto & GTA | News | Toronto Sun.

Except that isn’t true. The motion councillors agreed to last year said this:

City Council direct that funding for Pride Toronto be paid after the parade and be conditional upon Pride Toronto requiring all registered participants to comply with the City of Toronto’s Anti-Discrimination Policy.

Notice that the motion says nothing specific about QuAIA whose message, it’s been ruled, does not violate the city’s anti-discrimination policy.

Without an additional motion or a change to the city’s anti-discrimination policy, my read on this is that the city has no recourse to deny Pride Toronto its funding this year, even if QuAIA participates.

link — Comments Off on Setting policy by imagined consensus
27
May 11

Setting policy by imagined consensus

Speaking of Doug Ford, I thought his contribution to an article regarding the Jarvis Street bike lanes by Marcia Chen and Ashleigh Smollet of CityNews.ca was kind of interesting:

Not even a year after they were installed, the fate of the contentious Jarvis Street bike lanes is in question.

“We would like to eliminate them,” said councillor Doug Ford. “We have had more complaints about the bike lanes on Jarvis than any other road in Toronto. Hundreds and hundreds of people.”

But ward councillor Karyn Wong-Tam disagreed, noting the revitalization of the downtown’s east side depends on the lanes and other projects on Jarvis.

“Hundreds? No, definitely we haven’t received hundreds,” Wong-Tam said. “I don’t think we’ve had even one hundred.”

via Rob Ford may consider removing Jarvis bike lanes – CityNews.

It’s a neat encapsulation of Ford-brand politics. Both Doug and Rob consistently back up their pet issues with claims that they’ve received hundreds — sometimes thousands — of phone calls supporting them. It’s a tired, easily-mockable refrain. There’s no way to confirm the reality of their claims, nor is there a way to quantify, track and analyze this data. In real terms, their claims are worse than useless.

Even if Doug Ford were accurate, and they — leaving aside for now the issue of who they is, because people really shouldn’t be complaining to the councillor in Ward 2 about an issue with infrastructure in Ward 27 — had received hundreds of calls, is that enough reason to eliminate lanes that are, by the city’s own estimates, used by hundreds of cyclists every day?

link — Comments Off on Is Doug Ford good for Toronto?
27
May 11

Is Doug Ford good for Toronto?

One cover story at a time, The Grid’s Ed Keenan is writing what would be, if bound together, a very good book about the Rob Ford mayoralty. His latest looks past the mayor and discusses Councillor Doug Ford, a figure referred to by some — including, sometimes, me — as the man who’s really setting the agenda for this city.

As part of the feature, Keenan talked to a number of left-leaning councillors, who seemed relatively optimistic about Doug Ford’s presence at City Hall:

Both supporters and detractors of the Fords say that as Doug learns the ropes at City Hall, he may represent the best hope for a functional government. No one expects that he will suddenly turn his back on his right-wing ideology (“That’s his religion,” says Councillor Glenn De Baeremaeker of Scarborough). But, as Carroll says, “If it turns out that he is a little more of an empath, he may go back to the mayor’s boardroom saying, ‘We need to listen to this person, whether our politics are aligned or not.’”

Beyond that, Vaughan has seen something else he considers promising in Doug’s approach. “Doug is more likely to see the merits of a good idea than his brother. His brother looks at the source of the idea instead of the merits of the argument. Rob is made into a better mayor with Doug’s presence here. The family made a wise decision to send a second son.”

via Doug Ford: Mr. Personality | The Grid TO.

I don’t think there’s any denying that having Doug at City Hall has helped Rob tremendously. Doug has kept the mayor’s once-famous temper in check. There’s even been the occasional compromise — though they’re rarer than they should be.

Still, though, I’m wondering if in the long-term Toronto would have been better off without Doug Ford. A free-wheeling, old-school Mayor Rob Ford would have made for a more explosive and chaotic council, but he also would have been more likely to burn himself out earlier. He could have been marginalized with a firm majority of council against him.

Without his brother, a second term for Mayor Rob Ford would have been challenging under the best of circumstances. With Doug around, another four years is far more plausible.

Good for Rob Ford but, I’d argue, bad for Toronto.

The thing that worries me most about Doug Ford is that he’s more calculating. He’s better equipped to work political angles, to court allies and to spin issues to fit what Councillor De Baeremaeker aptly calls his “religion” of right-wing ideology. His younger brother is much more of a what-you-see-is-what-you-get personality. Headstrong and sometimes destructive, but always pretty obvious.

Doug Ford is different. He can, and will, surprise us.

feature — Comments Off on City Council Scorecard: Garbage, Bridges, Committees & Sewage
25
May 11

City Council Scorecard: Garbage, Bridges, Committees & Sewage

Toronto Council Scorecard

May 25, 2011 Update: Download (PDF) – Download (PNG) – Google Docs

Last week saw a big three-day council meeting filled with all sorts of exciting developments. I’ve added four votes to the City Council Scorecard. By my count, Council has now considered 17 major items since their term began in December.

In other exciting developments, I’ve finally published the scorecard as a Google Spreadsheet for easier viewing.

New Votes

The four votes added:

  • PW3.1 — The garbage issue, pertaining to solid waste collection west of Yonge Street and litter collection in parks. While initially written as an all-in-one motion that would see council vote to both send a contract out to tender and automatically approve the best bid through the Bid Committee, the mayor and his team conceded to their opponents prior to the meeting and promised to amend the item. As passed, the item is an invitation to the private sector to submit bids. Council will then examine their numbers versus the status quo, and determine how to best proceed.
  • MM8.6 — The motion that killed the Fort York bridge. Sticklers and apologists will tell you that the bridge wasn’t killed when Councillor Mike Layton’s motion to reintroduce the item to council failed to achieve a two-thirds majority vote, but they’re being pedantic. The outcome of this vote means that it will likely be 2015 before anything gets built, which is a lifetime in political terms.
  • EX5.3, Motion 1a — The ultimate outcome of the mayor’s attempt to eliminate citizen advisory committees was delayed by a month, as motions to save many of the committees on the chopping block were referred to the mayor’s office. Staff will report back at the next council meeting, at which time we’ll learn which of them — if any — will survive. One committee that will definitely live on is the Aboriginal Affairs Committee, as Layton was successful in passing a motion that saved the group, despite the objections of Mayor Ford. A relatively minor vote compared to others on the scorecard, but important because it was a major defeat for the mayor.
  • PW3.5, Motion 1 — In an item relating to the treatment facility at Ashbridges Bay, Councillor Gord Perks moved an amendment that would see the city move toward using environmentally-friendly ultraviolet light technology in the facility, instead of the chlorination process used in other city facilities. Team Ford lost this one, though they might have won had more councillors been in the chamber when voting took place.

Trend Watch

Only 13 councillors remain in the 100% club, having voted with the mayor on every major item. The are: Paul Ainslie, Vincent Crisanti,  Mike Del Grande, Doug Ford, Mark Grimes, Doug Holyday, Norman Kelly,  Denzil Minnan-Wong,  Frances Nunziata, Cesar Palacio, David Shiner, Michael Thompson and Giorgio Mammoliti. On the other end of the spectrum, Gord Perks and Pam McConnell continue to share the crown in the anti-Ford club, with Perks holding a slight edge because McConnell has missed a couple of votes.

Questions

Questions about the Council Scorecard? Read my notes on methodology. Also, you can email me.

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →