News   Jun 24, 2024
 318     0 
News   Jun 21, 2024
 5.1K     6 
News   Jun 21, 2024
 1.9K     3 

New Land Transfer Tax

How long can this go on?
IMHO, until the city declares bankruptcy, the mayor and his key advisors on counsel resign and the Ontario gov't is forced to directly take over the running of the city. As long as the city tries to make the current circumstances work, the province will do nothing. If a child is having trouble swimming, but is making an effort and is showing some success the parent will not step in, but if the child stops swimming and sinks, the parent will come to the rescue.
 
The city can't declare bankruptcy.



So it can drown and swim all at the same time.
 
The Premier speaks out one side of the mouth for more Toronto taxes, then announces this. No doubt his opponents will point out his record on promises made versus promises kept. Nevertheless, should this happen, the city could begin to see some relief.



McGuinty to pledge $935-million for Ontario cities
Canadian Press
August 20, 2007 at 9:16 AM EDT

OTTAWA — Premier Dalton McGuinty will announce a four-year plan Monday to have the province take over social service costs now being paid by Ontario municipalities.

The Canadian Press has confirmed Mr. McGuinty will issue a pre-election pledge to upload $935-million in costs at an Ottawa meeting of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario.

The uploading plan would start Jan 1, if the McGuinty Liberals win re-election, and cover costs downloaded to municipalities by the previous Conservative government.

A government source says this is the next phase in a plan to ease the burden on property taxpayers while addressing the number one concern of municipalities.

Ontario residents currently pay the highest property taxes in the country to help pay for social services.

New Democrat Leader Howard Hampton announced last week that he too would take over some of those costs if elected premier on Oct. 10. He said an NDP government would pay for some transit costs, court costs and disability assistance.
 
The Premier speaks out one side of the mouth for more Toronto taxes, then announces this. No doubt his opponents will point out his record on promises made versus promises kept. Nevertheless, should this happen, the city could begin to see some relief.
His record on promises is pretty dire, and thus I'd not put much faith in this new one.
 
The main point being that he recognizes the problem and has finally suggested that it is a problem. It will be interesting to hear if Tory ups the ante, as it is his party that created this enormous mess in the first place.

Both McGuinty and Hampton can play the hero to a greater or lesser degree on this issue, but the Conservatives are responsible for this mess. It's their legacy of governing. People should think twice if they view the Conservatives as having the interest of Ontario's cities in mind. There is a big difference in questioning the promises of another leader, and repudiating the actions and resulting damage of one's own party.
 
Play the hero? The amount we're talking about, on an annual basis, is pathetically small--The Star pegged it at $38m for Toronto in '08. That's nothing! In other words, the new taxes are sure to get the go-ahead in the absence of any other options.

As for me, I'm voting NDP this time. Unofrtunately in my riding (Toronto Ctr) it doesn't matter...
 
NDP for me too, unless something big between now and October happens. I usually switch between NDP and Liberals, depending on the candidate and how I feel at the time. My old Liberal MP could count on my vote, partly as I liked her politics and knew her a little bit. I also like my current Liberal MP as well, (I like his politics quite a lot), except he hasn't responded to my emails, which does go against him.

I'll certainly let my MPP know why I am planning on voting this way.

Provincially, I've voted NDP in 1999 (my first election) because the Liberal in Brampton West-Mississauga is an idiot (I know because I went to all-candidates meetings, all three candidates even went to my OAC politics class in 1999, even Clement), which even meant refusing to participate in strategic voting against that shit-eater Tony Clement. I think I did the same in 2003.
 
.
Fiscal cloud could be Miller's silver lining

August 20, 2007
by Royson James

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/247893


As crazy as this sounds, Mayor David Miller today is in a better position than ever to achieve a permanent fix for Toronto's fiscal mess.

For the first time since becoming mayor in 2003, Miller has everyone's attention on the budget – closing community centres and libraries has a way of accomplishing what endless talk fails to do. Miller's next "ask" must be for exactly what the City of Toronto needs, nothing less.

Yes, the city's budget is nearly $600 million in the hole for next year. Yes, debt has soared past $2 billion. Yes, the mayor has been announcing service cuts that have further angered residents. And, yes, he has no apparent plan in place to deliver a favourable council vote in October that would restore the nearly $350 million in new taxes deferred last month.

But the mayor has an enormous, historic opportunity. He must seize it by making a bold and risky play for higher property taxes, for new revenue sources not tied to property, and for help from Ottawa and Queen's Park. This three-pronged approach should lace his every speech and strategic manoeuvre.

To ask citizens for anything less than what's needed to build a great city – anything less than a revolutionary financing plan – is to blow this chance.

To pretend that the deferred taxes come close to fixing Toronto's fiscal mess is a mistake. They don't.

Nor can new money from Queen's Park, an essential part of a rescue plan, provide the kind of investment capital required to rebuild the city's infrastructure. Even the 1 cent of GST revenues that Miller wants from the federal government would not be enough to deliver us a shining city on Lake Ontario.

To survive, in fact, Toronto needs all three. And beyond that, if the city is to thrive and become robust and innovative to compete against well-financed world cities, its ratepayers must be persuaded to shoulder slightly higher taxes – with designation of the extra revenues tied to an identifiable renaissance effort.

Miller must know the budget controversy already has residents on edge, attuned to his words and pronouncements about money. He must spell out the situation in bloody, stark terms – using charts and graphics to sell the message to audiences large and small, grassroots and business elite.

He cannot, must not, return to the people with another set of pleas next year and the following year. He must give citizens the full road map now, projected over several years, or lose all credibility.

A few months back, during the 2007 budget deliberations, the city's chief financial officer, Joe Pennachetti, and city manager Shirley Hoy warned that Toronto was headed for financial disaster. Few batted an eyelash. We'd heard the warnings for more than a decade.

"We've never pillaged the parks department or laid off firefighters and I guess until that happens, the average citizen won't get it," Pennachetti said.

The cuts have started. Citizens are beginning to "get it." Many still need to be convinced. But to stop here is to squander this new awareness.

Don't spend time blaming Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong and others for the cuts. Turn the deferral setback into an advantage.

Tell citizens the entire, ugly story. Challenge them to help make Toronto great despite the obstacles.

Lead, mayor. And don't blow it being cautious.
.
 
Play the hero? The amount we're talking about, on an annual basis, is pathetically small--

It was a relative term. There is a big difference between "playing" the hero and actually being one. McGuinty has a very long way to go before being one, imo.
 
It really annoys me when I see "bailout" in respect of the downloaded but unfunded mandates. If someone brings a debtor to court, who say bought goods and didn't pay for them, should we expect the judge to tell the creditor - "telling the deadbeat to pay you would be a bailout for you"?
 
It really annoys me when I see "bailout" in respect of the downloaded but unfunded mandates. If someone brings a debtor to court, who say bought goods and didn't pay for them, should we expect the judge to tell the creditor - "telling the deadbeat to pay you would be a bailout for you"?
Yes, but this is not a case between equals. The Province tells the city what their responsbilities are, and the city must accept it. The city has no recourse, so court of appeal or second opinion.
 
Yes, but this is not a case between equals. The Province tells the city what their responsbilities are, and the city must accept it. The city has no recourse, so court of appeal or second opinion.

Little different. For many fees the province said what the responsibilities were, and indicated they would pay x% of the bill. The pay x% of the bill for most municipalities, but not Toronto.

This is not the entire problem but if the province paid x%, as indicated, it would inject a significant dollar value into the city.
 
Little different. For many fees the province said what the responsibilities were, and indicated they would pay x% of the bill. The pay x% of the bill for most municipalities, but not Toronto.

This is not the entire problem but if the province paid x%, as indicated, it would inject a significant dollar value into the city.
True. However as long as the city will cover the cost of traditionally provincial programs, nothing will be done. The city should have from day one refused to cover these costs, and waited for Harris to send in the OPP to arrest council.
 

Back
Top