Gas tax for cities...

Mayor Miller’s 1¢ of the GST NOW campaign (or $5 billion in total with $400-$500 million in Toronto) is certainly a good strategy to address Toronto’s fiscal problems, although inherently risky. Indeed, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty quickly “shot down” the Mayor’s plan.

Cities can feel justifiably aggrieved by the damage done to their budgets through service down-loading, but any calls for increased funding by senior governments are more likely now to fall on deaf ears following the federal government recent reduction of the GST rate one percentage point to 6%.

So the real risk in Mayor’s strategy is that our senior levels of governments may take the view that since Toronto has not yet used its new powers granted to them under the City of Toronto Act to raise revenues, they are really being asked to subsidize the city and refuse his request. Which means the mayor’s plan is needs a good defense strategy!

The 1¢ NOW campaign is clearly part of an evolving multi strategy plan to get Toronto out of its fiscal predicament. But, what if this initiative was articulated as part of a broad, national and local strategic framework or plan, extracted from Mayor's Miller's "What makes a city great" vision? Voters would clearly see the mayor’s local successes while minimizing any potential political fall-out should this and other high risk initiatives like “National Transit Strategy” get blocked by senior governments.

These larger, more politically risky funding initiatives could then be place in the context of striving to achieve the impossible, but striving none the less. Local success could be highlighted and promoted, but with the big ticket strategies like the gas tax, the risks would be minimized and any successes would be all gravy come election time!

905 Affordability crisis in 15-20 years?

What will the 905’s low density subdivisions look like in fifteen to twenty years from now? My prediction is that factors such as vehicle running costs, poor public transit, growing tax and utility costs, decreased funding for social services, local education limitations, long job commute times, living preferences, environmental issues and simply being located on the edge of the city will make the economic viability of living in these areas questionable in the coming decades?

In fifteen to twenty years the 905’s low density areas will have felt the full effects of “thinned out” service delivery and infrastructure funding. Equally, the cost of what little services they do get will be much higher due to poor economy of scale factors. Located on or near the “fringe” (the greenbelt border) of an expanded Toronto they will become areas to avoid as they now resemble dilapidated projects; abandoned by all, home to the unemployed and the working poor; and incubators of crime.

To avoid this fate, sooner or later the 905’s low density subdivisions homeowners will have to be bought out and their houses torn down to make way for high density, economically sustainable development. Over the coming years the pressure to re-develop huge swaths of low density land will become impossible to resist as well as being an economic imperative (either this or a convenience in having the poor pushed out to the 905 fringe areas). This I see as the unspoken truth about urban sprawl.

Heritage designations add to property values!

Real estate’s “article of faith” claim is that newly designated heritage properties immediately lose their market value. However, U.S. and Canadian studies suggest that properties values actually increase, or at worst remain the same. So why do some homeowners fight heritage listing and designation from being placed on their properties?

After observing recent heritage proceedings at Toronto city, a lack of information on heritage listing and designation market impacts seems to be the answer. A quick survey of local heritage web sites reveals technical and process information on heritage listing, designation and owner obligations, but nothing quantatative on market value impacts (that I could find). So fearful homeowners rely on their real estate agents for information, though inaccurate, and grow highly sceptical of the positive impacts of owning a heritage property.

Homeowners have two city committee meeting opportunities to argue against listing or designation. Their presentations are often emotional, rambling, and at times ridiculous, but most reflect underlying market value concerns. No statistics, reports or information sources are provided to the homeowner other then market value assurances that there was nothing to “worry about.” Lost on homeowners is the message that interested purchasers will pay a premium in order to live in a heritage property.

To get the “message” out heritage groups need to move away from “tree-hugging” preservation arguments to more business-like discussions. As money is limited, heritage groups need to pool their resources to pay for market value impact studies that demonstrate the positive business case for heritage preservation. Heritage preservation is good, smart business, and this “message,” unlike today, needs to be main selling point of our heritage preservation efforts.

Transit capital "pooling" could free-up cash?

Later this month Canadian mayors hope to announce a new “national transit strategy” to repair the nation's aging transit systems and reduce environmental damage (the Star Feb 10-07). Most likely there will be a call for new government funding to help keep transit systems across the country rolling. However, if new funding does arrive it may not be enough. Therefore, transit authorities will continue to look for creative ways to increase funding and ridership, while reducing costs.

On the cost saving idea that may have merit is capital "pooling" to pay for big ticket items such as subway cars, LRT’s, buses, etc (much as the car companies do). For example, a combined three city order for buses would benefit from the economies of scale that a smaller, one city order would not. Small cities would also benefit by dove-tailing their bus orders with their big city brethren and accruing savings that normally would be denied them. Parts purchasing would also be cheaper as the common parts pool would be that much larger, while many warehousing and distribution costs would be shared.

Certainly, the challenges implementing such a scheme would be truly huge from selecting common rolling stock or components to conflicting city needs; never mind how the various transit suppliers could be given a fair opportunity to participate in the plan. What is important here is not the specifics of the idea, rather the concept of transit authorities looking beyond their own transit borders to partner and leverage the power of economy of scale be it capital, funding or otherwise).

A national transit strategy and innovative revenue generation tactics may keep transit systems in good repair. Looking outside for creative partnering synergies and opportunities may just be a way free up additional cash to improve transit for cities big and small?

GTA transit vision is a needed first step...!

Most people would agree that a new GTA wide transportation plan is badly needed. Driving across the GTA at peak periods easily underlines this point. The job of creating a new transportation strategy has now fallen to former Burlington mayor Rob MacIsaac and the newly formed Greater Toronto Transportation Authority (GTTA).

One the GTTA’s first challenges will be to articulate a transportation vision for the GTA. Tactics seem to abound as dedicated surface routes and new subway transit lines, including an airport link, have all been recommended. What we seem not to have is a clear, easily understood vision of where want to go. A vision that the voter, federal, provincial and municipal levels of government can all buy into. The lack of an articulated transportation vision or end state is to my mind what really holds our GTA transit development back.

Once the vision is agreed upon the tactics and timelines will become obvious. A sell-able transportation vision is possible. One has only one has only to look to Madrid and Dublin to name a few and see their vision, progress and drive in action. Changing people’s minds about car travel will be a long and difficult process and needs to start now before we actually collide head-on in debilitating gridlock.

About this site

The climate is changing and I don't mean the weather! I’m talking about a growing recognition that the city is the most important engine of our national economy.

As a result city government now impacts our daily lives far greater then our senior levels. Gridlock and urban sprawl highlight our federal and provincial government’s need to keep pace up with competitive “city thinking” as found elsewhere in the world.

Through TORONTO perspectives I offer you my (non expert) thoughts and ideas on the issues facing Toronto. Hopefully over time creating, evolving and expressing my personal vision of Toronto.

Now more then ever citizens need to get involved in the issues impacting their own city's future competitiveness and how it is perceived in the world. This is my small first step!