[max]

However, the province holds all the legislative power. They can legislate that the city keeps the highway open, without being able to toll it and without any money transfers from the province. Or, they can transfer the control to province while making the city pay for the upkeep. However silly that sounds from the logical standpoint, they can legislate that.

Sure, the province could do those things, but I the way I see it that's just QP dictating the city pay the bill from property taxes which is what they are doing now so they're no worse off. The city might as well roll the dice and see if they can get a better outcome.

EDIT: Also, as I had suggested the city publish what the tax increase would be to fund the highway. That would be telegraphing to the province the next step if the city must pay. They can even put it as a separate line item on the bill if it comes down to it.

 

[evandyk]

Sure, the province could do those things, but I the way I see it that's just QP dictating the city pay the bill from property taxes which is what they are doing now so they're no worse off. The city might as well roll the dice and see if they can get a better outcome.

EDIT: Also, as I had suggested the city publish what the tax increase would be to fund the highway. That would be telegraphing to the province the next step if the city must pay. They can even put it as a separate line item on the bill if it comes down to it.

They already broke out the "City Building Levy" which is directed to specific items. No reason they couldn't break our a "Gardiner Expressway Levy" too/instead. I get that you can't break down taxes into every individual component, but when it gets that big, it makes things a lot more transparent.

You can even call it the "East Gardiner between Yonge and the DVP Levy" so everybody can see exactly how few people are benefiting from the huge outlay.

 

[Aplus23]

How exactly are Scarborough residents supposed to end up downtown if the Gardner is removed?

U want us to take main roads all the way into the city?

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

How exactly are Scarborough residents supposed to end up downtown if the Gardner is removed?

U want us to take main roads all the way into the city?

If only there were GO Trains in Scarborough. If only the Eglinton Crosstown Line 5 goes into Scarborough. If only the Bloor-Danforth Line 2 will go into Scarborough. If only there was some TTC buses in Scarborough.

Too bad no streetcars. Oh wait! From link.

The Toronto and Scarboro' Electric Railway, Light and Power Company inaugurated a single-track radial service along Kingston Road from Queen Street as far as Blantyre Avenue, just east of Victoria Park Avenue, in 1893. The line was extended in stages, reaching its furthest extent east of Morningside Avenue in West Hill in 1906. The TTC assumed tracks on the line in 1922 and converted service as far as the newly constructed Bingham Loop (Victoria Park) to double-track city streetcars by the end of the year, and to Birchmount Loop in 1928, with radial service continuing in each case beyond. Radial service was closed east of Eglinton Avenue, replaced by buses, in 1930, and all radial service ceased in favour of buses in 1936. TTC streetcar service was truncated at Bingham Loop in 1954

From link.

 

[evandyk]

You would take the non-elevated Gardiner?

 

[evandyk]

If you had to drive, which you really shouldn't do if heading to downtown Toronto.

 

[Aplus23]

If you had to drive, which you really shouldn't do if heading to downtown Toronto.

I'm a youth outreach worker working at several different locations downtown. There's no way I can travel by transit to downtown, and then travel by transit to different locations. My 8hr work day would be on local transit. With another 2 hrs for commute to and from home.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

I'm a youth outreach worker working at several different locations downtown. There's no way I can travel by transit to downtown, and then travel by transit to different locations. My 8hr work day would be on local transit. With another 2 hrs for commute to and from home.

10-minute headways minimum on ALL public transit surface routes. REAL transit priority signal lights. Transit signals at subway loop exits and entrances. Bus and streetcar lanes. High fines and towing for blocking public transit vehicles.

There are other improvements for public transit needed, if the auto-addicted powers-that-be were not in charge.

 

[nfitz]

How exactly are Scarborough residents supposed to end up downtown if the Gardner is removed?

U want us to take main roads all the way into the city?

Use the Richmond/Adelaide ramps. If you want to be south of the Gardiner, then take the DVP to Lakeshore, and turn right.

 

[Rainforest]

I'm a youth outreach worker working at several different locations downtown. There's no way I can travel by transit to downtown, and then travel by transit to different locations. My 8hr work day would be on local transit. With another 2 hrs for commute to and from home.

Fair point. However, you should be able to expense the toll to your employer, not pay out of pocket.

 

[Rainforest]

I'm not sure why you would not toll commercial vehicles as well. Why would they have special status?

The idea is that commuters have the option of switching to public transit, while trucks can't do that.

I think it isn't necessary to let the trucks travel for free. Instead, they could be charged the same price as regular cars. That will simplify the toll collectrion, while the relative impact of a $5 - $10 toll on the economy of a big track delivery will be very small.

 

[Rainforest]

I hear ya; but in this instance, what that amounts to is lie down, rollover and take it.

Not at all.

Can't support that.

The City has a lot of tools to make life very difficult for the province, and in practical terms the province can't win that fight indefinitely.

Sure, they could just dissolve the City, but they wouldn't. Expensive, impractical, non-starter. Sure they could just dissolve Council and take direct control of the City, that too is a 'no'; the province literally lacks the administrative capacity to take that on, on a near-term basis; besides that would make them accountable for every single thing the City does wrong, no provincial party wants to wear that.

Its quite right to say the effort should first be made with honey, rather than vinegar; its equally right to suggest some small slights/hiccups should probably be overlooked at the risk of creating a bigger problem. But we're at the point where we have ~12,000 people homeless and record food bank usage.

Toronto is already being kicked in the teeth. Time to kick-back, and aim a little lower.

If the City wants to fight back, I think the most effective routine is to work with swing voters who vote both in the provincial and the municipal elections.

This is where the City might have the upper hand, because of the difference in election patterns. The provincial elections are defined along the party lines, thus gaining or losing say 5% of the total vote is a big deal. The city elections are about individuals, thus a popular mayor can afford to lose the same 5%. And the councillors might not be affected at all because they represent themselves and not the party.

Say, assume John Tory went into a public argument with Doug Ford, and both lost 5% of the vote because of that. Jonnie drops from 62% to 57%, still gets comfortably re-elected. Dougie drops from 41% to 36%, that could mean going from majority to minority, if not losing outright.

Perhaps John Tory was too timid to use that mechanism, that's another matter. The concept still stands.

Due to the above, I would think twice before doing something that can upset the swing voters, and make then think that out of the two bullies, Dougie is the one causing fewer problems for them personally.

 

[Rainforest]

Sure, the province could do those things, but I the way I see it that's just QP dictating the city pay the bill from property taxes which is what they are doing now so they're no worse off. The city might as well roll the dice and see if they can get a better outcome.

EDIT: Also, as I had suggested the city publish what the tax increase would be to fund the highway. That would be telegraphing to the province the next step if the city must pay. They can even put it as a separate line item on the bill if it comes down to it.

Sounds about right. Tell that publicly: "Dougie, let us toll the Gardiner. Otherwise we have to increase the property taxes, and that will be your fault."

 

[Northern Light]

Not at all.



If the City wants to fight back, I think the most effective routine is to work with swing voters who vote both in the provincial and the municipal elections.

This is where the City might have the upper hand, because of the difference in election patterns. The provincial elections are defined along the party lines, thus gaining or losing say 5% of the total vote is a big deal. The city elections are about individuals, thus a popular mayor can afford to lose the same 5%. And the councillors might not be affected at all because they represent themselves and not the party.

Say, assume John Tory went into a public argument with Doug Ford, and both lost 5% of the vote because of that. Jonnie drops from 62% to 57%, still gets comfortably re-elected. Dougie drops from 41% to 36%, that could mean going from majority to minority, if not losing outright.

Perhaps John Tory was too timid to use that mechanism, that's another matter. The concept still stands.

Due to the above, I would think twice before doing something that can upset the swing voters, and make then think that out of the two bullies, Dougie is the one causing fewer problems for them personally.

The problem with that is that there are very few swing ridings in Toronto, relatively speaking.

The swing ridings are mostly in the 905; which, interestingly, is also where you'll find the majority of drivers who use the DVP/Gardiner, who are not, for the most part, City residents.

 

[nfitz]

Fair point. However, you should be able to expense the toll to your employer, not pay out of pocket.

I'd be cycling and/or taxiing. Heck, I've used transit (where it's faster than driving) combined with a taxi for the last mile, and I've both been quicker, and billed my employer less than if I was driving! Not to mention more productive.