Amalgamation

[FutureBuilder]

The same.

Yes.

The same.

Roads might be a bit worse, but it's probably a wash when increased congestion is taken into account.

My taxes and fees have gone up by a reasonable amount taking inflation into account, thanks for asking.

Do you even live in Toronto?

Which means Rob Ford has been an excellent Mayor for you.

Yes I do. And I'm involved in construction, so when someone says fees haven't gone up I laugh. Not to mention land transfer.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Well, before amalgamation East York, Etobicoke, North York, and even Scarborough were run much better than the City of Toronto. (I can't speak for York).

The "Mega City" had the effect of bringing everyone and everything down to the lowest common denominator... which happened to be the City of Toronto (with its dirty schools, politics at the local level etc etc). The effect has been services and standards for everyone in East York, Etobicoke, Scarborough, and North York going down... and taxes and fees going up.

The funny thing is, a lot of old City of Toronto ppl don't want this project undone, however, they're looking at another term of Rob Ford and the suburban vote is larger so the downtown agenda will be pushed aside (no matter how much the Star and Globe complain).

The best thing is to just undo this mess. Let the "suburban" people do their thing and let the "progressive" downtowners do theirs.

I would have to disagree with you. The old City of Toronto was run better, and provided better service to its residents. As a kid, I was using the Toronto outdoor swimming pools for free, while I avoided the non-Toronto pools because I would have to pay an admission.

Even the trees (except for small sections) were more numerous and bigger in the City of Toronto. One would drive up a street and can feel they are crossing the border to the outside the city by the lack of trees. Some sections of the current city are still that way.

 

[TOareaFan]

It's done and dusted ... give it up.

If that's really what people want, let's make Toronto (416) it's own province. Then divide the province into cities.

Would Toronto become the first province in the country without an international airport? Or would YTZ get an even bigger expansion

 

[nfitz]

Actually all of it....amalgamation was started in 1953.

If you really want to be a pedant, amalgamation has been going on for years. The old town I live in, and several others, were annexed between 1905 and 1912. Swansea and Forest Hill were annexed in 1967.

However, I think you actually knew what I was talking about, as I was referring to the April 1997 Bill 103 (City of Toronto Act).

I'm confused when people say "de-amagamattion". Are you talking about going back to a two-tiered municipal government....or complete municipal separation as it was prior to 1953?

Presumably prior to 1998.

 

[spider]

I'm confused when people say "de-amagamattion". Are you talking about going back to a two-tiered municipal government....or complete municipal separation as it was prior to 1953? Presumably prior to 1998.

Sadly the de- people don't know what they want except to rid themselves of the tiresome suburbs. They don't want to be burdened with detail but they should not be allowed to post to this thread without an alternative to the status quo they hate so much.

Stop complaining and start explaining what you want to do in some detail and suggest how to do it.

 

[King of Kensington]

Metropolitan Toronto was created in 1954 using London, England as its model. London was, and is still, a two-tier government, made up of 32 boroughs and city.

What should have happened in 1998, should have been the addition of Peel, York, and Durham regions into Metropolitan Toronto, but leaving the existing cities, towns, boroughs, etc. to handle local matters. If there had to be some amalgamation, then the inner suburbs of the former City of York and the Borough of East York into the former City of Toronto, but no more than that.

I agree 100%.

 

[ShonTron]

It always struck me as strange the way some parts of the province were forcibly amalgamated while others were left alone.

The Cities of Ottawa and Hamilton combined urban, suburban, exurban and very rural areas together, and both had reasonably functioning regional municipalities that provided all the major hard services like transit, major roads, water/wastewater, police and such. Perhaps Vanier and Rockcliffe Park should have joined Ottawa, but old Carleton County, Anglo and conservative, doesn't really fit with urban Ottawa, semi-bilingual and liberal. Places like Munster and Richmond Village have more in common with Lanark and Renfrew Counties than Ottawa. The suburbs like Kanata stuck in the middle. Meanwhile Waterloo Region was left alone even though Kitchener and Waterloo share an invisible border and relatively compatible.

Why were Kent and Victoria Counties forced to amalgamate but others, like small Dufferin County, left alone? Like what does Coboconk have in common with Lindsay and it with Pontypool? That should have been consolidated into 2 or 3 municipalities, not one. Prince Edward County, given its size and dispersed townships, was the only one that worked. Why is there still a village of Point Edward, a tiny place surrounded by the City of Sarnia, left alone? Why was Essex County left alone where a larger City of Windsor might have been useful (not that I'd advocate a City of Windsor-Essex, but merging Tecumseh, LaSalle, etc. with Windsor)

The City of York was disadvantaged, and made sense amalgamating with Toronto. It might be the only municipality to actually benefit from the megacity. And if you were deal with York, East York should logically follow. At least then most of pre-1950 Toronto would be in one 1.2 million-sized city. Putting the inner 905 in with Metro would have made a lot of sense too, I would have liked to see that.

 

[nfitz]

Meanwhile Waterloo Region was left alone even though Kitchener and Waterloo share an invisible border and relatively compatible.

Ah, I was living in KW back then. I wasn't following that closely, but my recollection, is that KW, unlike Toronto, co-operated closely with the province, and made a lot of sounds that they would merge. So they were left alone to do studies, consultation, meetings, committees ... which went around and around ... and sometime late in the first Harris term came back with a conclusion that the current system was fine, and not to do anything. By then Harris had lost the energy to fight the issue, and it was blowing up everywhere else that had already done it.

My guess is that Elizabeth Witmer was heavily involved, and they all colluded to look like they were playing along, when the entire plan was to stall as long as possible. And when it was clear that they were no longer going to be forced into it, they concluded that the status quo was okay.

I'm only hypothesizing based on my recollections at the time. I haven't really thought about it in over a decade.

 

[King of Kensington]

The City of York was disadvantaged, and made sense amalgamating with Toronto. It might be the only municipality to actually benefit from the megacity. And if you were deal with York, East York should logically follow. At least then most of pre-1950 Toronto would be in one 1.2 million-sized city. Putting the inner 905 in with Metro would have made a lot of sense too, I would have liked to see that.

Indeed...in 1931 both York and East York requested annexation, and were turned down! They should not be resurrected and are pretty indistinguishable from Old Toronto.

 

[Johnny Au]

Indeed...in 1931 both York and East York requested annexation, and were turned down! They should not be resurrected and are pretty indistinguishable from Old Toronto.

True. It is hard to tell the difference between north and south of Rogers Road at times (as well as north and south of Milverton Boulevard) at times. Leaside and North Toronto are quite indistinguishable (same with Lambton and West Toronto).

 

[freshcutgrass]

Metropolitan Toronto was created in 1954 using London, England as its model. London was, and is still, a two-tier government, made up of 32 boroughs and city.

Besides Metro predating that London borough system by a decade, the simple fact of a two-tiered system doesn't make it the same at all, as the structure can be very different. I'm not aware Metro used any existing system as a model....it was fairly unique at the time.

What should have happened in 1998, should have been the addition of Peel, York, and Durham regions into Metropolitan Toronto, but leaving the existing cities, towns, boroughs, etc. to handle local matters.

A three-tier system????

There would be little point or advantage to adding Peel, York or Durham to Metro. The whole point of Metro was to build/expand a new Toronto city in the post war era. And it changed as it went along, going from a weak upper tier to a dominant upper tier gradually.

The entire 905 is essentially built out and would not benefit from being part of Metro....it's too late. This would also create an area just a tad large to manage reasonably...Metro was a good size.

Peel, York and Durham are of course already two-tiered systems...only the opposite of of Metro (weak upper tier).

 

[ReadScout]

leaving the existing cities, towns, boroughs, etc. to handle local matters.

That still happens. Once a month the local Community Councils meet for each borough. They have their chairs (mini mayors) and even sub-committees and deal with matters that are strictly local. The final reports go to full Council but hardly ever get held up, unless Ford wants to grandstand on a new stop sign as a "war on car" issue, which is 44-1 anyway. But other than that, there is relative autonomy there.

Prior to that was the Metro model, where local and metro Councillors represented both kinds of interests for the same Ward -- 2 tier. So essentially, local flavour representation has always been there.

What this is actually about is that downtowners hate it when a suburban mayor with a pedestrian attitude is elected. My only impulse to de-amalgamate comes from that so let's be honest.

 

[FutureBuilder]

Indeed...in 1931 both York and East York requested annexation, and were turned down! They should not be resurrected and are pretty indistinguishable from Old Toronto.

RIDICULOUS!!!!! Ask any East Yorker and they will tell you they want their borough back. The old East York was way better than this current mess. I'll take Mike Prue over anyone on city council as my Mayor any day.

The borough of East York's school system was excellent. Services were excellent and everything ran properly. What followed was a disgrace.

 

[nfitz]

The borough of East York's school system was excellent. Services were excellent and everything ran properly. What followed was a disgrace.

You must have lived in a different East York than I lived in, during the 1980s!

 

[FutureBuilder]

You must have lived in a different East York than I lived in, during the 1980s!

The EY School System way better than the mess today. Things were much smoother then. And our roads were actually cleaned when it snowed.

And Mike Prue was a better mayor than anyone we've had - or will have - in the mega city.

How long did you live in EY? Did you have children in the school system?