Northern Light
Superstar
That's a pretty fair assessment, I reckon.
So, let's look at the point about the opposition to development and his inability to work with developers to induce benefits to the ward. That right there, whilst going on about raising taxes from land owners for the sole purpose of paying for "affordable" (he didn't define what this meant, but I can guess it didn't include people like me) housing which would lead to increased rents for the working class middle such as myself, is part of why I discounted him....hey, @bobbob911
...
He literally told me that property taxes should be higher for the sole purpose of paying to build more "affordable" housing. That's it. Fair and inclusive city? Nah, I don't think he's necessarily about that because a fair and inclusive city, by definition, doesn't foist burdens on one socio-economic segment of the citizenry in order to better the lot of another.
Can and should landowners pay more? Sure, I'm not against that in principle. But don't pretend to me that building more shitty council estates is going to help everyone find a more affordable place to live when those same landlords who are asked to pay more will pass the cost on to their tenants. We'll end up with more council estates and less people like me. I mean, sure, maybe that's all fine and good, if that's what we want, but don't call it a fair and inclusive city.
.
I'm not a subscriber to the notion that mass RGI (rent-geared-to-income) housing is desirable plan for resolving housing and income inequality issues. (though would oppose any reductions in the stock)
I think fixing the income side is more the key, along w/some measures to contain housing cost, and encourage new supply.
Though, I don't have a problem w/government owned or funded housing being a part of the solution. However, I look to many European cities where such housing is often aimed simply to be non-profit and really targets the middle class or lower-middle-income earners, as opposed to being focused on the poor. Key in that, is that the projects can be commercially or bond-financed if they aim to break even. Enough new supply at any income level, should push rents down at least somewhat.
To be clear, the poor need society's help, I just think the focus should be on fixing their income, rather than treating a symptom of said income's inadequacy.
All of that said, I don't disagree w/Perks on raising property taxes subject to the following statements.
Single-family homes are under-taxed in Toronto based on both GTA and broad North American norms.
By contrast, multi-residential rentals are taxes much more highly, just over double the rate of single-family homes, based on market value.
Were those rates evened out, it would reduce 'typical' rents by about $125 a month, in my estimation. Though, that only applies to older rental stock and not new buildings or condos already taxed at the lower rate.
Of course, I would prefer to roughly even rates out over 2-3 years, rather than a large-scale (above inflation) rise.
I do favour a modest rise (above inflation) as well as implementing road tolls on the DVP/Gardiner and raising Permit and On-Street Parking rates in order to fund some new/improved programs as well as bring the City
closer to financial health.
