Ontario municipal elections, (October 27, 2014) - Master thread

[Hatman 🍁]

I'm not opposed to regional governments, Al.  The way things worked before amalgamation were better (far from perfect, but better). There was a regional government that took care of region-level things (eg Public Transportation), and local governments to take care of more local concerns.

But by the 1990s the 'regional' level no longer covered the entire metropolitan region or anything close to it. Local government structures should at least try to reflect reality.

I do agree, though, that in a large city it makes sense to have lower level local government units that provide some services (something closer to the model of London boroughs than New York ones, even). And you might as well use the old borough boundaries for those.

And there are other reasons to be displeased with Canadian amalgamation policies: the implementation was handled extremely badly, no doubt about that. Of course (and to make it clearer where I'm arguing from) British deamalgamation policies in the 1980s were also handled extremely badly and had pretty lamentable results, so...

Perhaps a Greater Toronto regional government should exist? Or maybe even make it its own province! I like the London borough system a lot, and I think it should be applied to Toronto, Ottawa and Hamilton.

As far Ottawa, it is probably actually too big (geographically) for even a regional government. No reason why a farmer in Burritt's Rapids should be in the city whatsoever. (And obviously the people most against the amalgamation were in the rural parts of the city, and they continue to vote contrary to the rest of the city)

Amalgamations and de-amalgamations should be done with the consent of the public. I'm usually against having referendums for everything, but this is one case where I would support it.

[King of Kensington]

If we were to have a New York-type borough system I'd break the city into Toronto (including York/East York), North York, Etobicoke and Scarborough.

What would a London/Montreal-type borough system look like? 

[lilTommy]

If we were to have a New York-type borough system I'd break the city into Toronto (including York/East York), North York, Etobicoke and Scarborough.

What would a London/Montreal-type borough system look like? 

I would rather more borough's... Roughly; North Etobicoke, South Etobicoke, Old Fort York-High Park, Beaches-Riverdale-East York, York-East Humber, North York, Rosedale-Forrest Hill, Don Valley, Scarborough Bluffs, North Scarborough, Rouge Valley.
Something like that

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Not including the City of London (a foul nest of corruption with its own dubious rules and a population of less than eight thousand), there are thirty two London Boroughs. Though London is bigger than Toronto. Average population per borough is about 255,000. Largest borough (Croydon) has about 360,000 people, smallest (Kensington & Chelsea) about 158,000.

So, you'd probably keep East York and York as are/were (they'd be a touch on the small side, but not by so much as to be a problem), and presumably Etobicoke as well. Old Toronto, North York and Scarborough would all be too large, so you'd divide them into three or two each.

That's if the objective is for boroughs that are large enough to carry some political weight (and not just be glorified community councils) but not so large as to threaten the primacy of the city government.

[MaxQue]

Don't copy borough councils of Montreal. There is things in which in which both borough and city have power and there is no coordination between most boroughs. Organizing events crossing the border of a borough is very complicated.

[adma]

Another (the original?) Canadian case where a "megacity" cheats progressivism, yet unmentioned: Winnipeg (y'know, Sam Katz and all).

But, really; we shouldn't be looking at things unilaterally through a "progressive" lens when it comes to handling rogue mayors like Rob Ford (or, to a lesser degree, Larry O'Brien--interestingly, I *wouldn't* include Mel Lastman in that pantheon of rogues, since he knew a thing or two about team-building).  I mean, it may have taken a mushy-middler rather than a "true progressive" to take down O'Brien; but at least he was taken down.  Otherwise, you're inadvertently "normalizing" a rogue who doesn't merit normalization.

[RogueBeaver]

This is ridiculous: Chow being interviewed by her own strategist. But that's Sun "News" for ya.

[DL]

This is ridiculous: Chow being interviewed by her own strategist. But that's Sun "News" for ya.

Sun News is usually so ridiculously biased towards the right that if once in a million years they do something "nice" for a leftwing candidate - i will not compalin!

[lilTommy]

Soknacki is proposing giving the Community Councils more powers/authority over how their revenues are spent; also mandate equal representation on the executive based on the Community Council and the CC itself would elect who them want on the executive... well done, I think this is a very good idea... ehemm Chow, steal this (If elected)!

http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/03/14/david-soknacki-proposes-different-tax-levels-based-on-where-in-toronto-you-live/

[Hatman 🍁]

Another (the original?) Canadian case where a "megacity" cheats progressivism, yet unmentioned: Winnipeg (y'know, Sam Katz and all).

But, really; we shouldn't be looking at things unilaterally through a "progressive" lens when it comes to handling rogue mayors like Rob Ford (or, to a lesser degree, Larry O'Brien--interestingly, I *wouldn't* include Mel Lastman in that pantheon of rogues, since he knew a thing or two about team-building).  I mean, it may have taken a mushy-middler rather than a "true progressive" to take down O'Brien; but at least he was taken down.  Otherwise, you're inadvertently "normalizing" a rogue who doesn't merit normalization.

Ah yes, Winnipeg is a good example too. Even though amalgamation happened there in the 1970s, and it was an NDP Premier who did it! That amalgamation put more than half of Manitoba's population in the city of Winnipeg.

Not including the City of London (a foul nest of corruption with its own dubious rules and a population of less than eight thousand), there are thirty two London Boroughs. Though London is bigger than Toronto. Average population per borough is about 255,000. Largest borough (Croydon) has about 360,000 people, smallest (Kensington & Chelsea) about 158,000.

So, you'd probably keep East York and York as are/were (they'd be a touch on the small side, but not by so much as to be a problem), and presumably Etobicoke as well. Old Toronto, North York and Scarborough would all be too large, so you'd divide them into three or two each.

That's if the objective is for boroughs that are large enough to carry some political weight (and not just be glorified community councils) but not so large as to threaten the primacy of the city government.

If Toronto did adopt a borough system, they'd likely follow the "community councils" they have now. But I prefer your plan better. Not sure how I'd divide up North York, Old Toronto and Scarborough though. Sounds like an interesting project to undertake (I have long thought about an Ottawa Borough plan though, if anyone is interested)

[Sol]

Eh, if anything, they should look into further expanding the city of Toronto's boundaries to include the entirety of the metro area.

[Hatman 🍁]

Eh, if anything, they should look into further expanding the city of Toronto's boundaries to include the entirety of the metro area.

One good way to ensure a progressive mayor is never elected again.

[Linus Van Pelt]

The amalgamation of 1995 was actually preceded by a report that had been commissioned by the Rae government, which recommended keeping the distinct cities within Metro Toronto but expanding the boundaries of Metro itself into the suburbs. This would likely have been better than what actually happened both for local autonomy and for overall regional planning. But Harris had this preoccupation with reducing the number of politicians.

[Hatman 🍁]

The amalgamation of 1995 was actually preceded by a report that had been commissioned by the Rae government, which recommended keeping the distinct cities within Metro Toronto but expanding the boundaries of Metro itself into the suburbs. This would likely have been better than what actually happened both for local autonomy and for overall regional planning. But Harris had this preoccupation with reducing the number of politicians.

That would've been interesting. I wonder, if that happened, would the chair of the Metro council ever be directly elected? I know that happened in Ottawa with the RMOC Chair, and other regional municipalities that still exist are beginning to elect their chairs directly by the voters.

[King of Kensington]

Perhaps a London-type "borough system" could include:

A Central Toronto borough stretching from the CPR Tracks and Rosedale Valley between Bathurst and the Don.  Plus North Toronto, West Toronto (old city west of Bathurst) and East Toronto (old city east of DVP). 

Retain York and East York.

Split Etobicoke in two (Rexdale and Etobicoke) and Scarborough into Scarborough, West Hill, Agincourt and Malvern.

North York could have a Don Mills/Downsview/Willowdale split.  The only question is what to do with the areas of North York that shared postal codes with the Old City of Toronto.

[Hatman 🍁]

New Forum poll
Ford: 35 (+7)
Chow: 32 (-4)
Tory: 19 (-3)
Stintz: 3 (-2)
Thompson: 2 (new)
Soknacki: 2 (n/c)



I guess some conservatives are holding their noses and backing Rob Ford to stop Chow. Disgusting.


In other news, Jim Watson has finally filed his papers to run for re-election as mayor of Ottawa.

[RogueBeaver]

Imagine if Ford somehow won. Trying to imagine the headlines and reaction.

[Hatman 🍁]

I expect that eventually the Anti-Ford voters will coalesce behind Chow, and anyone left who is anti-Chow and can stomach voting Ford will back Ford, leaving a small rump of people who don't like either. I'm afraid Ford might be able to hit 40%, at least if you think his approvals can translate into votes. 

[DL]

In a two way race there are far more "anyone but Ford" voters than there are "anyone but Chow". If those Forum numbers are real (I only some some fragments on sarah Thomson's website and they looked raw and unweighted) - you have to think that the only think to have happened between this poll and the last one - was John Tory's official launch! I guess the more Tory campaigns the fewer votes he gets!

[Hatman 🍁]

Today's Toronto mayoral debate (yes, already!) has been a farce.

[adma]

I expect that eventually the Anti-Ford voters will coalesce behind Chow, and anyone left who is anti-Chow and can stomach voting Ford will back Ford, leaving a small rump of people who don't like either. I'm afraid Ford might be able to hit 40%, at least if you think his approvals can translate into votes. 

Methinks that's only likely if every viable non-Ford candidate save Chow actually drops out, as opposed to mere fading down the stretch.  I mean, I agree that Chow has her own ceiling and stigma; but I can just as well see those who can't fathom voting for a "tax & spend socialist" yet not to the degree that they'd (re?)endorse a lying rogue of a crackhead, either "parking their vote" with one of the others or not voting at all.  And even if it's a lost cause and it's Advantage Chow, they can rest comfortably in the possibility/probability that she won't *rule* like the reckless tax & spend socialist she's portrayed as being, i.e. even if she wins, she'll be "kept straight"...

[Hatman 🍁]

I think you have too much faith in the intelligence of the voter. I don't think most voters realize how powerless the mayor truly is.

[adma]

Depends on which kind of voter.  And again: this isn't about Ford vs "progressivism", this is about Ford vs sanity.

[Hatman 🍁]

Banned forumite "Teddy" announced on Twitter he is running for mayor.  Hasn't registered yet, but I believe it, as he's run for political office twice before.

[Hatman 🍁]

Now that I think of it, it may be an April Fools joke.