[Pacer]

At this point, the real race might be for second place. This could position the runner-up as the "anti-Chow" candidate in 2026.

Looking at who hasn't run, but could position themselves as the anti-chow candidate, McKelvie has to be in the conversation. Her not running, but being seen as the head of council, has done quite well for her image and recognition.

 

[TonyV]

At this point, the real race might be for second place. This could position the runner-up as the "anti-Chow" candidate in 2026.

Best comment so far. Further, Olivia’s best chance at a second term is to prove to be a good listener, and not feed the cynics and political trolls. That’s a leftist’s challenge.

 

[christiesplits]

New poll from Liasion:

Chow - 30%
Saunders - 16%
Matlow - 13%
Bailao - 12%
Furey - 10%
Hunter - 7%
Bradford - 4%

Chow holds lead as other candidates struggle to close gap in final week of Toronto mayoral campaign: polls

Despite a dip in support in recent weeks, Olivia Chow remains the front-runner in Toronto’s mayoral race, according to recent polling data, and other leading candidates are running out of time to catch her.

www.cp24.com

 

[Towered]

New poll from Liasion:

Chow - 30%
Saunders - 16%
Matlow - 13%
Bailao - 12%
Furey - 10%
Hunter - 7%
Bradford - 4%

Chow holds lead as other candidates struggle to close gap in final week of Toronto mayoral campaign: polls

Despite a dip in support in recent weeks, Olivia Chow remains the front-runner in Toronto’s mayoral race, according to recent polling data, and other leading candidates are running out of time to catch her.

www.cp24.com

Nice little unexpected bump for Matlow - I might just vote for him after all.

 

[ShonTron]

MIainstreet has Badbad Ford at 3%. So much for the Ontario/Canada Proud momentum

 

[Northern Light]

The Star is endorsing Bailao.

Editorial | Ana Bailão is the best choice to lead Toronto

We believe she could be trusted to lead the city sensibly, bridging the left and right factions on council to achieve progress on the city’s many challenges.

www.thestar.com

 

[rbt]

I voted Bailao mostly because I'd like her to try again in 2026.

 

[TonyV]

Very weird that The Star endorsed Ana Bailão. Their columnists would probably disagree with the editorial position.

Ana is the status quo. That is not acceptable.

Bad Star!

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Very weird that The Star endorsed Ana Bailão. Their columnists would probably disagree with the editorial position.

Ana is the status quo. That is not acceptable.

Bad Star!

Not the first time - remember the Globe and Mail 2015 election endorsement - where the owners overrode the editorial board?

AoD

 

[EddyMCD]

You assume we’ve built much of it since the 80s.

Most of our rental stock these days is coming from “investors” trying (and often succeeding) in turning an undersized condo marketed directly as an investment property into their own personal cash flow.

There are many new rental buildings in development/construction across the City, and all of them are by REITs or typical condo developers. We need these to continue being built. Even if they are expensive, the additional supply of these theoretically eases pricing pressures on older buildings. I have seen first hand on multi-building site developments where the City offers additional floors on condo buildings to developers in exchange for more rental units.

If ultimate rent control is implemented, no new rental units will be constructed, and the housing crisis will get worse. Everyone wants public rental building to be constructed, but the reality is that the City is simply not capable of doing that themselves, they need private partners. The City just approved the multiplex zoning, who the hell is going to lay out the money to build a multiplex if they can never raise rent?

It's a very bad policy.

 

[Northern Light]

There are many new rental buildings in development/construction across the City, and all of them are by REITs or typical condo developers. We need these to continue being built. Even if they are expensive, the additional supply of these theoretically eases pricing pressures on older buildings. I have seen first hand on multi-building site developments where the City offers additional floors on condo buildings to developers in exchange for more rental units.

There is very limited new purpose-built rental construction and it is not significantly higher since rent control on new builds was lifted, again, by the province.
'

If ultimate rent control is implemented, no new rental units will be constructed, and the housing crisis will get worse. Everyone wants public rental building to be constructed, but the reality is that the City is simply not capable of doing that themselves, they need private partners.

This is not correct. The City absolutely has the financial means to build, its a question of whether they choose to raise the requisite sum and prioritize housing construction with same.

The City just approved the multiplex zoning, who the hell is going to lay out the money to build a multiplex if they can never raise rent?

It's a very bad policy.

Rent control in Ontario has never completely frozen rent; its generally permitted to increase every year in line with inflation.

Landlords in Ontairo can also seek above-guideline increases beyond that inflationary amount for large capital projects.

The discussion here would be about the extending that level of rent control to new buildings, for existing tenants (vacancy de-control is also normative right now, meaning when a tenant leaves the rent can be re-set to market)

 

[zang]

There are many new rental buildings in development/construction across the City, and all of them are by REITs or typical condo developers. We need these to continue being built. Even if they are expensive, the additional supply of these theoretically eases pricing pressures on older buildings. I have seen first hand on multi-building site developments where the City offers additional floors on condo buildings to developers in exchange for more rental units.

If ultimate rent control is implemented, no new rental units will be constructed…

Because no one will rise to meet demand? I'm sorry, but that just never happens.

…and the housing crisis will get worse. Everyone wants public rental building to be constructed, but the reality is that the City is simply not capable of doing that themselves, they need private partners. The City just approved the multiplex zoning, who the hell is going to lay out the money to build a multiplex if they can never raise rent?

It's a very bad policy.

Only for those looking to enrich themselves at ungodly rates.

There are plenty of countries with both strict rent control and money-making developers. They're not mutually exclusive.

 

[EddyMCD]

There is very limited new purpose-built rental construction and it is not significantly higher since rent control on new builds was lifted, again, by the province.
'


This is not correct. The City absolutely has the financial means to build, its a question of whether they choose to raise the requisite sum and prioritize housing construction with same.



Rent control in Ontario has never completely frozen rent; its generally permitted to increase every year in line with inflation.

Landlords in Ontairo can also seek above-guideline increases beyond that inflationary amount for large capital projects.

The discussion here would be about the extending that level of rent control to new buildings, for existing tenants (vacancy de-control is also normative right now, meaning when a tenant leaves the rent can be re-set to market)

My initial post was raising concerns over Chow's platform which states she wants to remove vacancy de-control, meaning once rent is set when a unit is built, the rent can never be raised beyond the allowable inflation rate (unless an AGI is used). This is what I was flagging as a concern, I don't have any major issues with rent control brought in by Wynne.

 

[zang]

My initial post was raising concerns over Chow's platform which states she wants to remove vacancy de-control, meaning once rent is set when a unit is built, the rent can never be raised beyond the allowable inflation rate (unless an AGI is used). This is what I was flagging as a concern, I don't have any major issues with rent control brought in by Wynne.

Why is keeping prices in line with the rate of inflation such a bad thing?

You're ultimately advocating for jacking prices simply to make money. (see the entirety of the last decade of price increases)

 

[EddyMCD]

Why is keeping prices in line with the rate of inflation such a bad thing?

You're ultimately advocating for jacking prices simply to make money. (see the entirety of the last decade of price increases)

Keeping prices in-line with inflation is ok if we actually match inflation. But the average inflation rate in Canada in 2022 was around 6%, but the rent control approved inflation rate was only 2.5%.

And developers would still be very weary of unforeseen costs that aren't quickly captured by inflation (IE. spikes in Natural gas prices, or future carbon taxes). I know everybody here seems to altruistically think that developers will build rental housing for minimal profits, but we don't have any evidence in Canada to suggest this will happen. And if it doesn't, then the housing crisis will only get worse.