[zang]

This was built-in to the strong mayor powers legislation upfront. They can only be used on items that advance a small number of provincially provided goals.

Yes, but it's the interpretation of the province's goals that can come into play. Would building government-funded apartments for the homeless population count towards housing goals? Would building out ROWs for all streetcar lines count towards transport or infrastructure goals?

The federal government has zero authority in provincial matters, and cities are a department of the province. At best the federal government could take the same approach as health-care and leverage contract law by providing provinces with gobs of money with strings attached.

We are in dire need of reopening the constitution. The notwithstanding clause is being abused like crazy these days, and our major cities have become the economic heart of their respective provinces with dwindling power and representation. I know we're afraid it'll give Quebec an out, but they're going to head in that direction whether we appease them in the constitution or not.

 

[picard102]

We are in dire need of reopening the constitution. The notwithstanding clause is being abused like crazy these days, and our major cities have become the economic heart of their respective provinces with dwindling power and representation. I know we're afraid it'll give Quebec an out, but they're going to head in that direction whether we appease them in the constitution or not.

No one wants to reopen it because it would only get worse. No province is going to give up the notwithstanding clause, and they have even less reason release control of cities.

 

[rbt]

Yes, but it's the interpretation of the province's goals that can come into play. Would building government-funded apartments for the homeless population count towards housing goals?

Yes, the province has been very specific on that point. If council voted to turn a proposed housing site into a park instead [using 3rd party donated funds], the mayor could veto that and the province would support the mayor.

Government-funded apartments are a budget item and the mayor needs support of council for construction.

Would building out ROWs for all streetcar lines count towards transport or infrastructure goals?

Yes, but you'll find the powers don't actually help here. The strong mayor veto only applies to non-budget related items and damn near anything to do with roadways is a budget item. Even adding or removing a single parking space impacts the budget, as does expanding or reducing CafeTO.

Massive debt and infrastructure backlogs prevent this type of thing, not the province. Ford would almost certainly step-in to require the city preserve the same number of vehicle lanes; they've shown zero objections to roadway widening which create space for a ROW (see Finch and Hurontario for ROWs Ford funded).

We are in dire need of reopening the constitution. The notwithstanding clause is being abused like crazy these days, and our major cities have become the economic heart of their respective provinces with dwindling power and representation. I know we're afraid it'll give Quebec an out, but they're going to head in that direction whether we appease them in the constitution or not.

Not sure how reopening the constitution helps; a province of Greater Toronto would almost immediately elect Ford as premier. A province only of Municipality of Toronto would have massive struggle to make changes without getting crushed by the 905 region. Corporate tax revenue seems like it would be a savior until you realize federal Equalization still applies and the remaining not-Toronto would be a substantial recipient; and now has zero incentive to assist with GO or public housing or TTC repairs. There's also a non-trivial chance someone like Ford, Tory, or Lastman would be Premier of a 416-only province too in addition to those constraints.


What has been working is encouraging the 905 to urbanize and experience similar challenges as 416. Suddenly they vote differently. A Harris style "Down with Cities" candidate isn't electable in Ontario today.

 

[Richard White]

First let me say, I'm with @PL1 above. I don't think Olivia has been given a fair chance overall as this point. Yes, she has disappointed on a couple of files, that's pretty much a given for any mayor though, especially one with high expectations.

Now, that doesn't get her a free pass; and she needs to show material progress before, but especially during the upcoming budget. But I think any read that she's been a disaster is just out to lunch.

Personally, I do think that Olivia could be doing better but that is also because there were lofty expectations for her.

I always say, the issue is not with the leader but with the people underneath them. In politics, the leader is only one vote however the people under them make the decisions.

Having said that, some members of council are inept and only win by virtue of being the incumbent. The constituents in their wards may not know better and vote them in. What we need are term limits to bring fresh air into things.

Stephen Holday, Frances Nunziata, Paula Fletcher among others have been there far too long and have gummed up the works in some cases. Paula Fletcher from my understanding went so far as to veto the expansion of the Broadview station loop in order to save a couple parking spots.

Olivia is not entirely to blame for our current situation but her vision is not helping much either.

 

[Northern Light]

Having said that, some members of council are inept and only win by virtue of being the incumbent. The constituents in their wards may not know better and vote them in. What we need are term limits to bring fresh air into things.

Stephen Holday, Frances Nunziata, Paula Fletcher among others have been there far too long and have gummed up the works in some cases. Paula Fletcher from my understanding went so far as to veto the expansion of the Broadview station loop in order to save a couple parking spots.

This part I'm content to agree with; I'm not a huge fan of narrow term limits (one or two) because I think there's value in institutional memory and allowing people to democratically re-elect someone they think is doing a good job makes sense to me.

However, people that have near lifetime sinecures are overstaying. There's a point where its inherently undemocratic to have one, un-ending point of view dominating public discourse.

The exact time limit isn't something that definitive in my mind, but with 4 year terms, I think a 4-term limit would be more than fair. At some point you need to share the stage.

All three councillors you mention were probably past their best-before date the day they were elected, but regardless are in dire need of being replaced today.

I would add to that, Councillors Mantas, Bradford, Perruzza, Colle, Crisanti, Burnside, Pasternak, Thompson and although new, Kandavel as well. I think Councillor Myers is well intended, but he's been a pretty big disappointment at TTC.

 

[Richard White]

I think Councillor Myers is well intended, but he's been a pretty big disappointment at TTC.

To be fair, I chalk that up to Olivia's vision for the TTC. If I recall, he was her preferred choice.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

Happy to announce that the frugal money-saving programs initiated by Mayors Ford and Tory are have been continued by the fiscal conservative councillors and bureaucrats at city hall. Haven't seen a street sweeper in my neighbourhood since spring. There are tree leaves in the street gutter. After the thunderstorm downpours, the streets were flooded because of the leaves clogging the sewer grates, but the city did save money.

 

[Mihairokov]

A province only of Municipality of Toronto would have massive struggle to make changes without getting crushed by the 905 region.

Would you mind expanding on this? Corporate HQs wouldn't be relocating to Pickering or Vaughan.

Corporate tax revenue seems like it would be a savior until you realize federal Equalization still applies and the remaining not-Toronto would be a substantial recipient; and now has zero incentive to assist with GO or public housing or TTC repairs.

I believe there still would be an incentive to support GO because, as referenced above, these jobs aren't going to be relocating to the suburbs, and these suburban residents will still need to travel into the city to work.

There's also a non-trivial chance someone like Ford, Tory, or Lastman would be Premier of a 416-only province too in addition to those constraints.

I think this would be off-set by a mayor more progressive than Chow taking the reins and forwarding policies more applicable to people living south of Bloor.

What has been working is encouraging the 905 to urbanize and experience similar challenges as 416. Suddenly they vote differently. A Harris style "Down with Cities" candidate isn't electable in Ontario today.

Agree with this, but I think this densification and urbanization needs to happen within the 416 and not the 905, as the former has a lot more room to densify and the latter fuels further sprawl. Stuff like the further densification of Golden Mile is fine, but it seems kind of fruitless of Pickering GO is surrounded by towers but residents still need vehicles for local, non-commuting travel. There are still seas of parking and SFHs between downtown and Steeles that can be densified without having to skip over them.

 

[rbt]

Would you mind expanding on this? Corporate HQs wouldn't be relocating to Pickering or Vaughan.

Sure they would. Not senior staff, but the registered address that pays corporate taxes.

I believe there still would be an incentive to support GO because, as referenced above, these jobs aren't going to be relocating to the suburbs, and these suburban residents will still need to travel into the city to work.

Yes, the New Jersey argument is valid, but not when a Province of 416 needs to make bribes to the existing Ontario to get out of Ontario. Jersey obtains benefits they would not have otherwise; current Ontario already has all the benefits and Province of 416 is asking to give some of those benefits away. Also need to bribe other provinces into agreeing to it as you're asking them to give up some of their authority as well.

I think this would be off-set by a mayor more progressive than Chow taking the reins and forwarding policies more applicable to people living south of Bloor.

Such a person still needs to be electable by the majority, which is located in North York, Etobicoke, and Scarborough. A province of "Old Toronto" or "Waterfront adjacent Toronto" is a non-starter; gerrymandering, what you're proposing with a Province of South of Bloor, isn't a tolerated thing in Canada.

Create a Toronto Party and flood Queens Park with them. BQ gets an awful lot of concessions for a party that has always had near zero actual power.

 

[Dan416]

There is no way a province of the City of Toronto could ever exist, even for just the fact that the airport isn't even in Toronto proper. I think it's a non-starter of an idea. A province of Greater Toronto might be more feasible, but even then, I think the chance of it happening is maybe 1%. Maybe Northern Ontario splitting off into its own province might be more realistic, but even then I find it extremely unlikely. In the US, we haven't seen a single new state created in my lifetime, and in Canada we only had Nunavut created out of a portion of the Northwest Territories, and that was just a territory, not a province so I don't think it's as difficult to do.

I think a better, more realistic option would be giving the big cities of Ontario / Canada some additional powers, particularly in regards to implementing new taxes. But there's no way that will happen under Doug Ford's watch.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

There is no way a province of the City of Toronto could ever exist, even for just the fact that the airport isn't even in Toronto proper. I think it's a non-starter of an idea. A province of Greater Toronto might be more feasible, but even then, I think the chance of it happening is maybe 1%. Maybe Northern Ontario splitting off into its own province might be more realistic, but even then I find it extremely unlikely. In the US, we haven't seen a single new state created in my lifetime, and in Canada we only had Nunavut created out of a portion of the Northwest Territories, and that was just a territory, not a province so I don't think it's as difficult to do.

I think a better, more realistic option would be giving the big cities of Ontario / Canada some additional powers, particularly in regards to implementing new taxes. But there's no way that will happen under Doug Ford's watch.

Northern Ontario and Northern Québec were part of the North West Territories.

 

[PL1]

There is no way a province of the City of Toronto could ever exist, even for just the fact that the airport isn't even in Toronto proper. I think it's a non-starter of an idea. A province of Greater Toronto might be more feasible, but even then, I think the chance of it happening is maybe 1%. Maybe Northern Ontario splitting off into its own province might be more realistic, but even then I find it extremely unlikely. In the US, we haven't seen a single new state created in my lifetime, and in Canada we only had Nunavut created out of a portion of the Northwest Territories, and that was just a territory, not a province so I don't think it's as difficult to do.

I think a better, more realistic option would be giving the big cities of Ontario / Canada some additional powers, particularly in regards to implementing new taxes. But there's no way that will happen under Doug Ford's watch.

Any such additional powers would have to be such that the next government can't just come in and change the playing field. That happened with Ford, and to some extent with the previous government (not allowing tolls). Clearly legislation means nothing... The City of Toronto Act has been rewritten as necessary by Ford et al. to suit their needs