Mayor Olivia Chow's Toronto

[Northern Light]

Ok, the report on Toronto's Financial Future is out.

And wow, its a doozy.

The short-term issue is 1.5B fiscal gap next year, without considering improvements to services.

But it the unmet capital needs that are the jaw dropper, 46.5B over the next 10 years, for stuff already on the needs/wants list.

The summary is here:

Agenda Item History 2023.EX7.1

Agenda Item History 2023.EX7.1

secure.toronto.ca

Lots of and lots recommendations, but still a few things kicked out at least as far as the budget process (reviewing IMIT and next year's specific property tax hike among many others)

But there are many revenue raising rec's here, some of them quite good, which would be approved, in advance of the budget process if this report goes through Council.

- Notables, substantial increases in the LTT for anyone with 3 or more properties, and for higher-value properties.

- Freeing the Toronto Parking Authority to charge whatever it wants for on-street rates without Council approval.

- An not so veiled threat to the province that:

- The City has insufficient budget capacity to operate all the transit lines the province is building and will have to leave them to the province to operate. (Includes Finch)

- The City has insufficient funds to operate the already approved 978 long term care beds approved for Toronto and will have to cancel the projects and/or de-fund them.

I'm now going to read the details and report back to UT

 

[Towered]

Ok, the report on Toronto's Financial Future is out.

And wow, its a doozy.

The short-term issue is 1.5B fiscal gap next year, without considering improvements to services.

But it the unmet capital needs that are the jaw dropper, 46.5B over the next 10 years, for stuff already on the needs/wants list.

The summary is here:

Agenda Item History 2023.EX7.1

Agenda Item History 2023.EX7.1

secure.toronto.ca

Lots of and lots recommendations, but still a few things kicked out at least as far as the budget process (reviewing IMIT and next year's specific property tax hike among many others)

But there are many revenue raising rec's here, some of them quite good, which would be approved, in advance of the budget process if this report goes through Council.

- Notables, substantial increases in the LTT for anyone with 3 or more properties, and for higher-value properties.

View attachment 500609

- Freeing the Toronto Parking Authority to charge whatever it wants for on-street rates without Council approval.

- An not so veiled threat to the province that:

- The City has insufficient budget capacity to operate all the transit lines the province is building and will have to leave them to the province to operate. (Includes Finch)

- The City has insufficient funds to operate the already approved 978 long term care beds approved for Toronto and will have to cancel the projects and/or de-fund them.

I'm now going to read the details and report back to UT

I'm already dreading Doug Ford's reaction to this, which he will no doubt blame on the city being "lefty".

 

[christiesplits]

- Freeing the Toronto Parking Authority to charge whatever it wants for on-street rates without Council approval.

I expect the BIAs, especially outside the core, being very opposed to this.

 

[Northern Light]

Ok.......I'm on the detailed report now, and it is not silent on property taxes........

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2023/ex/bgrd/backgroundfile-238626.pdf

There is an implicit recommendation to raise them to the average of the other large GTA municipalities .

This would mean a structural rate increase of 10-12% beyond any inflationary increase. The report considers the option of phasing these in over 2-3 years.

My Comment: Yes, and yes. approve it now, plan accordingly:

From the report:

We'll come back to revenue; here's a look at expense reduction options discussed:

My comment:

I would oppose number 2 as structured. i actually favour fewer concessions, but I want any savings directed to lowering fees for those same units. I do not want income-based concessions as there is a stigma issue, and effectiveness issue (reach); and these are administratively burdensome.

A simple fare cap of 40 fares per month produces a much better solution for TTC vs the low-income pass program (its just as cheap to the end user), and nixing seniors and student fares, but then lowering the Presto base-line fare to a flat $2.75 per ride, produces greater benefit and paves the way for only one type of Presto Card an no cash fares.

My comment: Careful about #3 above, the City's centralized procurement and HR almost certainly cost more than the previous disparate divisional services, because of all the extra bureaucracy and time lags.

To be continued in next post

 

[afransen]

Disappointing that a land value tax is not contemplated. This could raise significant revenues and increase the purchase price affordability of homes, while encouraging investment.

 

[Northern Light]

There's a slew of options small and large to cut costs, and I cannot reasonably report on them all.

I will briefly summarize

The sale/privatization of Toronto Hydro is being given weight.

That the option of telling the province to upload the entire TTC is discussed.

That the City clearly expects the province to either upload the Gardiner/DVP or impose cost-sharing on the suburban municipalities for it.

****

The recommendations on major capital projects and possible cuts/deferrals are obscured, The options are laid out, but every project has had its name/title removed, in favour of projects 1, 2, 3, 4 etc.

The City is clearly reconsidering the current form of 2 large capital projects, but does not say what they are.

However, it does give their budget costs by year, so we can dig UT.

****

On Long Term Care homes, the City notes that the province has not increased the construction subsidy it pays to operators/builders of same since 2018. (that's absurd, why is this not an indexed value?)

****

Here's something I like:

From the revenue options report:

Here's something I support:

I think we'll leave it there for now! Lots more details if you follow the links and read along for yourself.

Happy Reading UT!

 

[allengeorge]

First off - thank you @Northern Light for the excerpts. It’s great to see this all laid out.

I’m truly hopeful that Olivia Chow and Council will make the hard choices to fix Toronto’s structural problems. (Sidenote: I truly worry that if she does do the dirty work, voters will toss her out and replace her with someone with visions of fairy dust and ‘efficiencies’.)

I was truly surprised by one thing though: is the city legitimately thinking of not running the Crosstown or Finch?!

 

[Towered]

I was truly surprised by one thing though: is the city legitimately thinking of not running the Crosstown or Finch?!

It's a bluff designed to get the province to pay the operating costs. Not sure it will work though, especially with Thug at the helm...

 

[Northern Light]

First off - thank you @Northern Light for the excerpts. It’s great to see this all laid out.

You're welcome!

I’m truly hopeful that Olivia Chow and Council will make the hard choices to fix Toronto’s structural problems.

As do I!

(Sidenote: I truly worry that if she does do the dirty work, voters will toss her out and replace her with someone with visions of fairy dust and ‘efficiencies’.)

I honestly think governments of all political stripes are inclined, whenever possible to 'force' the tough decisions on their successors.

Its regrettable, and more than that, irresponsible.

But its quite common.

Note that Mulroney, federally, left all the tough choices to the Chretien-Martin Liberals. Not a new idea.

I was truly surprised by one thing though: is the city legitimately thinking of not running the Crosstown or Finch?!

I honestly haven't spoken w/the authors of that, at this point..........but I would say to read it more a negotiating ploy, the same type of which I myself suggested with the Gardiner/DVP, shut it down (or threaten to) until the province coughs up.

But there's an element of a game of chicken/bluff calling.

Saying that, this might be the right time, Ford is being pilloried over the Greenbelt, the next election is now less than 3 years away, and about 2 years by the time this report is actionable in the above respect.

 

[christiesplits]

Ok.......I'm on the detailed report now, and it is not silent on property taxes........

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2023/ex/bgrd/backgroundfile-238626.pdf

There is an implicit recommendation to raise them to the average of the other large GTA municipalities .

This would mean a structural rate increase of 10-12% beyond any inflationary increase. The report considers the option of phasing these in over 2-3 years.

My Comment: Yes, and yes. approve it now, plan accordingly:

From the report:

View attachment 500611

View attachment 500612
View attachment 500613

We'll come back to revenue; here's a look at expense reduction options discussed:

View attachment 500614

View attachment 500615
View attachment 500616

View attachment 500617


View attachment 500618

My comment:

I would oppose number 2 as structured. i actually favour fewer concessions, but I want any savings directed to lowering fees for those same units. I do not want income-based concessions as there is a stigma issue, and effectiveness issue (reach); and these are administratively burdensome.

A simple fare cap of 40 fares per month produces a much better solution for TTC vs the low-income pass program (its just as cheap to the end user), and nixing seniors and student fares, but then lowering the Presto base-line fare to a flat $2.75 per ride, produces greater benefit and paves the way for only one type of Presto Card an no cash fares.

View attachment 500619

View attachment 500620


View attachment 500621

My comment: Careful about #3 above, the City's centralized procurement and HR almost certainly cost more than the previous disparate divisional services, because of all the extra bureaucracy and time lags.

View attachment 500622


View attachment 500623


To be continued in next post

There's a slew of options small and large to cut costs, and I cannot reasonably report on them all.

I will briefly summarize

The sale/privatization of Toronto Hydro is being given weight.

That the option of telling the province to upload the entire TTC is discussed.

That the City clearly expects the province to either upload the Gardiner/DVP or impose cost-sharing on the suburban municipalities for it.

****

The recommendations on major capital projects and possible cuts/deferrals are obscured, The options are laid out, but every project has had its name/title removed, in favour of projects 1, 2, 3, 4 etc.

The City is clearly reconsidering the current form of 2 large capital projects, but does not say what they are.

However, it does give their budget costs by year, so we can dig UT.

****

On Long Term Care homes, the City notes that the province has not increased the construction subsidy it pays to operators/builders of same since 2018. (that's absurd, why is this not an indexed value?)

****

Here's something I like:

View attachment 500634

From the revenue options report:

View attachment 500635

View attachment 500636


View attachment 500637

View attachment 500638

View attachment 500639
View attachment 500640

View attachment 500641

Here's something I support:


View attachment 500642


I think we'll leave it there for now! Lots more details if you follow the links and read along for yourself.

Happy Reading UT!

Terrific summary and analysis, Northern.

Raising taxes is typically a tough test for a mayor's grip on council. Chow will need 13 votes to support any new revenue streams. The math seems to be in her favour.

12 very likely votes:

Perks
Fletcher
Morley
Matlow
Bravo
Myers
Malik (Deputy Mayor)
Moise
Carroll
McKelvie (Deputy Mayor)
Colle (Deputy Mayor)
Saxe

Plus she'll need one of:

Ainslie
Bradford
Cheng
Perruzza
Robinson
Thompson

 

[Northern Light]

Terrific summary and analysis, Northern.

Raising taxes is typically a tough test for a mayor's grip on council. Chow will need 13 votes to support any new revenue streams. The math seems to be in her favour.

12 very likely votes:

Perks
Fletcher
Morley
Matlow
Bravo
Myers
Malik (Deputy Mayor)
Moise
Carroll
McKelvie (Deputy Mayor)
Colle (Deputy Mayor)
Saxe

Plus she'll need one of:

Ainslie
Bradford
Cheng
Perruzza
Robinson
Thompson

Ainslie is on the Executive Ctte; she should have his vote.

The others are more question mark; but she's treated Bradford remarkably well in Ctte Assignments, and Perruzza is nominally NDP (though a bit of a wild card)

 

[W. K. Lis]

End "Free Parking" on strip mall and shopping mall parking lots. Have a 15-minute grace period, after which the parking tax gets applying and should be collected by a meter.

Should not be a "hidden" tax included as a cost of doing business. The property tax on the parking lot is a "hidden" tax included in the cost of doing business. A "hidden" tax would be paid by shoppers who do not use an automobile.The "parking tax" should be paid only be paid by those who use the parking lot.

 

[Richard White]

End "Free Parking" on strip mall and shopping mall parking lots. Have a 15-minute grace period, after which the parking tax gets applying and should be collected by a meter.

Should not be a "hidden" tax included as a cost of doing business. The property tax on the parking lot is a "hidden" tax included in the cost of doing business. A "hidden" tax would be paid by shoppers who do not use an automobile.The "parking tax" should be paid only be paid by those who use the parking lot.

Logistically though it would be easier to levy a surcharge on the owners of the facility on a per-parking spot basis. This can be added to their property tax bill, or something of that nature.

Yes you can have people pay to use the lot but can you imagine how hard it would be to maintain parking meters for a lot the size of Yorkdale or STC. You would need alot of meters otherwise there would be massive lineups.

 

[Northern Light]

Logistically though it would be easier to levy a surcharge on the owners of the facility on a per-parking spot basis. This can be added to their property tax bill, or something of that nature.

Yes you can have people pay to use the lot but can you imagine how hard it would be to maintain parking meters for a lot the size of Yorkdale or STC. You would need alot of meters otherwise there would be massive lineups.

This is correct.

This is what is contemplated.

The only other option considered would be some type of sales tax on a parking transaction, but that would require first imposing that parking can't be offered free and then require the province to permit a sales tax.

@W. K. Lis you may be happy to know that most large mall ownership groups will likely be shifting to some form of paid parking, as their leases permit, in the not too distant future. No decisions taken just yet.

Its likely that that parking costs will be absorbed by some retailers, and there will be a parking validation system. Bit of a pain, but it will discourage needless car trips as their will be a 'window shopping' penalty.

I expect you'll see a minimum purchase rule for validation.

 

[W. K. Lis]

This is correct.

This is what is contemplated.

The only other option considered would be some type of sales tax on a parking transaction, but that would require first imposing that parking can't be offered free and then require the province to permit a sales tax.

@W. K. Lis you may be happy to know that most large mall ownership groups will likely be shifting to some form of paid parking, as their leases permit, in the not too distant future. No decisions taken just yet.

Its likely that that parking costs will be absorbed by some retailers, and there will be a parking validation system. Bit of a pain, but it will discourage needless car trips as their will be a 'window shopping' penalty.

I expect you'll see a minimum purchase rule for validation.

"I expect you'll see a minimum purchase rule for validation." And if you didn't use a car? Would you get a discount if you walked or cycled or used a bus in?