last night i had the opportunity to take part in a public consultation regarding what's called the "city of toronto act". it's basically the piece of paper that allows toronto be a city, issued by the province. the problem with it though is that it includes a lot of restrictions on simple things that now, nearly 150years after the document's issue are common place, and it's pretty ridiculous to require a provincial nod to get it done. one example noted in the meeting is that if toronto wants to keep the bars or restaurants open later during the worlds largest independent film festival (toronto film fest), they have to get the go-ahead from the province... this is nuts.
the big issues were funding and democracy though. way back when paul martin was finance minister, the federal liberals gave a bunch of financial responsibilities to the provinces and didn't follow it up with funding (healthcare is a good example of this). the provinces in turn, passed the buck to the cities and didn't follow that up with funding... and now our cities are broke. so one of the things they asked us to suggest were ideas on how to raise money for the city, and how the powers of the city could be expanded to do this responsibly.
now why am i boring you with this? and what's the deal with this newspaper clipping? well my suggestion got picked up by the toronto star, though they seemed to have missed the explanation behind it. regardless, i got my name in print and thought that my mom would like to see it (hi mom!).
i do however want to qualify my "expand areas for tax collection" idea though, 'cause it was a sticky one for the table and the star didn't really relay any of my own explanation. the idea is to allow toronto to tax things other than private property, so it can be used as a tool to direct the populace toward a common goal. a good example would be to tax polystyrene products (styrofoam) coming into the city since they cost the city considerable coin to ship to michigan every day. the tax could then be used to subsidise the cost of moving to reusable containers or even just recycleable ones. i don't see why this is such a big deal really, but my table balked at the word "tax" instead opting for "other revenue sources"... a creative way of saying "don't call it a tax and we'll be happy".
as you might have observed from that last statement, i didn't really like the people at my table that much. there was a couple there hell-bent on this mindset of "communities within the city" -- which is a nice idea, but they kept bringing the table back to this thinking that we need to give more power to smaller communities, and more democratic involvement at the "grassroots" level. in other words: "we like our little 3 by 5 block "neighbourhood" just the way it is, and we don't want to support anything for the city if it might change our space". it was infuriating.
overall the consultation was a neat experience but i want to close with this: we elect these people to make decisions and get things done. we don't elect them so they can hold consultations with "the public" regarding what to do next. most of that room consisted of elderly white people, non-waspy-types only checkering the demographic. i would wager that most of the people in that room had very little else to do that night, or made special plans to go to try to push their agenda. that isn't democracy, that's the tyranny of the people-without-day-jobs.
why was i there then? because (a) i want to learn more about how municipal government works, and (b) i don't want to be at the mercy of these same people. it was fun and interesting, but i seriously don't think it was helpful or even a good idea.
edit: andrea rocks. she found the article online for me (don't ask me how, i honestly looked). anyway, the link above to the toronto star is now updated.
