News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.1K     0 

In an effort to increase support for Toronto’s “creative sector,” Olivia Chow plans to raise arts funding and establish a city music office, should she be elected mayor of Toronto. Ms. Chow’s announcement referenced the vibrant music industry of Austin, Texas, a city with which Toronto city council unanimously endorsed a musical partnership in July 2013.

Ms. Chow said she wants Toronto to hire a music commissioner and establish a city music office similar to the city’s existing film office, which she says would cost $500,000 a year. She said she would generate the necessary funds for the office by indexing the city’s billboard tax, which was put in place in 2013 to redirect money from billboard advertisers to the city’s arts sector.
Click to expand...

http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/0...sic-office-following-example-of-austin-texas/
 
rbt said:
I believe Vancouver does this. Any building over a certain number of units must build units for the city for this purpose. In most cases, Developers don't mind as they give the city the junk units that don't sell (lousy layouts, floors, views, ...) which makes it much better for them than an equal amount in developer fees.

The working theory is that mixing have and have-not residents helps turn the have-nots into haves by giving them more opportunities. That is, they can interact in the elevator and amenity spaces and possibly be given opportunities that they may not have been presented with in a more segregated housing structure. Job recommendations (loading dock/mail room type stuff) and letters of reference. Long-term they may become fully self-supporting.
Click to expand...
It's got to be a two-ways street. What's the benefit to those who paid full value for their units?
 
rbt said:
I believe Vancouver does this. Any building over a certain number of units must build units for the city for this purpose. In most cases, Developers don't mind as they give the city the junk units that don't sell (lousy layouts, floors, views, ...) which makes it much better for them than an equal amount in developer fees.

The working theory is that mixing have and have-not residents helps turn the have-nots into haves by giving them more opportunities. That is, they can interact in the elevator and amenity spaces and possibly be given opportunities that they may not have been presented with in a more segregated housing structure. Job recommendations (loading dock/mail room type stuff) and letters of reference. Long-term they may become fully self-supporting.
Click to expand...

That's all well and good...and we already have mixed-income buildings in Toronto.

The problem I guess lies in whether we want to layer yet another tax/fee onto the condo development industry. The other problem is the potential image problem associated with instantly adding a 10% "renters" dwellers to a a non-rental (purpose built) building on top of it being low-income as well. I think mixed-income buildings do work at better integrating people into the community, but I'm not naive to think it does not affect the market value of units in a building that has them.

I like this idea from a "city" point of view. Rather than acquiring land and building mixed-income rental buildings and managing/maintaining them (which I believe is a bit of a debacle at the moment...no?)...they just sit back and acquire condos instead. They just have to submit the condo fees and that's it. It also means the city can dispose of individual units any time they like.

10% on top of everything else the City gets seems excessive...even for a place like Toronto. The average condo project in Toronto tends to be very big...hundreds of units. That would result in more than 1000 units /year transferred to the City. I think they would have to reduce that number, or claw back the other fees and taxes already in place. And while socially, I think it is a good concept, I bet there are plenty who want nothing to do with it.
 
One of my friends appears in this photo with John Tory at Pride.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...920495.1073741849.319861065494&type=1&theater

He writes:

"I’m in this picture. I suppose it me makes me look like a supporter, but I’m not. I know other people in his pictures who aren’t supporters as well. Photography can do wonders.

John Tory’s body language gave off a very disingenuous vibe, and he definitely gave the impression that people are just a means to an end for him. His phoniness is very overt, and despite his high favorability, I doubt he’ll truly connect with enough voters to win.

He is very focused on his right-wing privatization agenda, and despite how he depicts himself, over the years he just hasn’t spent nearly as much time listening to voters and being actively involved in the community as Chow and some of the more progressive candidates. To the more informed voter, his deliberately misrepresented intentions are obvious."
 
salsa said:
Sara Thompson was handing out these brochures at the Pride street festival. Wasn't impressed with her all underground LRTs.

14531881955_653e373406_z.jpg
14528497321_caf7a6f0cb_z.jpg
Click to expand...



So, she wants to build LRT's, uselessly, underground along a rail corridor which already doesn't interfere with auto traffic?
What possible angle could she be playing with these doomed mayoral runs? It's just a huge waste of her fortune. Is there some sort of tax incentive/loophole for her and her husbands financial doings? I find it hard to believe that she is this mentally feeble and/or ego driven.
 
I received one of those cards at the Pride Parade and immediately told my friend, "She has no chance at being mayor". Just as I finished saying that, she comes and shakes my hand.
 
LNahid2000 said:
I received one of those cards at the Pride Parade and immediately told my friend, "She has no chance at being mayor". Just as I finished saying that, she comes and shakes my hand.
Click to expand...

Sarah Thomson wouldn't be on my list in a ranked ballot of three choices. Out of six, she'll be number five (ahead of Ford).
 
I like the idea of tolling DVP and Gardiner. Why should they be allowed to use it for free?
I don't think all this free wifi is a good thing. People should pay for that. Wifi is not a daily necessity and it is a stretch to say "the poor people need wifi to live". Techsavvy has it for $25 a month. Mobility's unlimited data plan is $25. If you still can't afford it, then too bad - but there is always tim hortins.

Regarding Chow, after many months I still don't know much about her plan. More music fund, good, but that's not something urgent that they city needs. On her website she mentions that Scarborough is being treated unfairly - I fail to understand why. Is it because Scarborough only has 3 subway stations and somehow deserves more? I have driven in scarborough and don't think it deserves a single subway station or LRT whatever. Rapid transit goes to where the density/ridership warantes, it is not a you have it so I should have it too game. More buses - she will have to do something better.
 
Daniel Dale @ddale8
Olivia Chow is now calling on Rob Ford to resign. She'd previously avoided doing so, and the Tory camp criticized her for it.

Daniel Dale @ddale8
Her spokesman says it's a silly debate, since Ford is not resigning anyway, so they'd rather debate substantive issues.

Daniel Dale @ddale8
Tory campaign says Chow's refusal to call for Ford's resignation until today is a failure of leadership.

Daniel Dale @ddale8
Chow camp responds that Tory donated to Ford, has a campaign that involves former Ford honcho Nick Kouvalis, so this is a bad litmus test.
 
W. K. Lis said:
Sarah Thomson wouldn't be on my list in a ranked ballot of three choices. Out of six, she'll be number five (ahead of Ford).
Click to expand...

I might even put Ford before her as council eventually learned how to manage him; Thomson is an entirely new challenge that will take some time to work out. A problem you know and understand is better than a problem you don't.

I think I'd write in `concrete slab` before either of them.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top