Preville on Politics
A (vague) new plan for Toronto’s future
Posted on February 21, 2008 by Philip Preville
Ask a panel for unanimity and you get vagueness. The mayor’s fiscal review panel—made up of blue-chip businessmen, academics and labour—released its report at a packed press conference this morning. It’s an 86-page opus full of recommendations, the most concrete—and contentious—of which is a proposal to toll the city’s highways (more on that later.) Contrary to widespread rumour, it does not recommend the privatization of Toronto Hydro, although, to judge from what the panelists had to say this morning, I got the sense that at least some of them wish it did.
Page 16 of the report says that “The City can become the world’s best in certain priority areas and get out of others altogether.” Stark words, those, yet they only state the obvious. Ever since amalgamation the city has been faced with a structural “fiscal shortfall,” which is code for “not enough money to do all the things it currently does.” Despite this year’s balanced budget, the shortfall is still there. By the panel’s count, the city offers over 100 separate services, which is both impressive and foolish. At some point, it behooves the city to cut bait on some things so that it can concentrate better on others. (This argument might sound familiar to readers of this blog.) Yet no one on the panel was willing to say which areas the city should vacate. Jim Stanford of the Canadian Auto Workers—the labour economist mentioned above—said those words on page 16 didn’t necessarily mean “downsizing,” but that’s how they read to most of the media folks in the room.
Perhaps, given the many ideas the panel came up with for raising new revenues, it’s conceivable that the city could somehow grow its way out of the shortfall. One panelist, Larry Tanenbaum of Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment, pointed out that the Toronto Parking Authority owns surface parking lots on some very valuable property: he suggested putting the lots underground and getting private-sector partners to put commercial developments on top of them, thus diversifying city revenues. Another idea championed by Tanenbaum was to toll the Gardiner and the DVP. Mayor David Miller’s response was his standard line: any tolling must be done on a regional basis across the GTA. But you can add this report to the ever-growing stack of studies recommending road tolls of some kind or other—seems like there’s about one a week these days, which gives it an air of inevitability. And given all his bright ideas, let’s add Tanenbaum to the hypothetical list of potential future mayors.
But I digress. Miller said that the panel’s report puts to rest once and for all the idea that the city is mismanaged. Dunno about that: the report spends four pages commending the city for all the things it does well, singling out the public service for its professionalism and hard work, and noting that the city is, by and large, efficiently run. The remaining 81 pages are devoted to ideas for managing it better, and the true litmus test for good management will lie in how quickly and purposefully the mayor and his administration act upon the panel’s recommendations. The report says the city should set the bar a little higher for itself: instead of comparing its performance to other municipalities in Ontario, compare it to other global cities of similar stature—in other words, stop patting yourself on the back for doing a better job than Nippissing. And it is urging council to conduct a very basic management exercise that is long overdue, but that city hall seems determined to avoid: decide what you should no longer be doing, and stop doing it.
- Categories: General, Queen's Park, Transit, City Hall
- Permalink
Philip Preville
Veteran freelance writer Philip Preville lived much of his life in Montreal and Edmonton before he was lured, like so many Torontonians before him, by the promise of more work and a better living. A National Magazine Award winner and former Canadian Journalism Fellow at the University of Toronto’s Massey College, Preville writes Toronto Life’s politics column. He lives with his wife and one-year-old son in Riverdale, just close enough to the Don Valley Parkway that he can hear it when he steps outside his house—but just far enough away that it doesn’t keep him awake at night. On his office wall hangs a 1938–39 press pass belonging to his grandfather, Elias Gannon, who wrote for the Montreal Star.
Latest blog entries:
- I have a new home
- Montreal to adopt vacuum waste collection
- Why U.S.-based magazines hit newsstands so late
- I salivate at the prospect of a Miller-Smitherman-Ford cage match
Topics:
Postings by date:
- May, 2008
- April, 2008
- March, 2008
- February, 2008
- January, 2008
- December, 2007
- November, 2007
- October, 2007
- September, 2007
- August, 2007
- July, 2007
- June, 2007
- May, 2007
- April, 2007
- March, 2007
Comments
Neither the author nor Toronto Life necessarily agree with the comments posted below. Editors will not correct spelling or grammar. Toronto Life reserves the right to edit or delete comments entirely. Read our full policy
Bern Grush February 21, 2008 at 7:05 p.m.
When Mayor Bloomberg wrote PlaNYC and dedicated one of some 100 plan points to "piloting congestion pricing", this seemed to get most of the attention. Today's report from Miller's panel also has a slim mention of road tolling (which is an absolute no-brainer) considering that [done right] road user charging addresses financial, congestion and GHG issues, but this is also getting an undue portion of attention.
Perhaps there is a reason that a new report on road pricing appears "one a week". Maybe some of the reasons are here at grushhour.com
Mark Dowling February 21, 2008 at 11:45 p.m.
The TPA should cease to be with exception of paid on-street parking - off-street lots should be outsourced just as hospitals and other enterprises do while retaining title (but not for pennies at 99 year intervals). The City cannot regulate private parking while acting as a competitor, and TPA actions with respect to advertising boards and the Matador is hinting at a distinctly TEDCO-ish quality...
As for collaborations (p. 30):
* the furniture contract, rewarding owners of illegal signs rather than mandating their removal prior to contract award
* BMO Field/Lakeshore Lions/Ricoh, handing MLSE a licence to print money not once but three times (although the latter maybe not so much) - bet Larry Tanenbaum felt good reading that part of his own report!
At least they were realistic on one front: "In our opinion, the chances of the current federal government acceding to the City’s request for its share of 20% of GST revenue are close to zero." (p. 39)
I don't understand why any of the Toronto Zoo's bill is the Province's matter - perhaps another reader can help out here. (p. 41) Sure visitors from York, Peel and Durham visit the Zoo but should not the cost sharing be theirs rather than the greater Province? Perhaps it is for scientific programmes of some sort? The free passes for councillors won't help get that money.
TL gets a mention (p. 44): "Consequently, many people are critical of the governance of the City: there are jokes that it is the City that had to call in the army to clear snow or to police certain highly sensitive regions; that a photo op for Councillors had to be cancelled because of a squabble over who got to sit in the front row; that the City’s budget woes and what Toronto Life magazine recently termed “down the toilet” spending practices mean it must be perpetually bailed out by senior levels of government."
Toronto Hydro might have quite a lot of potential based on the upside of the telecom/internet business but no doubt Larry's friends at Bell and Rogers are concerned at the potential to eat into their business given Hydro's drive into the downtown office market. A sale would be positive for Toronto consumers if THT went to a strong firm such as Telus looking to increase presence. A sale to either existing gorilla would remove an opportunity to increase competition.
While the panel addresses the headline figure for the city debt now ($2.6bn) and not the 2011 figure ($3.1bn or so) there is also refilling the infrastructure reserve funds pillaged of over $1bn in Miller Administrations.
As for realising assets - there is ingrained resistance to dispose of real estate (Metro Hall) and a lack of drive to complete opportunities like Eglinton and Davisville TTC stations. What chance of repealing "Housing First" (p. 74) under Miller even if it meant having money to build housing on what land remains? Certainly TEDCO should NOT be left near a Toronto Realty Corp if the Corus deal is anything to go by.
Dave February 22, 2008 at 9:10 a.m.
"the report spends four pages commending the city for all the things it does well, singling out the public service for its professionalism and hard work, and noting that the city is, by and large, efficiently run."
That is nice to read, but somehow I don't think that this will stop people from screaming about 'Lazy union workers who want jobs for life' when it comes time to negotiate new contracts this year.
Philip Preville February 22, 2008 at 10:32 a.m.
Nice catch on the One Cent Now campaign, Mark. What the city calls "one cent" is actually 20% of all the revenues generated by the GST. The campaign seems to be asking for so little, but it's asking for a lot.
DR February 22, 2008 at 1:19 p.m.
20% of all revenues generated by the GST? The feds underestimate their annual surplus by as much.
One Cent Now isn't a lot in Ottawa. It's a rounding error.