So is Ford fiscally responsible? Does he truly have the taxpayer’s interest at heart?
It’s a little more complex and questionable than that.
For example, Ford claims $24 million was “saved” by hiking the fees for recreation programs. And fair enough, it saved the city money when it comes to general accounts. But it doesn’t mean savings for the average joe when they still have to pay the fee.
Yet Ford makes the opposite argument for how he saved Torontonians money by eliminating the vehicle registration tax, which required car owners in the city to pay a $60-per-year fee. Ford estimates this fee brought $200 million into city coffers. By eliminating it, he’s saved a driver $60 a year but the city now has to find other ways to pay for infrastructure and road projects, which, well, that’s also taxpayer money.
It’s classic cases of robbing Peter to pay Paul, not truly finding efficiencies within the budget.
Ford has said that as mayor he would never use an annual surplus to balance the current year’s operating budget. And yet, in 2011 and 2012 he did just that, while using reserve funds in 2013 to balance the budget.
Under his watch, Ford claims Toronto is spending less money than in previous years.
And fair enough, Ford has been a driving force behind cutting back on spending, which has lowered how much spending has gone up by — but all three of the budgets he has overseen have increased each year once the final numbers are tallied.
This isn’t strong fiscal management, it’s fudging numbers to appear as fiscally responsible to win votes.
And for someone who emphasizes cutbacks, Ford has a habit of it not applying to him.
After scandal broke in November, Ford gave each of his 20 staff $5,000 bonuses — that’s $100,000 — notes GTA magazine Grid TO when listing some of Ford’s fiscal failures.
Former Ford Staffer Kia Nejatian told police that he was sent to buy alcohol for Ford twice a week. At a $30/hour staff cost and being employed for three years, that amounts to $6,000 in labour — labour that should have been focused on working for the taxpayers.
Add in costs for when Ford allegedly sent staff to his house to change toilet paper, bring him cases of Diet Coke, change light bulbs, or change batteries in children’s toys. Or an estimated $81,760 in costs for time Ford’s staff spent coaching football.
And by engaging in illegal activities — it must be re-emphasized that Ford has full out admitted to smoking crack and drinking and driving — Ford has made taxpayers pay more for policing. Think of the hours police had to spend on this whole Ford Smorgasbord or scandal. Think of how much we complain about our own policing costs here in Medicine Hat.
It would be irresponsible for police to not investigate Ford. To do otherwise would have been granting him immunity for simply being mayor. That’s a terrible precedent to set.
There is sympathy to be had for Ford. He is obviously a man struggling with addiction, and that is a horrible situation to be in.
But he is no tragic financial hero felled by personal vices.