How did Toronto get to the point that during a very long period of world wide economic growth it could not create a single job? Why is the city a quarter of a million jobs behind its own estimates? How did Toronto's surrounding municipalities create over 750,000 jobs in that period?
Blake Hutcheson, chair of Toronto's Independent Fiscal Review Panel sheds some light on the issue...........
Toronto has the highest-taxed offices in the world. It is the lowest-taxed residential city in the country. That isn’t right. Why is it that way? Because for years councillors have been afraid to do the right thing, at the expense of business. The status quo just isn’t working. A lot of councillors told us that they fundamentally agree with a strong mayor system, but not with this mayor. To me, that’s shortsighted. If the mayor has enough rope to hang himself, if he shouldn’t be here, let democracy play its course, but at least give him the rope. If I were a councillor and opposed this mayor, I would definitely vote for a strong mayor system, because I would want to give him enough rope and if he can’t deliver, then the city can make a change. If I were for him, I’d also definitely go for it, because it would allow him enough latitude to effect the necessary change. If you’re in the middle, then maybe you can debate the pros and cons. The reality is there are an awful lot of councillors who would rather see the city fail, go into further debt and further derail good programs because they gain political points.........
http://www.canadianbusiness.com/managing/ceo_interviews/article.jsp?content=20080910_114938_25528
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Well said, although on an initial quick read, I thought at first he was suggesting stringing up the mayor. (!)
One would think that the councillors have enough to lose themselves. Are they not businesspeople as well?
The article mentions that the city needs to see some serious prioritization - what kind of priorities, just generally, would you like to see set?
foundcity,
I think the first priority is to gather the necessary information to make informed decisions. The city cannot even calculate the cost of servicing a single household. What that means is that many councillors (not all but most) view new residential development as increasing government revenue. All the while they ignore the added expense of servicing the new households (fire, police, libraries, etc.) . Frankly put, they spend far more servicing households than households pay back in taxes and fees.
The way that this imbalance has been addressed is that the non residential sector pays far more, even though the municipal act, past and present, promised they would not. The city also relies on grants from the province, federal gas tax and has even raided reserve funds to operate. This certainly is not a viable long term strategy.
That being said, I lower the city's non residential tax rates to the 905 average within 5 years. In ten years I would have all rates be homogenized, so that there would only be one tax rate. That would remove the unfair advantage that those who work from home enjoy. I would also create a parking tax of $500 per spot per year, with the revenue used to lower the overall tax rate.
I post back with ideas on the spending side.
Post a Comment