[Mr.Colley]

Well we'll see what happens. I will be supprised if he gets re elected. But then again I've seen stranger things happen. But at the end of the day, one politician is as good as the next...

 

[GenerationW]

And you have NO WAY of knowing that Pitfield would have been able to raise the $$ to build subways, she would have faced the same issues Miller did. Subways are too expensive to build, light rail you get much more coverage which is what Toronto needs desperately.

And you have NO WAY of knowing that it wasn't possible, but money is certainly more than available right now.

For the most part, we already have that much coverage. The debate which we we deserved but never got was whether or not X billion dollars would be better spent on LRT lines or subways (or a combination of both). Instead, TransitCity was shoved down our throats from day one.

 

[GenerationW]

Also, while there's a lot of grumbling about Transit City on this board, I'd imagine the average voter doesn't really care about the details and just sees "building more transit" as a positive for the mayor. For better or for worse, most people don't really get all that excited about alignments and headways.

Does the average voter care? One way to find out.

TransitCity, I think it's safe to say, is a huge turning point for transit in Toronto. When subways (another huge turning point) were initially seriously considered, I believe two referendums on subways were held in Toronto, the first of which failed. Why not do it again for TC?

 

[Condo Queen]

I heard Denzil Minnon-Wong might run....??

 

[Automation Gallery]

I heard Denzil Minnon-Wong might run....??

Good Luck

 

[MetroMan]

You didn't hear it from me: Michael Thompson is being positioned by some councillors and influential people as a centre/right candidate. I have a close insider that tells me there's a 90% chance that he will run in 2010 against Miller.

 

[urbanboom]

And you have NO WAY of knowing that it wasn't possible, but money is certainly more than available right now.

For the most part, we already have that much coverage. The debate which we we deserved but never got was whether or not X billion dollars would be better spent on LRT lines or subways (or a combination of both). Instead, TransitCity was shoved down our throats from day one.

Of course if you mean by "Shoved Down our Throats" you mean, we elected him then he gave out Transit City. Then we re-elected him by a landslide, then yeah, Transit City was "shoved down our throats".

 

[voxpopulicosmicum]

As much as despise Lastman (for his buffoonery), I will say that Lastman was a very active supporter of North York's growth and development.

Let's not look under the rocks around thr redevelopment of "downtown North York". People who suffer from Lastman nostalgia are likely to discover unsavoury details about the "tiny, imperfect mayor", such as a high degree of coincidence between the mayor's campaign contributors and those who directly benefitted from the redevelopment of "downtown North York".

It's significantly harder for such development to occur if city council and the mayor are in opposition every step of the way.

Are we to assume that you believe that the current "city council and the mayor are in opposition [to growth and development] every step of the way"? If so, then I would like to nominate your argument for "strawman of the year".

 

[voxpopulicosmicum]

Of course if you mean by "Shoved Down our Throats" you mean, we elected him then he gave out Transit City. Then we re-elected him by a landslide, then yeah, Transit City was "shoved down our throats".

TransitCity tastes good, no matter how it's served.

 

[kEiThZ]

^ It leaves a bitter after-taste if you are from Scarborough and have not seen any reduction in the number of transfers if you have a destination anywhere other than in Scarborough (like the downtown core for example).

 

[Whoaccio]

Let's not look under the rocks around thr redevelopment of "downtown North York". People who suffer from Lastman nostalgia are likely to discover unsavoury details about the "tiny, imperfect mayor", such as a high degree of coincidence between the mayor's campaign contributors and those who directly benefitted from the redevelopment of "downtown North York".

The fact remains that NYCC is the most succesful example in Toronto of urbanizing suburbs. Its not perfect, obviously, but between '01 and '06 Ward 23's population grew by 30% making it, to the best of my knowledge, the fastest growing ward in the city. I, for one, would be surprised to see the 'Avenues' fad achieve as much as Lastman did with NYCC.

Of course if you mean by "Shoved Down our Throats" you mean, we elected him then he gave out Transit City. Then we re-elected him by a landslide, then yeah, Transit City was "shoved down our throats".

I would be surprised if anyone circa 2006 knew anything about TC. While that says more about general voter apathy than a problem with Miller/TC, reading a 'landslide' victory for Miller as a landslide for TC isn't totally accurate.

 

[kEiThZ]

I would be surprised if anyone circa 2006 knew anything about TC. While that says more about general voter apathy than a problem with Miller/TC, reading a 'landslide' victory for Miller as a landslide for TC isn't totally accurate.

+1

I am willing to bet that even now a good chunk (if not most) of the public still has very little understanding of what Transit City is. And I bet if they understood the trade-offs involved there would be far less enthusiasm for it. A lot of the support for Transit City is not because people like the concept. It's because residents are just happy that something is being done about improving transit. If you told them what they were giving up (the city has a great PR campaign on the pros....but neglects to talk about the cons) in the process, I suspect that people would be quite dissatisfied.

 

[GraphicMatt]

Unfortunately, elections tend to distill complicated issues - like transit strategies - down to their simplest pieces. Miller will portray anyone who argues against Transit City as being anti-transit. And, especially if his opponent aligns themselves with the suburban 'war on cars' crowd, it'll be hard to get voters to see otherwise.

It'd probably be best to look past Transit City as an election issue and focus on the next big transit project. The DRL would be a good start. It'd be easy to make an argument that those living in the downtown core have been dramatically under-served by new transit construction in the last thirty years.

You either need to increase voter turnout or win over the downtown core voters to beat Miller. The latter is probably the winning strategy.

 

[Paleo]

Mississauga's operating budget has increased at a rate faster than growth and inflation. Have they been caving into unions too? If you want to talk about being forced to help neighbouring municipalities, you can't talk about that without mentioning the hundreds of millions the province taxes businesses in the 416 to fund education outside of the city. GO is fine because it is primarily an inbound system that ignores the 416.

That cities in Canada (it's not just an Ontario problem) have had fiscal challenges is not an excuse for much of what Miller has done. He has received greater revenue generating powers than many of those other municipalities. Is Mississauga allowed to apply a land transfer tax or a charge on vehicle registration? And in Toronto's case, the neighbouring municipalities are forced to help out with social service costs and some transportation costs (GO). So to argue that Toronto is completely helpless is patently false. Miller has worsened Toronto's fiscal position by wasting away the extra revenue that was generated on raises for the unions and councillors. He refuses to contract out any service, even if it makes sense for the city not to provide said service. And he's about to squander billions in transit dollars on a plan to deploy trams across a city that barely has a functioning subway network.

 

[kEiThZ]

Mississauga's operating budget has increased at a rate faster than growth and inflation. Have they been caving into unions too?

A lot of that above average spending growth has to do with their planning decisions. They built a sprawled out city and a good chunk of that infrastructure is coming of age just as developer charges are drying up. Naturally, that's lead them to the tight fiscal situation they are in. However, they still do not have anywhere near the revenue generating powers that the city of Toronto does.

If you want to talk about being forced to help neighbouring municipalities, you can't talk about that without mentioning the hundreds of millions the province taxes businesses in the 416 to fund education outside of the city.

But does that result in differential tax rates between Toronto and the 905? Education is pretty much taxed evenly throughout the province now. It's not a direct transfer from the 416 to the 905. The pooling of social service costs is. That's a region specific fund designed solely to pay for the city of Toronto's social services cost. I don't think there's anything wrong with that concept. However, once again it demonstrates that Toronto does get a lot of help with paying the bills.

Miller got revenue generating powers that should have let him balance the books in theory. With the province slowly uploading social service costs as well (not fast enough maybe), expenses should in theory be declining or remaining constant. So where has all that fiscal manoeuvering room gone? His supporters might not like that question but I guarantee you McGuinty will be asking the same thing when Miller goes cap in hand to Queen's Park asking for 350 million (maybe more if the strike settlement works out higher than planned).