This is the capital of Canada. This is not Minneapolis; this is not Houston.

—Councillor Frank Di Giorgio, speaking out against LRTs at yesterday’s council meeting, appears to have gotten a little confused. He’s right—Toronto isn’t Minneapolis or Houston. Unfortunately, though, it isn’t the capital of Canada—even if it often acts like it is.

Early reports from city hall suggest Rob Ford and the rest of council are in for a transit-themed slugfest at today’s special council meeting. Karen Stintz, who started the whole brouhaha when she said what everyone already knew about Ford’s grand vision to bury the Eglinton Crosstown, has already made her recommendations. In short, she wants council to reaffirm its support for LRT lines on Finch and Eglinton, convert the Scarborough RT to an LRT line with an extension to the Malvern Town Centre (as funds become available) and establish an expert advisory panel regarding transit on Sheppard Avenue. Meanwhile, Giorgio Mammoliti—and only Giorgio Mammoliti—wants a subway on Finch. Watch the proceedings live here »

(Images: Karen Stintz, Mike Beltzner; Giorgio Mammoliti, Christopher Drost)

(Image: Matt Elliott)

Too bad Matt Elliott’s Transit City bingo card doesn’t include a cash prize—because Toronto Sun columnist Sue-Ann Levy would’ve claimed it before the game even really started. In the pages of the paper this morning, Levy’s recycling of Rob Ford’s tried-and-true talking points scored her an easy B-I-N-G-O along the top row, and council’s special session on the city’s transit plan hadn’t even yet begun. Of course, given the rancorous debate on the issue so far, we’re sure Levy won’t be the only winner today. Read the entire story [Toronto Sun] »

(Image: Matt Elliott)

In their hasty attempts to defend Rob Ford’s transit plan despite mounting opposition, the mayor and his supporters have (rather dogmatically) relied on a trusty set of talking points to do their heavy lifting for them. In a bid to show just how tired Ford and Co.’s anti–Transit City arguments really are—that light rail will be a repeat of the St. Clair streetcar screw-up, that Ford was elected with a mandate to build subways and that Scarborough is getting shafted—city hall blogger Matt Elliott created “Transit City Opposition Bingo” (yes, it’s exactly what it sounds like). Tune in to tomorrow’s special council meeting—or just grab the nearest copy of the Toronto Sun—and see how long it takes to win! Read the entire story [Ford for Toronto] »

(Image: Christopher Drost)

Rob Ford will likely endure another public defeat at a special council meeting tomorrow, this time over his beloved Sheppard subway, the Eglinton LRT and the potential return to a transit plan much like supposedly dead-in-the-water Transit City. Of course, it’s not the least bit surprising that Ford is unwilling to make nice with TTC chair Karen Stintz, who’s leading the campaign against Ford’s own transit plan, on this. We know the mayor doesn’t like compromising, even if the alternative is losing a vote at council. What is rather surprising, though, is some councillors appear willing to support Ford’s plan at the expense of the wellbeing of their own wards. As municipal blogger Matt Elliott writes, Vincent Crisanti and Giorgio Mammoliti are poised to stand with the mayor even though that would be tantamount to robbing their constituents of expanded transit. Crisanti sides with Ford on almost every issue, while Mammoliti is big on subways and wants one for Finch Avenue. That means either he’s willing to sacrifice his own ward just to oppose Stintz, he’s uninformed of the financial and logistical considerations involved in building a subway, or Ford has made him a ridiculous offer to maintain his allegiance. Given that we’re talking about Hot Wheels here, we wouldn’t be surprised if it’s all three. Read the entire story [Ford for Toronto] »

(Image: Christopher Drost)

Following months of public bickering, negotiating through the media and much sabre rattling, the discussions between CUPE Local 416 and the city, which everybody expected to result in a work stoppage, are over. The details of the agreement have yet to be released, but both Doug Holyday and Rob Ford are heralding the deal as a victory for the taxpayer. And given union president Mark Ferguson’s defeatist language in the wake of the all-night bargaining session, it seems that in the end the city did come out on top.

From the National Post:

This has been a rancorous round of bargaining between the City and CUPE Local 416, which represents about 6,000 municipal employees. The rhetoric reached a fever pitch at points, with the union accusing the Ford administration of seeking to gut its collective agreement, and city officials insisting that changes are necessary to help it better manage, and afford, its workforce. At issue was not how much employees get paid, but terms in the contract that make it difficult for the city to contract out services, change shift schedules and redeploy workers when jobs are cut. Mayor Rob Ford has said he wants to trim 7,000 jobs from a civil service that is 50,000 strong. The offer his negotiators made public on Friday sought to rein in the so-called “jobs for life” clause by limiting the number of employees who can’t lose their jobs due to contracting out or technological changes to those with 22 years seniority.

With the deadline looming, and no deal in sight, the Ford administration threatened on Friday to impose new work conditions on outside workers if an agreement was not struck by 12:01.

The take it or leave it ultimatum appears to have reinvigorated talks, with both parties bargaining hard all day Saturday and through the night.

Once talks were wrapped up the following morning, Ferguson told the assembled media that the union had to make “numerous concessions” and that the protracted process was “one of the toughest labour negotiations in Canadian history.” His comments, though, aren’t particularly surprising. CUPE came to the bargaining table dragged down by lingering public resentment over the 2009 strike, and it probably couldn’t have afforded the damage that walking off the job would further inflict on its image. For his part, Ford scored points with his core constituents as a tough union buster while avoiding angering the rest of the city by contributing in any way to a work stoppage. Christopher Hume points out that the mayor will likely have to justify some of the concessions to his most loyal supporters. Still, from the start the battle was Ford and Co.’s to win. And with the dust starting to settle, it looks like that’s exactly what they did.

• Mayor Rob Ford vs. unions: Workers relieved as tentative deal reached [Toronto Star]
• Hume: Hardcore Ford supporters will be irked by city labour deal [Toronto Star]
• City of Toronto and union deserve credit for compromise deal [Toronto Star]
• Levy: Union bullies yield to city [Toronto Sun]
• Tentative deal reached in City labour dispute [National Post]
• City of Toronto, outside workers’ union reach tentative deal [CityNews]

(Image: Christopher Drost)

Just in case the mayor is feeling a little too confident after city hall’s victory over CUPE 416 in the recent labour negotiations, a group of over 100 planning experts, academics and other civic leaders issued a letter denouncing the current state of transit planning in the city. The letter challenges Rob Ford’s steadfast commitment to burying the Eglinton LRT and calls for it to be built partially above ground, as well as for a form of “higher-order” transit on Finch West and Sheppard East and the conversion of the Scarborough RT line to light rail.

An excerpt from the letter (courtesy of Torontoist):

Transit is the life-blood of our city. After several false starts and radical shifts in direction that have disastrously impeded progress, recent events have put the ball squarely back in your court. This is a defining moment for our city and we urge you to consider the following in your deliberations.

With up to 1.7 million riders per weekday the City could not function without an efficient, comprehensive transit system. Transit is as important to car users as it is to transit riders, since without transit our already-congested road system would grind to a complete halt. Planning for desperately needed public transit expansion within the City of Toronto, however, is currently in a state of disarray and current plans will not provide cost-effective solutions to the City’s pressing transportation needs. As transportation researchers, professionals and concerned citizens, the undersigned urge City Council to adopt the following three-point plan for restoring the City to a practical, effective strategy for building the transportation system that the City’s citizens need and deserve. The time is now for Council to take the lead in building tomorrow’s Toronto.

What’s most interesting about the letter is how the signatories deftly turn the mayor’s own rhetoric around on him. For example, in case Ford or his allies want to paint the backlash against burying the Eglinton line as further evidence of the so-called War on the Car, the group issues a pre-emptive defence: that transit functions as a preventative measure against gridlock. Moreover, on the cost of tunnelling Eglinton underground, they take Ford to task with his own government-should-be-run-as-a-business logic. Quoth the letter: “No private sector firm would be so wasteful in its use of company resources.” Bam.

• Planners, Urban Designers, Academics Call for Restoring Sense to Transit Planning [Torontoist]
• Mayor Rob Ford’s transit plan under fire [Toronto Star]
• Planning experts blast Ford’s Eglinton Crosstown strategy [Globe and Mail]

The Cinesphere is one of the facilities now shut down (Image: Loozrboy)

Earlier this week, the provincial government shut down Ontario Place to make way for a major redevelopment of the entertainment park in time for Canada’s sesquicentennial in 2017. More interesting that the redevelopment, though, is Dalton McGuinty’s government’s choice to have former Progressive Conservative leader John Tory captain it. By all accounts, it’s a deft political manoeuvre—one that effectively limits the scope of criticism for whatever plan the Liberals decide to implement. Still, Tory will be fighting a tough fight. Ontario Place’s attendance numbers are low, the space is expensive to keep open, and the draw has been largely uninspiring for years. While it’s tempting to celebrate revitalization plans, that’s probably not the Liberals’ real agenda. As the Toronto Star’s Martin Regg Cohn suggests, McGuinty is likely more concerned with shutting down a site that costs $20 million a year. In other words, the government is cutting costs and wrapping that in nice political packaging. Read the entire story [Torontoist] »

(Image: Christopher Drost)

Doug Ford says he and the mayor won’t be accepting a pay raise in 2012, ostensibly an act of selfless devotion to protecting the public purse—or, you know, another self-promotional stunt by a wealthy businessman. Technically, the minor pay hike is actually a cost-of-living increase, but Doug told the Toronto Sun he couldn’t wait to see which of his colleagues rides the gravy train all the same. Of course, Ford already donates his salary to charity (a solid gesture, no doubt). But we still find it a little rich for a pair of millionaires to be taking a stand over what’s essentially pennies to them. Read the entire story [Toronto Sun] »

The answer is simple: our curriculum is shamefully outdated, and the Liberals are too scared to fix it
By Jan Wong | Illustration by Jesse Lefkowitz

Adam and Eve nibble an apple from the Tree of Knowledge and suddenly realize they’re both naked. Unfortunately, sex ed isn’t part of God’s plan, and He evicts them from the Garden of Eden. These days, some folks in Toronto are acting quite God-like themselves, insisting that the next generation live in innocence and ignorance. Heaven forbid our youth get to know themselves in the Biblical sense.

Our public schools are under attack by an evangelical Christian organization called the Institute for Canadian Values, whose leaders believe, as a basic ideological tenet, that teaching up-to-date sex education in schools will corrupt and confuse our children. The institute is run by a man named Charles McVety, who is quite skilled at getting media attention. Shamefully, most journalists have checked their brains at the door, blandly covering the institute’s actions and claims without questioning their legitimacy or standing up against the influence of the church on the state.

While some parents feel it is solely their responsibility to educate their kids about sex, most of us—more than 85 per cent, according to the educational organization SIECCAN (the Sex Information and Education Council of Canada)—want schools to play a supporting role. This silent majority notwithstanding, our leaders are caving to splinter groups. In 2010, Premier Dalton McGuinty nervously shelved a newly revised sex ed curriculum after McVety launched an attack campaign in which he claimed to be speaking on behalf of Ontario parents.

The proposed new sex ed curriculum, three years in the making, was created by a team of health experts and educators. At 219 pages, it was meant to replace a 40-page curriculum from the 1990s—when Mike Harris was premier and a ninth-grader named Mark Zuckerberg had not yet imagined a gold mine called Facebook. Under the revised curriculum, Grade 1 students would learn the names of male and female genitalia, compared with previously learning only “the major parts of the body.” The old curriculum presumed heterosexuality. In the new one, Grade 3 students would learn about gender identity and sexual orientation through class discussion. The teaching guide mentions a scenario in which kids might say: “Some students live with two parents. Some live with one parent. Some have two mothers or two fathers. Some live with grandparents or with caregivers.” Pretty innocuous stuff, so far.

The old Grade 5 curriculum focused mainly on the physical changes at puberty. The new one focuses on emotional and social changes, too. “You can show that you like someone by being extra nice to them.…[Ways] that are inappropriate include touching them without their permission [or] spreading rumours about them to others or online.” Under the old curriculum, Grade 6 students studied “the changes at puberty to the reproductive organs and their functions.” The new one would inform them they weren’t the only ones masturbating, or having wet dreams, or experiencing vaginal lubrication. By Grade 7, students would learn about the importance of emotional readiness before having sex and the risks of contracting sexually transmitted infections through oral sex, anal sex or vaginal intercourse. You think age 13 is too young for such graphic stuff? A 2006–2007 Statistics Canada study of 13-year-olds with a girlfriend or boyfriend found that 6.5 per cent had already had sex. By age 14 and 15, the number jumps to 16.5 per cent.

Mayor Rob Ford (Image: City of Toronto)

With Rob Ford’s transit plans poised to grind to a rather embarrassing halt after a local law firm, solicited by Councillor Joe Mihevc, argued that the mayor legally lacked the power to unilaterally kill Transit City, the city hall press corps is pontificating about what, exactly, the powers of the mayor’s office are. (Of course, it probably would’ve been better to explore the limit of those powers before Ford went ahead and cancelled the multi-billion-dollar transit plan.) While Ford maintains he acted within his rights, based on a perceived mandate from voters to build subways, most reports are suggesting otherwise.

Take, for instance, a column in the Globe and Mail today by Marcus Gee:

In theory, the mayor of Toronto has plenty of power. He is elected citywide and he is elected directly by the voters. That should give him a broad mandate to implement his program.

In practice, he is only one voice among 45 on city council. In the words of Denise Bellamy, the judge who wrote a 2005 report into the Toronto computer-leasing scandal, “Council is the source/primary locus of almost all authority with relatively few exceptions, including all legislative authority.” By contrast, “The statutory authority of the mayor…is actually quite limited.”

Gee also notes that while Ford is the mayor of all of the city, he’s not all-powerful. More to the point, because Toronto’s municipal system is not divided along official party lines—although sometimes it seems like it might as well be—Ford can’t whip his colleagues into following his lead on any given vote. In short, as George Smitherman pointed about before the last election, that means that more than anything else “the office has the powers of persuasion.” But given Ford’s proclivity for bully tactics thus far, perhaps he doesn’t really wield that much power at all.

• Transit City flap raises prickly question: What power does Toronto’s mayor have? [Toronto Star]
• Transit woes reveal the limits of mayoral power [Globe and Mail]

The budget chief, perhaps pondering making another funny (Image: Christopher Drost)

Last week, silver-tongued Mike Del Grande asked the executive committee to redirect $16.4 million in funding from Regent Park to another project. Naturally, councillors like Pam McConnell, the representative for Regent Park, were pissed. As the Toronto Sun reports, the lefties at city hall argued that the move was tantamount to firing a torpedo into Regent Park. And, according to Del Grande, therein lies the joke. That’s right—the joke. Apparently, the budget chief wanted to get council’s left riled up and “give them a taste of their own game playing.” He told NewsTalk 1010 this morning that “it was kind of humorous to see their heads explode.” Since Del Grande is such a barrel of laughs, we thought he might find this funny too: city staff will now be wasting taxpayer dollars preparing a report based on his fake request. Read the entire story [Toronto Sun] »