Category: Politics

  • On the 2016 City of Toronto budget (Updated)

    Updated Jan. 12 with a thought on a progressive property tax. 

    It’s budget time at Toronto City Hall. Right now, city councillors are in the process of debating the city’s expenses and revenues. While the City of Toronto, like all municipalities in the province, is prohibited from operating at a deficit, there’s a ever-growing gap between revenue (taxes, fees, grants, etc.) and the necessary operating and capital expenses required to successfully run a city of 2.6 million people.

    Operating expenses are being held back due to “gapping,” in which vacant staff positions aren’t filled immediately. This is an easy way to cut costs, especially at a time when all city departments – the Toronto Police Service excepted – were requested by Mayor John Tory to reduce costs by 2 percent. But as Neville Park explains in Torontoist, this is not a viable long-term strategy.

    Meanwhile, the capital costs keep piling up. The Toronto Community Housing Corporation (TCHC) has hundreds of uninhabitable units; thousands more are at risk of being closed up unless its capital backlog is addressed. The Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) has a backlog of state-of-good-repair projects necessary to maintain its sophisticated transit system operating, as well as unfunded projects to improve accessibility and purchases of new vehicles to keep up with demand and grow ridership.

    2016Budget
    Estimated City of Toronto 2016 operating budget revenue (source)

    In 2016, $3.95 billion will be collected from property taxes in order to fund the City of Toronto’s operating budget, just over a third of all revenue. It’s the largest source of revenue, but provincial grants, user fees (such as TTC fares) and fines, water and waste management charges are other important sources of revenue. The much-loathed municipal land transfer tax will contribute $532 million to the city’s budget, an increasingly important source of revenue. But there’s still a projected gap, estimated between $90 and $124 million, that still has to be filled. That’s where the debate will largely focus on.

    Property taxes mostly do not fund the city’s capital budget; utility and parking rates are the largest single-source of funds (water, waste and city parking are self-financing), followed by provincial and federal grants (largely to fund transit and other infrastructure), development fees, and debt-financing and from the city’s capital reserves.

    Mayor Tory, despite wanting to hold the line on expenses, also wants to build his signature – yet unrealistic – SmartTrack line, among other transit projects, as well as social housing. He proposed a new levy (not calling it a “tax”) in December, if approved, it would be phased-in, starting in 2017.

    I’ve been critical of Mayor Tory’s administration, but his proposed infrastructure levy is a step in the right direction. It’s an acknowledgement that the backlog of necessary capital projects needs to be addressed.

    But I was concerned to read last week in the Toronto Star that senior city staff and Tory’s advisers were considering, even laying some of the groundwork, for a sale of a minority stake of Toronto Hydro to pay for new infrastructure. While it might raise $1.5 billion, it would be a one-time source of funds, and would reduce or eliminate an annual dividend that raised $60 million for the city in 2014. There were also rumours of a partial or complete sale of the Toronto Parking Authority. But responding in the Toronto Sun, Tory denied having such plans.

    The City of Toronto desperately needs to seek new, stable, and sustainable revenue sources beyond the property tax and user fees, neither of which are progressive or especially fair. Reinstating the vehicle registration tax would be a good place to start, at least to fund the city’s unfunded anti-poverty strategy, but income and sales taxes, currently prohibited by provincial legislation, tied to inflation, would help. So would increased, sustained provincial and federal assistance.

    You can find out more about the 2016 budget at the city’s website here. I’m not following the debates that closely, but Torontoist can be counted on for good issue-based coverage, the Toronto Star’s Ed Keenan provides excellent commentary.


    On property taxes, current value assessments, and a progressive property tax

    Property taxes are a very difficult subject to explain, but David Hains at Torontoist explains how they work far better than I, or most people, can. Property taxes are not well understood, but it’s important to note that despite rising property values, the city does not necessarily collect more taxes on each property. In many cases, even with a tax hike, the amount paid by some property owners may stay the same, or even decrease.

    Property taxes provide a predictable and reliable revenue source, but unlike income and sales taxes, they do not increase automatically with inflation; annual tax increases determined by City Council allows the city budget to grow with inflation and support city priorities, such as improved transit, infrastructure repairs, or other city services.

    The city is also phasing in changes to property taxes in order to reduce the burden on commercial properties (including multi-unit residential rental buildings) and increase it on freehold units. This is why, in 2013, I received a rent reduction notice as the property taxes in the apartment building I was living in at the time was reduced.

    To satisfy my interest in property taxes, property values, and assessments, I created three maps based on a City of Toronto 2016 budget briefing note on changes to the current value assessment (CVA) from 2015 to 2016. The Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) conducts property tax assessments for all properties on behalf of municipal governments in Ontario every four years. It is upon these assessments that the city calculates each property’s tax rates.

    The first map, below, shows the average assessed residential property value for 2016, using a standard deviation classification scheme. Ward 25 has, by far, the highest average property value, at $1,375,568. Ward 25 includes the exclusive Bridle Path neighbourhood, as well as the affluent Lawrence Park East and York Mills neighbourhoods. Other Midtown Wards (16, 22, 21) are well above the city’s average property value, assessed at $549,586. Lowest is Ward 8, whose average residential property is assessed at $301,320.

    It’s interesting to note that, with the exception of Ward 4, which narrowly voted for Doug Ford in 2014, the map closely resembles that of John Tory’s support base.

    2016 Average Residential Propery Value std deviation

    The second map, below, shows the change in the average CVA in each ward. Ward 18, which includes the gentrified or gentrifying Queen West, Brockton, Junction Triangle, and Dovercourt Village neighbourhoods had the highest annual average CVA increase, at 6.6 percent. Other downtown wards, such as 14 (which includes gentrifying Parkdale, Roncesvalles, and part of the Junction), 19, and 28 did well, as well as Wards 23, 24 and 41 in the suburbs. The northwest had the smallest average increases in assessments, with Ward 8 again coming in at the bottom, with only a 3.3% increase.

    CVA Change 2015-2016

    Finally, the map below shows the entire aggregate value of residential assessments in 2016. Not surprisingly, Wards along the dense Yonge Street corridor had the highest values. Except for Wards 16 and 25, all have higher than average ward populations, and housing in most neighbourhoods largely consists of expensive detached houses and highrise condominiums.

    2016 Total Residential Propery Values

    In today’s Toronto Star, Ryerson Professor (and friend) Myer Siemiatycki discusses the idea of a progressive property tax. A progressive property tax would be similar to income taxes, in which tax brackets are set up, lowering taxes on lower-value properties, and raising them on properties with high assessed values. Siemiatycki proposes that a first bracket, if a system was implemented this year, would ensure that properties worth under $400,000 would pay less property tax than they paid in 2015. A second bracket would apply to properties assessed at between $400,000 to $600,000, which would be subject to the currently proposed tax increase. Properties worth over $600,000 would be subject to higher property tax increases, the highest bracket topping out at properties worth over $2.5 million. Siemiatycki argues that the most expensive properties have benefited most from Toronto’s increasing housing prices.

    This is an interesting idea that would raise more revenue for the City of Toronto, give many “Ford Nation” residents a tax reduction, and provide more fairness in the flat property tax rate. It would be much more easily implementable than, say, sales and income taxes. But given that John Tory’s base (and wards represented by some of his staunchest allies) would be most affected by such a progressive tax system, I don’t hold out much hope for its adoption.

  • King Street: a mess of Uber proportions

    21207239313_0c5746b3f8_o

    One of the most frustrating things about living and working in central Toronto is having to rely on streetcars for east-west travel. This isn’t the fault of the streetcars; when free of traffic, they’re a smooth, fast and comfortable way to get around. But trapped in the quagmire that is downtown traffic, streetcars are painfully slow. They’re stuck behind left-turning cars and trucks. Cars plugging the curb lane, legally or not, force all traffic into the streetcars’ path. Replacing streetcars with buses isn’t a solution either; not only would more buses (and drivers) be required to match the each streetcar’s superior capacity, but buses would be forced to weave in and out of the curb lane around taxis, parked cars, delivery vans and other obstructions.

    Rapid residential growth, both east and west of the downtown core, have overloaded the 504 King Streetcar. With 64,600 daily riders, it’s the busiest surface route in the system. The city has done little to facilitate this highrise boom in neighbbourhoods such as Corktown and the Distillery District in the east, and CityPlace, Liberty Village, Niagara, and Queen/Gladstone in the west. Further west, the highrise condos built at Humber Bay Shores must either rely on a painfully slow and unreliable ride on the 501 Queen Streetcar, take an infrequent double-fare express bus, or ride a bus up to the Bloor Subway.

    No wonder then, Uber, the controversial firm that has delighted passengers with cheap transportation, but put the livelihoods of taxi drivers in jeopardy, launched UberHop, a variation of its “ride sharing” service that offers flat $5 rides between neighbourhoods along the King Streetcar and the downtown core. From a purely capitalist viewpoint, Uber is filling a need that’s been left unfulfilled.

    (more…)

  • Some thoughts about the 2015 election and Canada’s new government

    My congratulations to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party. The Liberals managed to win a healthy majority government on October 19, 2015, defeating Stephen Harper and the Conservatives. I’m not completely happy with the election day results, but I think there is still plenty to be satisfied about. For now, I’m cautiously optimistic thanks to a clear Conservative defeat and the first few moves on the incoming Liberal government.

    (more…)

  • On Brampton’s short-sighted Hurontario-Main LRT decision

    8742719319_adb77a0b03_k
    LRT mockup at Gage Park, Brampton

    On late Tuesday night (actually, early Wednesday morning) Brampton City Council made disappointing and harmful decision by voting against the Hurontario-Main LRT, a 23.2 kilometre, $1.6-billion light rail line, whose construction costs would be fully covered by the province. This followed another marathon meeting back in July in which a final decision was delayed to allow for further study and a possible compromise.

    The mayor, Linda Jeffrey, and four councillors (Gurpreet Dhillon, Pat Fortini, Marco Medeiros, and Gael Miles) supported the project, but six councillors (Jeff Bowman, Grant Gibson, Elaine Moore, Michael Palleschi, John Sproveiri, and Doug Whillians) voted against. The final vote was 7-4 against the LRT, with Jeffrey mistakenly voting with the majority, but the 6-5 vote against a modified downtown routing in an last-minute attempt to sway opponents should be considered the true decision.

    Light rail transit will still be coming to Brampton – construction will start in 2018 – but it will terminate at Shoppers World at Steeles Avenue, with only three stops completely within Brampton’s borders. Nearly four kilometres and four stops have now disappeared, including the crucial terminal at Brampton GO Station. The map below shows the Hurontario-Main LRT route, with the eliminated sections in red. (A short section of the LRT’s route in Port Credit was eliminated due to community opposition; it would have brought light rail transit closer to Port Credit’s bustling core. The Hurontario LRT will now terminate adjacent to the Port Credit GO Station, north of Lakeshore Road.)

    The Hurontario-Main corridor was selected for LRT simply because it is one of the busiest transit corridors in the Greater Toronto Area outside the City of Toronto; it connects three GO lines and several major bus corridors, it would help urbanize south Brampton and several neighbourhoods in Mississauga. It’s part of a larger regional network, yet six city councillors in Brampton, looking out for narrow, local interests, sunk it.

    Now transit advocates elsewhere are looking to capitalize on Brampton’s loss: at least $200 million of the province’s money won’t be spend. For example, advocates in Hamilton are looking for an opportunity to expand their funded LRT network with Brampton’s cash.

    HMLRT
    The Hurontario-Main LRT, after Tuesday’s vote. 

    The arguments against the LRT included heritage concerns (as if trams aren’t found in the centres of historic cities such as Vienna, Istanbul, Brussels, and Amsterdam), claims of low ridership (which were written about by the Toronto Star’s San Grewal), concerns about operating expenses. Some councillors suggested that Queen Street should get LRT first. Others took exception to the fact that most of the route (17.6 kilometres, 19 stops) would be in Mississauga, while only a quarter of the line would operate within Brampton (5.6 kilometres and eight stops) But one cannot dismiss the NIMBY factor – some of the biggest opponents were wealthy homeowners on Main Street. Even former Premier Bill Davis, long regarded as a friend of cities and public transit, came out publicly against the LRT. Davis will long be remembered for stopping destructive expressways, but won’t support public transit when it runs down his street.

    Opponents suggested other routes, or tunneling under Main Street. But those alternatives were more expensive, more difficult, less convenient for riders, and weren’t going to be funded by the province. These suggestions were studied by city staff and outside consultants and rejected.

    Yes, Queen Street is Brampton Transit’s busiest corridor. Yes, the ridership will be lower north of Steeles Avenue than through central Mississauga. Yes, there will be some traffic impacts on Main Street.

    But there’s no current planning study for a potential Queen Street LRT; a route hasn’t been chosen (would it go to the Spadina Subway extension to Vaughan? York Region would have to be on board), there’s no funding on the table, and the Hurontario corridor in Mississauga is a lot busier than Highway 7 in York Region. And yes, Mississauga benefits more from the LRT. But Mississauga has a larger population, a much larger transit ridership, and more jobs. By connecting to Downtown Brampton, the LRT increases mobility for the entire region, connects to the Kitchener GO line, and allows for direct transfers to the 501 Queen Zum, Brampton’s busiest bus route. It is part of a regional transit network; it would have made it a lot easier for trips, for example, between Downtown Guelph and Mississauga City Centre.

    10671927_oriToday’s news that anti-LRT councillors are now going to seek federal funds for transit expansion makes me want to tear my hair out. This image of Frank Grimes pretty much describes how I’m feeling right now.


    Just adding to my frustration, I read today that Councillor Bowman, who helped sink the Main Street section of the LRT, is now going to look for transit funding from the newly elected Liberal federal government. In the article, Bowman suggests that since Brampton elected five new Liberal MPs, helping to defeat the Conservatives, it was time to “leverage” that support. Payback, if you will. But there are no other plans to hold up, nothing that’s “shovel-ready.” There will be no ribbon-cuttings for Liberal MPs and cabinet ministers to attend anytime soon.

    If looking for money from a new federal government – one that’s so far very friendly with their provincial counterpart – it would have looked a lot better to have approved the transit that the province, and a majority of Bramptonians, wanted, and then ask for additional funds to build on that. Advocating for a potential Queen Street LRT would be a lot when there’s an existing line to connect it, and a strong transit-focused hub to anchor it.

    So, to sum up, Brampton city councillors threw away at least $200 million for a light rail project that they didn’t want, a gift-wrapped transit opportunity from the provincial Liberal government. Now they will be looking for new transit funding for alternative transit routes, which have yet to be planned, from the federal Liberal government. Good luck with that. 
     

  • Not so FAST: SmartTrack gets a lobby group, raises many questions (Updated)

    smarttrack_fb
    I find myself feeling frustrated, worn down, and at times angry about this federal election that’s thankfully coming to an end on Monday. As a progressive voter, I’ve been disappointed by Thomas Mulcair and the New Democrats, for reasons that Desmond Cole explains so very well in today’s Toronto Star. (Locally, I ‘ve been supporting the NDP’s Linda McQuaig in Toronto Centre, whose progressive credentials are impeccable.) The bright side is that Stephen Harper’s Conservatives are going down to an almost-certain defeat, hopefully taking their narrow and divisive targeted politics with them. My wish is for a minority government in which the Liberals and New Democrats share power; this may check the Liberals’ record of running left and governing right.

    Happily, Torontonians also have the Blue Jays and municipal politics to watch. Last night, we all got to watch the strangest seventh inning in baseball history; today, we get to snicker at the efforts of an Astroturfing crew of lobbyists pushing SmartTrack – a mayoral campaign slogan masquerading as a transit plan. Municipal politics may be at times just as depressing as provincial or federal politics, but at least it’s a lot more fun.

    The Toronto Star’s fantastic transportation reporter, Tess Kalinowski, reported on a new booster group, known as FAST (Friends & Allies of SmartTrack). Its spokesperson would be Alvin Curling, a former provincial Liberal cabinet minister and Speaker of the Provincial Parliament. Other members of its Public Advisory Board include Kyle Rae, former city councillor who is now a City Hall lobbyist, and three prominent lawyers  – Andrea Geddes Poole, Michael Brooks, and David S. Young. Also involved is one Tom Allison. 

    According to a press release, FAST claims it’s “here to advocate for SmartTrack and to educate the public about how it could make a huge difference in cutting congestion and moving people around the region.” It would raise funds “devoted to creating a variety of awareness campaigns such as town halls and informational videos.” 

    FAST’s website – launched today – is comically full of spelling and syntax errors, misinformation, and complete fabrications of basic facts. Here are just a few. (more…)

  • Exploring the downtown federal election races: Part II

    Back in April 2015, I looked at the impact of changes to the new federal electoral districts in three key downtown races: Toronto Centre, University-Rosedale, and Spadina-Fort York. The three downtown ridings were created by splitting two larger electoral districts, Trinity-Spadina and a larger Toronto Centre.

    As a downtown resident and political junkie, I was very interested in how previous election results would look with the new electoral districts. Could Toronto Centre, long held by the Liberals, go orange with Rosedale and Yorkville lopped off? Would University-Rosedale and Spadina-Fort York become Liberal bastions with the new boundaries?

    When I wrote the original post, the Liberal Party had nominated candidates in all three ridings — Chrystia Freeland in University-Rosedale, Adam Vaughan in Spadina-Fort York, and first-time candidate Bill Morneau in Toronto Centre. I wrote more about all six candidates (and some of my personal opinions) in the original post.

    Back in April, the New Democrats nominated Jennifer Hollett in University-Rosedale and Linda McQuaig in Toronto Centre, but had yet to choose a candidate in Spadina-Fort York to run against Adam Vaughan. Vaughan, who took Trinity-Spadina in a 2014 by-election, was a popular Toronto city councillor. There were rumours that prominent criminal defense James Lockyer and former MP and mayoral candidate Olivia Chow were both considering running, but in late July, Chow formally sought, and won, the nomination.

    After the 2014 municipal election, in which Chow came in third place in the race for mayor, she accepted a position at Ryerson University. I expected that she was going to sit this election out, but I was proven wrong.

    All three ridings are proving to be interesting races. The Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) and Green Party have also nominated candidates in all three electoral districts, but only the Liberals and NDP are competitive.

    In this post, I added results and maps from the 2008 election, when the Harper Conservatives won a minority government, the Liberals were led by Stéphane Dion and the New Democratic Party, led by Jack Layton, came in fourth place in the seat count (after the Bloc Québécois) with 30 seats. Perhaps the 2011 election, in which the Bloc was nearly eliminated, the NDP became the Official Opposition and the Liberals relegated to third place, was an anomaly.

    Toronto Centre 2008-2013 Toronto Centre election results, 2008-2013

    In Toronto Centre, the NDP kept gaining support since the 2008 election, yet the Liberals held on with comfortable margins in 2011 and 2013. In the 2013 by-election, triggered by Bob Rae’s retirement from electoral politics, the CPC vote share collapsed (as did voter turnout), and Linda McQuaig, the new NDP standard-bearer, more than tripled the NDP’s share of the vote in 2008.

    Trinity-Spadina 2008-2014Trinity-Spadina election results, 2008-2014

    The NDP’s Olivia Chow, elected MP in 2006, was re-elected in 2008 and 2011. But her resignation in 2014 to run for Mayor of Toronto triggered a by-election in which Toronto city councillor Adam Vaughan took the riding for the Liberals in a by-election held on June 30, in the middle of the Canada Day long weekend. Voter turnout was a miserable 31.9%.  (more…)

  • A quick guide to the Toronto Ward Boundary Review

    2014 Election - 2018 Ward ProjectionsThe variance in ward populations in 2018; new ward boundaries will address the population inequities shown above.

    Back in March, I wrote about the City’s plans for new ward boundaries, outlining the history of Toronto’s post-amalgamation council and the need for fairer representation. While Toronto’s population continues to increase, most of the growth is concentrated in northeast Scarborough, central North York and Etobicoke, and especially Downtown, where new condo towers are going up by the dozen.

    Yesterday, on August 11, the Toronto Ward Boundary Options Report was released, setting the stage for further public consultations. With the report, we now have tangible details of what the new wards might look like, and how many politicians the new council, to be elected in 2018, will be comprised of.

    I wrote more about the report in Torontoist, with a discussion on the process, criteria, and the various options presented.

    While the mayor may disagre (“I think the last thing we need is more politicians,” he was quoted as saying), I personally prefer the options that add a few more councillors than the existing 44. Back in 1997, the newly amalgamated City of Toronto had 57 city councillors, and with a growing population, a small increase in the size of council is more than appropriate. “Option 1 – Minimal Change” adds three new councillors; two downtown and one in North York; it is not a bad option, though I think fifty is a workable number.

    There are plenty of opportunities for feedback, including a survey and a new round of public consultations in the Fall; I recommend taking part and sharing your own views.

  • Updated: The Toronto Star’s shameful reporting on the Hurontario-Main LRT

    IMG_6655

    As of Tuesday, July 28, the Toronto Star has not published any letter to the editor responding to last Tuesday’s front-page article by San Grewal questioning the ridership of the northern section of the Hurontario-Main LRT, or any corrections. I find myself very much disappointed by this. I know I was not the only reader to submit a letter to San Grewal’s poor reporting, to which I link below.

    Here is the letter that I wrote and submitted on July 21, 2015:

    Dear Editor,

    I wish to express my disappointment with the publication of a badly researched and one-sided article by San Grewal on the opposition to the Hurontario-Main LRT.

    The article starts with by getting its numbers wrong. In the second paragraph, it claims that the LRT’s capacity will be 15,000 riders per hour per direction (PPHPD). This is false. The City of Brampton’s own staff report, which recommended that council approve the funded Main Street LRT [which can be found here:http://www.brampton.ca/EN/City-Hall/meetings-agendas/PDD%20Committee%202010/20150622pis_H10.pdf], states that the maximum capacity of the LRT is 7200 PPHPD, less than half the figure Grewal claims.

    The comparison to the Sheppard Subway, which Grewal appears to take at face value, is especially inappropriate. The Sheppard Subway cost nearly $1 billion when it was constructed 15 years ago. The section of the LRT between Steeles Avenue and Downtown Brampton will be built entirely on the surface, and comprise only a short section of the corridor’s entire length. It is worth repeating that the province will be funding the entire project; any deviation from Main Street would be more expensive and will cost Brampton taxpayers more.

    The Hurontario-Main LRT is not only a transit project; it is a city-building exercise that will help direct investment and urban intensification in Brampton and Mississauga. The light rail project will connect three GO Station and several urban centres identified for growth, including Brampton’s Downtown Core.

    San Grewal’s article is misleading, one-sided and irresponsible. I expect better from the Toronto Star.

    Sincerely,

    Sean Marshall

    The original post follows:

    (more…)

  • Why Brampton’s Main Street needs the LRT

    IMG_6655

    For the first twenty-five years of my life, I lived in Brampton. I still have family and friends who live there, and while I was happy to move to a place of my own in Toronto (first in North York, later to the old City of Toronto), I still have a soft spot for my hometown, even if it is a gigantic, sprawling auto-centric suburb.  Tonight, it has the opportunity to vote for a transit project that will help to transform its long-neglected downtown core into a thriving urban centre.

    Nearly a century ago, Brampton was a small town of about 5,000 people; the junction of two railways: the Grand Trunk mainline between Toronto and Chicago, and the Canadian Pacific branch line to Orangeville, Owen Sound, and other points in Midwestern Ontario. It was the seat of Peel County, with a beautiful 1867 Italianate courthouse, with a registry office and jail behind. Brampton had all the trappings of a prosperous rural service centre, including a hospital, a Romanesque federal building, a Carnegie Library, six historic brick or stone churches, a movie and vaudeville theatre, an armoury, and a fire hall. While there were manufacturing concerns by the railway junction  – both the Hewetson Shoe Company and Dominion Skate manufactured footwear – the leading industry was horicultural. The massive Dale and Calvert greenhouse complexes exported flowers and bulbs across Canada; as a result Brampton’s nickname was “Flower Town.” Grand houses lined Main Street, showing off the town’s booming economy.

    It wasn’t until the 1950s that Brampton began the transition from a small industrial and civic centre into a suburb of Toronto. In 1960, a new mall, anchored by Steinberg’s and Woolworth’s, opened south of downtown, new schools and factories, including a large American Motors assembly plant, opened here as well. In 1974, the same year that the first GO Train departed from Brampton for Toronto, the town was amalgamated with sections of several surrounding rural townships, becoming a city of nearly 100,000. Today, Brampton has a population of nearly 600,000.

    Apart from the greenhouses, which disappeared by 1980, and the hospital, which moved across town in 2008, all of the buildings I described are still standing (or in the case of Dominion Skate, partially standing). Downtown Brampton is blessed by its collection of historic buildings; many of these structures are lovingly preserved. The old Thomas Fuller designed Dominion Building on Main Street, which later became a police station and then a pub, was renovated and now has a Starbucks. GO Transit and VIA Rail still use the 1907 Grand Trunk Station. The Hewetson Shoe Factory is now a loft commercial space, and the old county buildings were preserved and now house the innovative Peel Art Gallery, Museum and Archives.

    While there’s lots of great built heritage in Downtown Brampton, but downtown struggles with retail vacancies; condominium towers built in the last decade have had difficulty with sales. A new condo tower planned for the Dominion Skate building, right across the tracks from the GO/VIA station, did not get built; it sits in a half-demolished state, awaiting a new use. Also awaiting a reuse is the old Capitol Theatre, which closed as Brampton’s civic performing arts centre when the new Rose Theatre opened at Brampton’s historic “Four Corners” in 2006. There’s the popular Gage Park, with its 25-year old skating path (which has since been copied in Etobicoke and elsewhere), but most attempts at urban renewal have been, at best, only partially successful.

    IMG_6642Thomas Fuller’s 1889 Dominion Building, Brampton

    Tonight, Brampton City Council will hold a special meeting to decide the fate of its section a fully funded $1.6 billion light rail project proposed for the Hurontario-Main Street corridor from Port Credit to Downtown Brampton. The LRT, which will be funded entirely by the Province of Ontario, will connect three GO corridors, the urban centres of Port Credit and Brampton, several major employment clusters, and Mississauga’s modern city centre, which includes Ontario’s largest mall.

    While most of the LRT route would operate in a reserved median in the centre of the street, in Downtown Brampton, it would operate in mixed traffic on the surface. It would require no private property, though it would require eliminating some surface parking on Main Street and turn restrictions at some intersections and driveways.

    The newly-elected mayor of Brampton, Linda Jeffrey, is in favour of the project, including the planned Main Street alignment, but at least five of ten councillors are against it. Tonight’s vote will be a nail-biter, a meeting for which a record 130-plus residents are registered to depute on this item; the city is clearly divided on this project.

    Opponents claim that the project mostly benefits Mississauga, and that light rail running along Main Street would ruin its heritage character, and would threaten the Saturday farmers market, which is set up on a closed Main Street. They also argue that the removal of street parking would hurt downtown businesses. These arguments are, of course, bunk; the heavy traffic, including light trucks and frequent buses do plenty to mar Main Street’s heritage; trams and light rail trains run through historic European cities like Brussels, Amsterdam, Prague, and Istanbul; the farmers market could simply re-locate to the new Garden Square or onto Queen Street. There are four large city-owned off-street parking garages with room to spare. These arguments are convenient strawmen hiding true NIMBY attitudes.

    8228039505_d6d424f22d_oThe Peel County Courthouse, now the Peel Art Gallery, Museum and Archives (PAMA)

    It is true that most of the route passes through Mississauga; it’s also true that the larger city to the south enjoys more benefits from residential and employment growth on its portion of the corridor. Main Street follows Etobicoke Creek north of Steeles Avenue; this limits new development. However, lands between Shoppers World (which has been losing major retail tenants like The Bay and Target) and Highway 407 are prime opportunities for intensification, as is the largely-vacant Brampton Mall at Nanwood Avenue. But the intermodal connections at Downtown Brampton and the opportunity to revitalize the downtown core make up for these drawbacks.

    Last year, at a 10-1 decisive vote, City Council voted against the proposed route, ordering staff and consultants to evaluate alternative alignments.

    These alternatives, nine of which were studied, included one that follows Etobicoke Creek through a floodplain and residential backyards. Other routes would have taken passengers far out of the way on McLaughlin or Kennedy Roads to reach the downtown core. A tunnel under Main Street, which would cost the City of Brampton $380 million, was looked at as well. Staff came back to Council in June with a report that evaluated all these possible alternatives and re-recommended the original surface alignment as being the most fiscally and technically responsible option and the best for transit users and for city-building.

    IMG_6675The Etobicoke Creek LRT alignment, proposed as a by-pass of Main Street

    The Hurontario-Main LRT is the boost Downtown Brampton needs. While expanded GO rail service will come, most Brampton commuters aren’t headed to Toronto’s financial core; they’re commuting to jobs elsewhere in Brampton, in Mississauga, and in other suburbs, and inter-suburb transport is lacking. Creating a higher-order transit network requires nodes, and Downtown Brampton, one of only a few historic and walkable neighbourhoods in Toronto’s suburban belt, is an ideal place for such a node. Not only is there the connection to GO and VIA trains (which would also benefit commuters to and from Mississauga, Guelph, Kitchener-Waterloo and elsewhere), but there are many opportunities for residential and employment intensification downtown, and along the Main Street corridor. Vacant storefronts that pockmark Main and Queen Streets say to me that more foot traffic is needed to revitalize these buildings. The LRT will help, not hinder, this goal.

    If Brampton votes a second time against the Hurontario-Main LRT, it will still be built, but will terminate at Steeles Avenue, four kilometres south of the downtown core. It will require a transfer to northbound buses at a third-rate shopping mall rather than at an urban transit hub with intercity rail connections. It would be a decision that Brampton will come to regret; offers of provincially funded transit don’t come around very often.

    Voting no will be, to put it mildly, a lost opportunity. Hopefully, Brampton City Council will see the sense of going with the province’s offer of a fully-funded LRT corridor.

  • Gardiner East: Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Megacity

    On Thursday, June 11, Toronto City Council voted to maintain the Gardiner Expressway between Jarvis Street and the Don Valley Parkway, endorsing the “hybrid” option by a vote of 24-21. The previous vote, a motion to support the remove/boulevard option, was defeated by a 19-26 vote. The two inconsistent votes were by Councillors Anthony Perruzza (Ward 8) and Rob Ford (Ward 2), who didn’t like either of the two options on the table.

    Immediately after that vote, I created the two maps below. The first shows the vote on whether to go with the less expensive option, to replace the East Gardiner with a boulevard. The second shows the final vote on the “hybrid” option strongly supported by the mayor, despite all the evidence that maintaining that portion of the elevated freeway wasn’t necessary. I shared these maps on Twitter.

    TT - Gardiner VoteVote on the Remove/Boulevard option for the Gardiner East

    TT - Gardiner Vote v2Vote on the “Hybrid” option for the Gardiner East

    While all “downtown” councillors, representing nearly all the former City of Toronto and much of East York favoured the tear-down, it wasn’t entirely an urban-suburban split. Six councillors in Scarborough and North York, namely Paul Ainslie, Michael Thompson, Ron Moeser, Shelley Caroll, John Filion, and Maria Augimeri, voted for the Gardiner’s removal. Eight (including Perruzza and Ford) voted against the Mayor, making the decision to go with the “Hybrid” a close 24-21 vote, a blow to Tory’s promise as a reasoned “consensus builder.”

    But almost as troubling as the vote, I soon started to notice mentions and replies to my Twitter feed calling for de-amalgamation. Here is a sample:

    These reactionary responses, while understandable, ignore some inconvenient truths.

    It’s easy to forget that Gardiner Expressway, along with the Don Valley Parkway and the Allen Road (the completed section of the infamous Spadina Expressway), were built by Metropolitan Toronto, an upper-tier government that was created by the province in 1953 in order to accommodate and control Toronto’s rapid growth. Its boundaries were the same as those of the post-1997 City of Toronto.

    Metro Toronto was given the responsibility for many, including the TTC, all major roads, ambulances, police, most of the city’s public housing, waste collection, and the administration of social services. Metro had its own system of parks separate from the lower-tier cities and boroughs, and its own divisive politics. The Gardiner Expressway, one of Metro Toronto’s first mega-projects, was named for the first Chair of Metro Council, Frederick G. Gardiner. The old City of Toronto opposed Metro’s Spadina Expressway plans; it was the Province of Ontario that stepped in to stop the controversial freeway at Eglinton Avenue.

    Had Mike Harris’ PC government wasn’t elected in 1995 and the six cities and boroughs were never amalgamated, it would be a Metropolitan Toronto Council deciding the Gardiner’s fate, and we’d probably still see the same urban/suburban divide when it came to the final vote.

    The case for amalgamation

    I’ll come right out and say that the provincial government under Mike Harris made a terrible mistake when it decided, without warning, to amalgamate Metro and its six lower-tier municipalities into a megacity in 1997. Even though I lived in Brampton at the time, I opposed Bill 103 when it was introduced and enacted in 1997. But I think amalgamation was a mistake because the process was rushed, it was steamrolled over the objections of almost every local politician and engaged citizen, and the motivations were politically suspect – a left-leaning City of Toronto, led by an NDP-allied mayor was overwhelmed by a more Conservative-friendly suburban population, with Mel Lastman as the first mayor.

    The first few years were painful as departments and agencies were melded together. Mayor Lastman’s property tax freezes did not help when the need for city services was growing. But what amalgamation did do was provide taxation and service equity across Toronto. York, the poorest of the six lower-tier cities, did not even have a full-service recreation centre and had a relatively poor parks and library system. That all changed, and generally, for the better.

    The Toronto Public Library, which just opened its 100th branch, is the the envy of library systems around the world. It is the second largest system in North America (after New York’s) and has the highest circulation. When its budget was threatened in 2011 in the early days of the Ford administration, they had to back off due to an overwhelming public campaign.

    Toronto Public Library - Scarborough Civic Centre BranchNew Scarborough Civic Centre Branch, photo by W Poon

    I would argue that the TPL makes the best case for amalgamation. Before, each of the six cities had their own library systems, and the Toronto Reference Library was a separate entity. Library access and budgets were limited in some of the smaller systems, especially in York and East York. Amalgamation of the library system has created a more equitable system that’s the envy of the world. It has been expanding and renovating branches all across the city without any cries of regional favouritism. While the library system is still mostly a collection of reading materials, the TPL has adapted to the digital age, providing communal study spaces, media labs, new computer equipment and 3-D printers, and access to vast digital resources through its website, including current periodicals. The Toronto Public Library is something all Torontonians should be proud of.

    So yes, there will often be an urban/suburban split on some issues, particularly on transportation items. I share the frustration after last week’s vote. We particularly need to elect a better council in 2018. And there always improvements that can be made to make this city work better for its diverse neighbourhoods, perhaps devolving more responsibilities to reformed community councils.

    But I have little time any more for calls for de-amalgamation. It won’t change politics all that much. Let’s focus on making this city work.