[nfitz]

She shouldn't be expressing it publicly. She should be expressing it to the mayor or whoever she serves. Then it's up to ELECTED politicians to decide.

She serves the citizens of Toronto.

Unless city politics is vastly different model/code of conduct than provincial and federal politics.

City governance is hugely different than the federal/provincial model. There's no comparison. For a start, the mayor has very little power. The power all sits in council, not the mayor. And the council is yet to come to an opinion. Ergo she can't be saying anything against the will of council - which surely would value the opinion of the professional - rather than an unethical racist like Nick Kouvalis.

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

And if Nick Kouvalis wasn't wrong about what he was tweeting about in the first place, not an ideologically-driven idiot to the point of getting Rob Ford elected on purpose, and not on the other side of the planet from what he's commenting on, it would matter what he thinks.

 

[junior43]

She serves the citizens of Toronto.

City governance is hugely different than the federal/provincial model. There's no comparison. For a start, the mayor has very little power. The power all sits in council, not the mayor. And the council is yet to come to an opinion. Ergo she can't be saying anything against the will of council - which surely would value the opinion of the professional - rather than an unethical racist like Nick Kouvalis.

I generally agree with what you're saying, but didn't the city planning dept basically write a report on this, but came to no conclusion? (stating that they listed pros and cons of both sides and it was up to city council to decide.) Isn't this also her dept? If her own dept came to no conclusion, why is she volunteering one for them?

Also, it's a bit of semantics, but I don't think she should be volunteering her preference, if a journalist asks, sure, but she shouldn't be championing one side over the other - especially when her own department doesn't have a preference. If a councillor asks her opinion, she should obviously give it as well.

some of this is coming from my shakey memory so correct me where I misstated something.

 

[TonyV]

^ and can you imagine a city going ahead with an elevated expressway without consulting the guidance and opinion of some planning staff and those who have architectural lookouts? You know, like, leaving it all up to politicians? Oh, yes, that's how we got the monstrously awful Gardiner in the first place.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

She shouldn't be expressing it publicly. She should be expressing it to the mayor or whoever she serves. Then it's up to ELECTED politicians to

Keesmatt does not work for the mayor. The only group of people she arguably works for is City Council and of course the people of Toronto. This idea that she needs the mayors permission to voice her opinion is nonsense. Again, it must be emphasized that she does not work for the mayor.

 

[Napoleon]

^ and can you imagine a city going ahead with an elevated expressway without consulting the guidance and opinion of some planning staff and those who have architectural lookouts? You know, like, leaving it all up to politicians? Oh, yes, that's how we got the monstrously awful Gardiner in the first place.

There have been many times where I wish the city staff would step up even more. In the few years I've lived in Toronto, I've been pretty unimpressed with both short and long term decision making on the city council. Maybe other city councils are this ineffective too, or perhaps Rob Ford just brought more attention to it, but Toronto's city council comes across as uninformed, partisan, and short-sighted.

 

[Napoleon]

By the way, you can follow along on the debate here:
http://torontoist.com/2015/06/live-blog-council-debates-the-east-gardiner/
As a caveat, this is not helping me get any work done.

 

[goreckm]

She shouldn't be expressing it publicly. She should be expressing it to the mayor or whoever she serves. Then it's up to ELECTED politicians to decide.

Unless city politics is vastly different model/code of conduct than provincial and federal politics.

My father was a senior policy advisor to the attorney general. He would never have voiced his personal opinion on what the AG should or shouldn't do regarding his policy recommendations to him. You keep that between you and the minister, not the general public.

Can you imagine if bureaucrats were constantly going to the press openly disagreeing with the ministers they reported too? It would be a circus.

Very unprofessional.

Ugh, what a horrible authoritarian viewpoint. Is the general public not smart enough to understand what the genius politicians understand? Are we to allow politicians to dictate what reality we should hear? (Really, politicians?!?!)

I would actually argue that it should be the responsibility of staff to voice their opinion to ensure that we don't get politicians hiding the truth, and it should be a criminal offense to not speak out if they can. I know that will never happen, but, politics can only be improved by not having politicians in charge of messaging.

 

[arcum]

By the way, you can follow along on the debate here:
http://torontoist.com/2015/06/live-blog-council-debates-the-east-gardiner/
As a caveat, this is not helping me get any work done.

Torontoist is so one-sided it's almost funny. The last 30 mins of council discussions have been on the traffic impacts and congestion removing the Gardiner will contribute to, not that you'd know it from reading that blog.

 

[Adjei]

So a mayor can make any kind of ridiculous claim, say for instance, saving the city a billion dollars, or making traffic congestion totally disappear, and it's up to city staff to just nod in agreement...

Or when Rob Ford was suggesting we put subways on Finch, I mean the city staff should have gone ahead with the marvelous idea.

 

[Adjei]

She shouldn't be expressing it publicly. She should be expressing it to the mayor or whoever she serves. Then it's up to ELECTED politicians to decide.

Unless city politics is vastly different model/code of conduct than provincial and federal politics.

My father was a senior policy advisor to the attorney general. He would never have voiced his personal opinion on what the AG should or shouldn't do regarding his policy recommendations to him. You keep that between you and the minister, not the general public.

Can you imagine if bureaucrats were constantly going to the press openly disagreeing with the ministers they reported too? It would be a circus.

Very unprofessional.

Dude do you think we live in North Korea. So some mayor or councillor can come up with any nonsensical idea and the city staff have to agree with. What world are you living in?

 

[Soop]

I generally agree with what you're saying, but didn't the city planning dept basically write a report on this, but came to no conclusion? (stating that they listed pros and cons of both sides and it was up to city council to decide.) Isn't this also her dept? If her own dept came to no conclusion, why is she volunteering one for them?

This has been discussed several times at council today. Originally, staff only recommended the remove option. They were asked to go back and develop the so-called 'hybrid' option. When looking at the pros and cons, they didn't make a recommendation because there isn't one that is better in all categories (environment, traffic, pedestrian, economic, capital costs, etc). It depends on through what lens (to use a council term) it is being looked at. So their recommendation was that council pick one.

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

Dude do you think we live in North Korea. So some mayor or councillor can come up with any nonsensical idea and the city staff have to agree with. What world are you living in?

The real world. If you are following along with the debate you will see the role of staff - to answer questions from council to assist them in coming to a decision.

 

[nfitz]

I generally agree with what you're saying, but didn't the city planning dept basically write a report on this, but came to no conclusion? (stating that they listed pros and cons of both sides and it was up to city council to decide.) Isn't this also her dept? If her own dept came to no conclusion, why is she volunteering one for them?

Where is this report? Can you provide a link to it?

I see reports from the Deputy City Manager and from the Acting City Manager, but not from the Chief Planner of the Planning Department.

This has been discussed several times at council today. Originally, staff only recommended the remove option. They were asked to go back and develop the so-called 'hybrid' option. When looking at the pros and cons, they didn't make a recommendation because there isn't one that is better in all categories (environment, traffic, pedestrian, economic, capital costs, etc). It depends on through what lens (to use a council term) it is being looked at. So their recommendation was that council pick one.

That's in reference to the City Manager's report. Which has a larger remit than planning. Presumably the Chief Planner is offering their view from a planning perspective, which is different that the City Toadie^H^H^H^H^H^HManager.

 

[Adjei]

The real world. If you are following along with the debate you will see the role of staff - to answer questions from council to assist them in coming to a decision.

Ya and the real world where staff are allowed to have their own opionion without having to toe the Mayor's line or face backlash.