Re: BY By Tommy boy Ford kicked out!!
I'm sorry, you seem to be defending your position that people are overburdened by taxes. I agreed to accept that position for the sake of argument, so you don't need to convince me.
My question was, how do you think the city will turn out in 10-20 years without increasing revenue (or only in proportion to inflation)? Give us your vision of Toronto of the future on existing levels of revenue.
Admittedly it is a hard problem to solve, thanks to decades of incompetence and waste there is a big wrong to right. I cannot cover all the issues here as well but here is a "taste." Toronto I think is still saveable, provincially I think we are screwed.
It is not about stopping revenue growth or never raising taxes it is about keeping it in line with inflation and/or median income growth, the catch is the first couple years this may not be possible (see wages). We also have to consider not just the percentage tax increase, with the density increase that has taken place in the last 10 years the PT base has ballooned (it also comes with more costs BUT where are the economies of scale?). The density continues to increase and will for a while, so revenue will also increase here. One area that may not be popular but we need to be very careful with commercial property tax to avoid becoming Hamilton, we need more businesses here not less. At the same time I would not reduce ANY current tax, people have already adjusted--the only exception being the residential land transfer, it needs to go.
City employee wages (and benefits) need to follow reasonable increases that are also inline with not double or triple inflation (this is the big one in so many ways). The catch is we may have to keep raising taxes until the current contracts are up (couple of percent), because we are stuck with increases over the next couple years from the previous guys (we have to pay for this somehow). If the unions do not want to participate this may mean contracting out. Really there should be deep pay cuts (>10%) to undue Miller's damage but that is not going to happen realistically. May also have to be layoffs or hiring freezes in some of the areas where we are overstaffed (Police come to mind due to the number we have per person compared to other well run cities, but there are others).
The city needs to take a good hard look at every service and decide what should and should not be funded, this will mean some service reductions. There are many services and facilities that are underused today, identify, combine, save. Toronto public housing (or whatever it is called), sell off the damn houses and put the money into the building repairs! We will have to reduce and actually eliminate some services. The idea of "no service cuts" is ridiculous. We also need to stop offering services that other levels of government already offer (i know it just transfers the tax burden by why do it twice, let them make the hard choice). We should also look at the 905 and ask ourselves, why are we offering this or that service (or a better service) when they are not--what makes us so special.
Parades and festivals need to submit a cost benefit analysis if they want city funding. I have no problem giving them money IF the city makes more money back. Some that no longer need the funding will be cut-off. Some my end up going away, are they more important than infrastructure? They may need to seek out more corporate funding.
The city needs to move faster, things like synchronizing the traffic lights should take $$ priority over more bike lanes. I was shocked in my travels to see how many cars (compared to here) can be moved simply by syncing the lights, the system is not that expensive these days and we need the upgrades anyway. Downtown is a grid which suits this well. I would do this one first just due to the bang for the buck. Then we can address bike lanes (ON SIDE STREETS) once the cars move faster and safer. Transit improvements are next. Moving people faster reduces the cost to businesses and will help encourage our commercial tax base to stick around or even increase.
Transit spending needs to be smarter, putting transit ROWs down hydro fields is way cheaper than digging up main streets. A subway under (or above) a hydro field will be cheaper and less disruptive per km to build than a new LRT down the middle of an existing road. The hydro fields cross the main roads, that is where the stations go, bus routes can be re-routed to work with the new system. I have been looking at this for a long time and what can be done is pretty impressive. Some of the routes could also be surface bus ROWs. The hard one that must be done is the downtown relief line, no hydro fields downtown, no way to do it but suck it up. I would make sure TTC fares increase every couple of years with inflation. May also do a model like the tube where one time cash fares (casual user) are much higher than passes, just has to be well thought out.
Gardiner needs to be addressed. Regrettably 10 years ago it could have been level all the way to Spadina and then level again past Jarvis, only Spadina to Jarvis would have required the expensive replacement. But some previous geniuses let condos be built beside it compounding the problem. One idea I have here is build it in a modular fashion above the CN ROW through the city. It will be put up in sections (which will be shipped in by rail!) during off peak time, this can be done to have almost no rail interruption. It is less disruptive than a big dig. It is less disruptive than tearing it down and putting it back in the same place. Everyone has a fear of elevated highways in the long term but the material technology has improved and things like smog that damaged the Gardiner have decreased.
The key here, reduce cost growth via wages, reduce some services. Take a look at the major projects and go beyond the idea of immediate gratification. Transit growth may just be a couple of kms a year as part of a long term plan (it may be small improvements every year instead of some grandiose big dig like we do today).
I would not rule out alternate funding streams. Casino I actually think is a good idea if done right, many of the so called "world class" cities have one, it is easy to see what does and does not work (instead of all the drama). I also have no issue selling out to corporate sponsorship, Pepsi Expressway...
Finally as I noted before. I am also not entirely against an increase IF it goes to what they say it will. If we get a 3% increase to replace the Gardiner, it damn well better go to replacing the Gardiner, not to giving CUPE more money, only to ask for another increase for the Gardiner....
