News   Jul 12, 2024
 139     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 450     0 
News   Jul 11, 2024
 5.4K     0 

Next Mayor of Toronto?

And when it comes to the municipal level, there's hardly any balance at all. Council has leaned left pretty much since Lastman left. And what have we gotten for that? Deteriorating services, tax increases, and unions that now use strikes to get to arbitration instead of bargaining.

Deteriorating services? Really!!? Like what?
TTC service has been expanded in Miller's term. Its hard to gauge the quality of the Police service, but there are certainly more of them. Libraries are being improved and expanded. Snow removal is certainly more competent that it was in the Lastman days. Lots of trees being planted. New skate park in the Beaches. The roads are being neglected, but other than that...

People seem to expect a pass with that 'Toronto, city in decline' cliche. I don't buy it. Services are not worse than they were in Lastman's term.

Perhaps the Union is using a strike to get into arbitration because that's how Lastman and Eves handled it in 2002?
 
Perhaps the Union is using a strike to get into arbitration because that's how Lastman and Eves handled it in 2002?
The union likely wants arbitration because it will probably get them a better deal than they are being offered now.
 
Deteriorating services? Really!!? Like what?
TTC service has been expanded in Miller's term. Its hard to gauge the quality of the Police service, but there are certainly more of them. Libraries are being improved and expanded. Snow removal is certainly more competent that it was in the Lastman days. Lots of trees being planted. New skate park in the Beaches. The roads are being neglected, but other than that...

People seem to expect a pass with that 'Toronto, city in decline' cliche. I don't buy it. Services are not worse than they were in Lastman's term.

I'll admit that it's an exaggeration to say that services have declined. But they most certainly have not kept up with population growth in the city. The TTC is crowded. The main arteries are congested. Heck, there's days when the public pools are crowded! And I dunno if it's a decline in quality or quantity of service, but how do you explain the growth in street trash in many corners of the city?

I am not going to pin all that on Miller. But for a guy who swept into office on a broom, he really has not done much to clean up the place.

Perhaps the Union is using a strike to get into arbitration because that's how Lastman and Eves handled it in 2002?

Well the unions are wily enough to repeat tried and true tactics to be sure. But do you really think Lastman would not have sought injunctions against the unions tactics such as delaying trash drop-off by residents for hours?

And aside from all this, you skirted the most important issue I raised in my post...p5connex suggested that fiscal conservatism is passe. Well if so, how is Toronto going to plug its 350 million dollar deficit. How willing do you think the province will be to help when they just handed over powers that were supposed to add hundreds of millions to Toronto's coffers? Powers that no other municipality in Ontario have. Miller's fate rides on McGuinty filling his begging bowl. It's easy to cry about the Conservative bogeyman when the feds aren't playing ball. How easy is it going to be for Miller when it's a Liberal premier? Next year's budget deliberations should be quite the eye-opener. We'll truly find out Miller and McGuinty are sufficiently BFFs for Dalton to hand over blank cheques for Toronto.
 
I'll admit that it's an exaggeration to say that services have declined.

"Exaggeration" is an understatement to say the least - Torontonians are truly spoiled by the incredible level of service provided to them.

But for a guy who swept into office on a broom, he really has not done much to clean up the place.

Strike aside, downtown Toronto has never been cleaner.
 
"Exaggeration" is an understatement to say the least - Torontonians are truly spoiled by the incredible level of service provided to them.

Especially since their taxes come no where near covering the costs of said services.


Strike aside, downtown Toronto has never been cleaner.

I would say that that it is the same as ten years ago. No better or worse. Though the graffiti problem is much worse in certain areas.
 
Strike aside, downtown Toronto has never been cleaner.

But the rest of the city is that much worse....

And again, what has Miller done that's so remarkable that Pitfield or Tory could not have done given the same resources? Heck, I am willing to bet that Lastman would have fare quite well too if the province had been throwing at money at him for transit in his day. The Sheppard line would have been done and the SRT would have been replaced if he had the resources Miller has right now. Instead Miller has lead the city to the edge of a rather severe precipice financially speaking.... This strike is the beginning of it. Wait till next year when there's no money in the till and all the reserve are drained and the unions that do have to negotiate continue demanding their usual 3% per annum increase. It's going to get quite interesting. I am still wondering what Miller's plan is to balance the books other than holding out his begging bowl as McGuinty and Harper walk by. Next year is going to be quite interesting.
 
The difference between Lastman's relationship with the province and Miller's is that Lastman screamed out in public, provoked and prodded the Ontario government into not wanting to deal with the man.

Miller built a friendly relationship with the province and successfully negotiated new terms for our city. He managed to grow Toronto from a begging pre-teen to the status of an adult city that can make its own decisions without requiring the consent of its parents (Province + Feds). In the meantime, David Miller headed a nationwide Mayors consortium to demand more from the Feds. And we got it.

David Miller is so under appreciated because most of his greatest work involved fixing the engine that runs this city rather than cutting ribbons. Fixing engines requires a lot of political capital and his wallet is now empty.

Even though I like Michael Thompson, I hope Miller is allowed to finish his work and take credit for the fruits of his labour which will be seen once Transit City gets constructed, the waterfront is the jewel that we've been promised and the city has a steady and reliable cash flow.

At the end of his third (and last) term, I hope he goes out as a mayor fighting for a Strong Mayor system for his successor. He won't benefit from it, but that's the point really. The city certainly will.
 
The difference between Lastman's relationship with the province and Miller's is that Lastman screamed out in public, provoked and prodded the Ontario government into not wanting to deal with the man.
I don't agree with that. Lastman was more prone to loud shrieks, but Miller has certainly done his share of whining over lack of provincial (and federal) support.
 
This isn't directly related to the next mayor, but it does compare our political system to Vancouver's. I tend to agree with their conclusion that Vancouver is simply better governed from a structural point of view. Gregor Robertson wouldn't be my first choice, but at least he had to run a campaign against a competitive challenger with clearly defined positions on a number of issues.

Why Vancouver works
Comparing Vancouver with Toronto hardly seems fair at the best of times. Throw a garbage strike into the mix, and it seems criminal to put Hogtown up against the charms of Grouse Mountain or Stanley Park. Of course there’s a lot more to ranking cities than scenic beauty. But almost any way you measure it, Vancouver still beats its bigger brother.

Maclean’s groundbreaking examination of municipal efficiency and effectiveness, in partnership with the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies, has determined Canada’s best- and worst-run cities. The big-city championship clearly belongs to Vancouver. It’s the only one of our three major metropolises to register above average in both efficiency and effectiveness. This alone should be cause for bragging rights.

But Vancouver’s dominance extends to international rankings as well. The Economist Intelligence Unit’s (EIU) business travel index puts Vancouver first in the world as a desirable business meeting location. Toronto is second. These calculations are based on infrastructure, security, culture and local costs. Looking at infrastructure alone, Vancouver is currently ranked sixth-best in the world (Singapore is number one), and tops in North America, by Mercer Human Resources Consulting. This respected study examines the provision of utilities, the state of roads, public transportation and airport facilities. Toronto comes 18th. Mercer also produces an overall livability index, combining infrastructure with indicators on the environment, culture, schooling and business climate. Vancouver is fourth. Toronto? 15th.

Certainly Vancouver has its challenges—from the Downtown Eastside to road congestion to growing gang violence; but such is the case for all large cities. By national and international standards, Canada’s third-largest city outshines the other two. In fact, Vancouver, Burnaby and Surrey in B.C.’s Lower Mainland represent three of the top four cities in our rankings. So what’s their secret?

Taken together, Maclean’s rankings plus the other international measures reflect on the competency of municipal government. And it’s not the pleasant physical climate that’s driving these standings, it’s the raucous political climate.

Municipal politics in B.C. are notable for their partisan nature. Local elections typically feature slates of candidates representing parties such as the Burnaby Citizens Association or Vision Vancouver. And while the inherent conflict this creates may stifle the collegial atmosphere praised at city halls in other provinces, it greatly improves accountability.

Too frequently, municipal politics in Canada is devoid of serious scrutiny. Voters are often unclear as to where candidates stand or what policy options they face. Compared to provincial or federal politics, a lower level of accountability means more opportunity for poor decisions, personal agendas and general inefficiency. Even in Toronto, where city politics can be fractious and ideologically driven, the absence of parties leaves the opposition scattered and disorganized.

Adding partisanship to local politics can improve voter clarity, enhance the policy-making process and lead to better governance. Yet provincial law in Ontario and elsewhere forbids listing party affiliations on ballots and stands in the way of such an improvement. A minor change to the law could give Toronto a fighting chance next time around.
 
And aside from all this, you skirted the most important issue I raised in my post...p5connex suggested that fiscal conservatism is passe. Well if so, how is Toronto going to plug its 350 million dollar deficit. How willing do you think the province will be to help when they just handed over powers that were supposed to add hundreds of millions to Toronto's coffers? Powers that no other municipality in Ontario have. Miller's fate rides on McGuinty filling his begging bowl. It's easy to cry about the Conservative bogeyman when the feds aren't playing ball. How easy is it going to be for Miller when it's a Liberal premier? Next year's budget deliberations should be quite the eye-opener. We'll truly find out Miller and McGuinty are sufficiently BFFs for Dalton to hand over blank cheques for Toronto.

I didn't skirt your most important issue. I completely ignored it because I wanted to vent about this 'decline' nonsense I'm reading everywhere - attributed to Miller. Toronto may have declined from its heyday, but that decline started in the early 90's and has, I think, leveled off during Miller's term.

But I think your main point is valid. Fixing the budget will require some fiscal conservatism. I think privatizing some services - such that the contract can be put up for competitive bidding, is essential to get the budget under control. You can't privatize the TTC, but you could privatize the TTC cleaners and ticket collectors. Miller will never do that.

The problem is that fiscal conservatives are often anti-urban: "cities should just clear the snow, pick up the trash and fix the potholes" types. They also, surprisingly, tend to be anti development. Karen Stinz was elected as an anti-development councillor. I also recall Pitfield's musings about banning tall buildings north of Bloor. At least Miller believes in expanding the tax base.
 
Last edited:
There is nothing that says fiscal conservatives have to be anti-urban. I would think that most municipal politicians would be pro-urban. The difference may only lie in depth; some leaning towards policies that favour the suburbs and others leaning towards policies that favour the core. Regardless that does not mean any of them are "anti-urban".

When it comes to not having tall buildings north of Bloor, while I personally would not support the policy, it certainly warrants some discussion. There is an argument to be made that prohibiting tall buildings in the burbs would force them to develop lots of little buildings which are far more urban than the "towers in a park" concept that dominates the outer suburbs. I'd certainly like to see some balance. Today the option lies somewhere between a house (detached, semi or town) and a condo in a high rise. There is nothing in between in the suburbs.
 
From Globe: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...r-brim-just-not-that-into-you/article1229510/

McGuinty to Miller: I'm just not that into you

Adam Radwanski
Toronto — Friday, Jul. 24, 2009 04:25PM EDT

If he has achieved nothing else in his second term as Toronto's mayor, David Miller has learned how to take a punch. Rival city councillors; union leaders; senior federal ministers; the art directors at Macleans magazine: All have lined up to hit him with their best shots, and many have landed.
Dalton McGuinty, no street fighter, does not throw punches. But the sense one gets from talking to those around him is that next winter, when Mr. Miller makes his usual plea for provincial assistance to make up the city's budgetary shortfall, the Ontario Premier might do something far more damaging to Mr. Miller. He might turn his back on him.
There was a time when Mr. McGuinty could not have seriously considered doing any such thing. In 2003, when both men won their respective positions, the Premier needed the Mayor as much as the other way around.
If you'd laid bets on who would enjoy a longer and more prosperous political career, the smart money would have been on Mr. Miller. A fresh face who had prevailed in an unusually exciting mayoral campaign, he was such a welcome change from the befuddled leadership of Mel Lastman that his honeymoon lasted several years.
Mr. McGuinty had no similar luxury. His landslide victory owed largely to Ernie Eves's dispirited Conservatives defeating themselves, rather than McGuinty-mania. When he introduced an unpopular new health-care “premium” in his first budget, breaking his campaign vow not to raise taxes, any honeymoon was over.

Miller_and_McGui_140760artw.jpg
The Globe and Mail
Toronto Major David Miller and Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty, shownin 2007, are no longer as close as they once were.

To avoid being a one-term wonder, Mr. McGuinty needed to maintain his party's dominance in Toronto and its surrounding area. He also had to hold the Toronto-based media – including the Toronto Star, which obsessed over fairer treatment of the city – at bay. That was no mean feat for an Ottawa native with a distinctly small-town vibe, viewed by Toronto's chattering classes as an interloper. So he hopped aboard the Miller Express.
Mr. McGuinty, himself a few weeks into his job, was among the first to phone Mr. Miller with congratulations on election night. The two men made a habit of photo-ops, and dined together with their respective spouses.
As much as Mr. Miller might have enjoyed the Premier's company, he might have also had his eye on Mr. McGuinty's chequebook. His government made an early gesture of goodwill by sharing a portion of the provincial gas tax with municipalities. In the ensuing years, they've shown much enthusiasm for joint initiatives with the city, particularly on transit. They committed to reclaim some of the costs for social services that Mike Harris's Conservatives foisted upon municipalities in the 1990s. And time and again, they bailed out the city at budget time by allocating one-off, nine-figure sums to allow it to balance its books.
Now, after six years of letting the money flow, it appears Mr. McGuinty may finally turn off the tap. There is every reason to believe Mr. Miller will return, cap in hand, in 2010; even if he wins major concessions from city workers in the current labour dispute, Toronto will likely be hundreds of millions of dollars in the hole.
But the early message from Queen's Park is that he'll be turned away. The official reason is that it's cash-poor, an estimated $14.1-billion in the red.
The unofficial reason is respect.
Unlike many other provincial Liberals, including Deputy Premier George Smitherman, Mr. McGuinty gives no appearance of actively disliking Mr. Miller; he is still more than happy to do photo-ops. But the sense one gets from those close to him – and from some of his recent decisions, including punting Mr. Miller and other municipal politicians from the board of the regional transit authority Metrolinx in favour of private-sector representatives – is that he no longer feels the need to defer to him.

Smitherman_clean_123741artw.jpg
Fred Lum/The Globe and Mail
Deputy premier George Smitherman helps clean up garbage on July 14 as part of a new volunteer effort during the Toronto strike.

Speak to some of the people vying to replace him in next year's municipal election, and you realize that Mr. Miller could yet win a third term. But he does not project the commanding presence he once did. His polling numbers have tanked, and he is no longer the darling of the city's media and elite. There is a sense that his 5 1/2 years in office have been a disappointment.
The province is still not rife with McGuinty groupies, but the Premier's support remains reasonably strong and he has more than two years left in his mandate. He has become a more confident politician, the cautious management of his first term giving way to activism in his second. And he has lived in Toronto long enough to believe he understands it.
There is also a feeling among some McGuinty advisors that Mr. Miller has abused their patience. Liberals contend that while Mr. McGuinty has made controversial decisions – the health tax in his first term, the harmonization of sales taxes in his second – Mr. Miller has coasted. They say that rather than using up his own political capital – and taking full advantage of new taxation powers given to him by the province in 2006 – to get the city's finances in order, the Mayor has taken the easy way out by leaning on the province.
Mr. Miller could reasonably contend that his unpopular introduction of a land-transfer tax was no walk in the garbage-strewn park. He could argue it's easier for a premier to take risks with a majority government than for a mayor presiding over an unwieldy city council, and that the city remains chronically under-funded. But Mr. McGuinty – who cannot go five minutes without mentioning the personal responsibility he learned growing up in a large Irish Catholic family – seems to believe Mr. Miller made his bed, and now must sleep in it.
For all his newfound boldness, Mr. McGuinty remains a conflict-averse leader, and he may yet find it more trouble than it's worth to send Mr. Miller away empty-handed. But the power dynamic has dramatically changed.
The challenge for Mr. Miller in the next few months is restoring some balance to that relationship; to make Mr. McGuinty need him again. If he doesn't, there will be nothing to stop Mr. McGuinty from delivering a potential knockout blow to Mr. Miller's mayoralty, all without lifting a hand.
 
I certainly sympathize with McGuinty here. He has done more than any premier in decades for municipalities. He has given new tax powers to Toronto while simultaneously uploading costs to the province. By all rights, Toronto should have been able to balance its books by now. Yet it hasn't. And the local politicians seem to want McGuinty to bail them out because they don't want to make the hard decisions to raise taxes or cut services (or cut the payroll but not the service). If McGuinty had to take his lumps with the health premium, the HST, etc. then Miller and rest of the city's council should certainly have to bare responsibility for their decisions. Hiring an extra 1000 unionized workers and voting yourselves a pay raise during a recession, with the books not balanced is certainly irresponsible. The province should not make a habit of bailing out municipalities that make poor decisions such as these.
 
I personally can't stand Adam Giambrone, but personalities aside the last thing we need is another Mayor who came right out of the union machine (someone actually suggested Peggy Nash - which I am sure has the unions drooling). We need some balance to things as I fear another pro-union mayor might push the city far enough to the left that some really entrenched problems will be established. To me, one of our biggest problems is a lack of focus on operational effectiveness. We dont get the most out of the city's resources. Our deficits arent going away - but our desires just keep growing. Someone needs to reconcilie that as Miller's broom certainly hasn't.

Furthermore, if Giambrone really wants to make something of him self he should go back to school and get an MBA and then work as a management consultant or something. Some job that is competitive and unforgiving and gives you real exposure to how the private sector works (or run a business or whatever). If he was successful there too he could go anywhere (city, provincial, federal politics) as he obviously has enough talent to get this far so early. But for me it is pretty hard for me to take him seriously when not only is he so young but he has so little of the life experience the rest of the citizens live in.
 
I certainly sympathize with McGuinty here. He has done more than any premier in decades for municipalities. He has given new tax powers to Toronto while simultaneously uploading costs to the province. By all rights, Toronto should have been able to balance its books by now. Yet it hasn't. And the local politicians seem to want McGuinty to bail them out because they don't want to make the hard decisions to raise taxes or cut services (or cut the payroll but not the service). If McGuinty had to take his lumps with the health premium, the HST, etc. then Miller and rest of the city's council should certainly have to bare responsibility for their decisions. Hiring an extra 1000 unionized workers and voting yourselves a pay raise during a recession, with the books not balanced is certainly irresponsible. The province should not make a habit of bailing out municipalities that make poor decisions such as these.

You keep repeating that council voted themselves a pay raise during the recession, but they did not - they voted to give councillors regular cost-of-living increases every year a couple of years back. The Mayor and some councillors have rejected or given this year's scheduled increase to charity.

Some have called for council to hold a vote on eliminating this year's increase, but the mayor rightly refused as that kind of thing is largely symbolic and a waste of council's time.
 

Back
Top