News   Apr 26, 2024
 1.6K     4 
News   Apr 26, 2024
 331     0 
News   Apr 26, 2024
 897     0 

Mayor Olivia Chow's Toronto

We really may be getting a commercial parking lot levy! This coming to Executive next week: https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2024.EX12.3



As a result of this research, staff are recommending the following parking levy design principles in the application of a commercial parking levy:



1. Apply a commercial off-street parking levy to the entire City of Toronto;


2. Include both private and publicly owned or operated commercial properties;


3. Include both unpaid and fee-paid parking facilities including surface parking, underground parking and parking garages;


4. Include a minimum area threshold, which provides an automatic exemption for the first 300m2 for all properties (equivalent to approximately 10 parking spaces) to reduce the burden of the levy on small businesses; and


5. Apply a two-zone rate structure based on geographic area:

a. Zone A – Downtown & Central Waterfront

b. Zone B – Entire City of Toronto, excluding Zone A.



The proposed parking levy will apply to properties within the Commercial tax class, and the levy will be calculated based on the total areal extent of the property that is used for parking multiplied by a per-square metre rate. An exemption from the levy will apply for the first 300 square metres for all properties. In addition to the mandatory statutory exemptions from taxation established under Section 268 of the City of Toronto Act, it is recommended that the property tax exemptions of Section 3 of the Assessment Act also apply for various property types. Staff are also recommending refining the definition of “parking area” to exclude certain situations where parking is directly associated with a business use, e.g., vehicle storage for certain commercial operations, as explained later in the report.
 
Also today Toronto gets another 100 million for apperently beating the 2023 housing target by 50%

Whats the total up to now after the Gardiner and the refugee stuff?

 
Also today Toronto gets another 100 million for apperently beating the 2023 housing target by 50%

Whats the total up to now after the Gardiner and the refugee stuff?


The 114M is one-time money, not annual money, so its not a fix for any operating shortfalls in the City.

It is, however, helpful in terms of making up some needed funds that can be invested in state-of-good-repair, and/or new (affordable) housing. Do keep in mind, if it went to the latter, that we'd be luck to see 228 units out of it. Which, while better than a kick in the head........would be a very small dent in something like 14,000 homeless people in Toronto.
 
Executive Ctte surprised me by referring the proposed parking levy.

As such it will not be approved in this cycle of Council.

They did not spike it.

But I'm leery. As the motion came from Cllr. Carroll who is the Mayor's budget chief......clearly this move had the mayor's blessing.


1709303349780.png
 
Big scoop from the Toronto Star:

Toronto signed a secret deal that would have let it back out of hosting the 2026 World Cup

Toronto signed a secret agreement that gave it the right to withdraw from hosting the 2026 FIFA World Cup if it didn't receive financial support from senior levels of government by mid-2020, internal emails obtained by the Star show.

But for reasons that remain unclear, the city didn’t trigger the deal, leaving it on the hook for the skyrocketing costs of games.

A draft of the deal is contained in emails obtained by the Star through a freedom of information request. They provide the fullest picture yet of how the city joined the bid to host the global soccer tournament in 2018, despite not meeting the key council condition of securing provincial and federal funding beforehand.
 
Executive Ctte surprised me by referring the proposed parking levy.

As such it will not be approved in this cycle of Council.

They did not spike it.

But I'm leery. As the motion came from Cllr. Carroll who is the Mayor's budget chief......clearly this move had the mayor's blessing.


View attachment 544671
Not sure I am surprised, in order to have a levy, one needs to know how many and where the parking lots are and it could never have been applied in 2024. This motion admits that 2024 is impossible but provides a method of getting all the necessary info so it COULD be implemented in 2025. Will it happen then? 50:50
 
Not sure I am surprised, in order to have a levy, one needs to know how many and where the parking lots are and it could never have been applied in 2024. This motion admits that 2024 is impossible but provides a method of getting all the necessary info so it COULD be implemented in 2025. Will it happen then? 50:50

The initial report did not propose implementation this year, but in 2025.

The info you note was still to be collected, and still will be collected.

The issue was a political one; whether to attempt to push approval, in principle, through Council now, or wait.

The decision was made to wait. Cllr. Carroll has identified that she wanted to see what the interplay would be between this tax and a proposed stormwater charge which may be coming down the pipe as well; she also wanted to see more on potential exclusions, among other things.

Talking to a few folks, I'm under the impression this would been given a vigorous ride at Council and the feeling was that it would be better to have the answers to certain questions before it reaches Council and to figure out ways to massage things a bit.
 
Big scoop from the Toronto Star:

Toronto signed a secret deal that would have let it back out of hosting the 2026 World Cup
Is there any chance of seeing the complete article ( I do not subscribe to the Star). I am a big supporter of the World Cup, 'footie ' in general, and the chance to host Cup game here. But, and it is a large BUT., I am also tired of municipalities being held to ransom by organizations such as FIFA. Reading the City report it would seem that much of the support for these costs from other levels of government and the private sector are not yet funded If these charges for the WC Games are growing out of proportion to the benefits (speedier transit growth?), and no further cost remediation, other government support, other corporate supports are to be found, I could see myself supporting the city in saying "Thanks, but no thanks" Having the games would be nice, but not overwhelmingly so, supporting the Canadian team at home would be great, but I think there is only one sure Team Canada game in the FIFA calendar, the first game. I could say no without regret.

And what is and how is $7.5 million in "legacy + indigenous capacity funding" connected to the world cup?
 
Is there any chance of seeing the complete article ( I do not subscribe to the Star). I am a big supporter of the World Cup, 'footie ' in general, and the chance to host Cup game here. But, and it is a large BUT., I am also tired of municipalities being held to ransom by organizations such as FIFA. Reading the City report it would seem that much of the support for these costs from other levels of government and the private sector are not yet funded If these charges for the WC Games are growing out of proportion to the benefits (speedier transit growth?), and no further cost remediation, other government support, other corporate supports are to be found, I could see myself supporting the city in saying "Thanks, but no thanks" Having the games would be nice, but not overwhelmingly so, supporting the Canadian team at home would be great, but I think there is only one sure Team Canada game in the FIFA calendar, the first game. I could say no without regret.

And what is and how is $7.5 million in "legacy + indigenous capacity funding" connected to the world cup?
You can get full access via Toronto Public Library now their IT problems are being resolved.
 
And what is and how is $7.5 million in "legacy + indigenous capacity funding" connected to the world cup?

I suspect they want any venues created to be usable after the World Cup like was the case with the Pan AM games in 2015.

The indigenous capacity funding was likely for the same reasons we have land acknowledgements.
 
I knew it would not be long before one of our all-time favourite politicians reared his ugly head again!

EA8.1 - Compliance Audit Application by Kevin Wiener for the Election Campaign Finances of Giorgio Mammoliti​

Consideration Type: ACTIONWards: All

Statutory - Municipal Elections Act, SO 1996​

Summary​

Application for a Compliance Audit received February 26, 2024, from applicant Kevin Wiener for candidate Giorgio Mammoliti for Mayor.

Background Information​

(February 26, 2024) Compliance Audit Application - Applicant Kevin Wiener, Candidate Giorgio Mammoliti

 
Ok, first public look at the probable, upcoming stormwater charge from Toronto Water.

This is a tax many here have pined for, both as a source of revenue, but also a way to disincentive surface parking (and if applied to flat roofs, to incentive green roofs).

I broadly support the idea, though on the former, much of the same would be achieved via a commercial parking tax.

In looking through the City's proposal, I'm not happy.


Have a muddle through. There are gratuitous tiers, other water rate changes bundled in which will muddy the impact, and lots of complicated mess.

This looks way to expensive to administer, as structured, and the incentives for change don't look great. KISS rules; (Keep It Simple Stupid).

- You want a clear penalty for large amounts of hard surface area.
- You want to exempt smaller properties generally and tackle them differently because staff time to assess all those properties is costly and cumbersome. This is about mall parking lots and factory and big box roofs)
- You want a straight line incentive for reducing stormwater tax (reduce the flow by creating a more absorbing, soft landscape, and/or stormwater holding tanks, using same for irrigation, etc etc.)

*****

Small properties (for example houses) are better dealt with by:

1) Raising the amount the City charges for parking pads across its property significantly. Why? The database already exists, and the charge is already billed.

2) Creating a financial incentive for removing parking pads in front yards; (ie. the City will allow you to rebate a portion of the cost against your property tax, and the fee for the pad will be removed in perpetuity )

3) Outlawing new parking pads entirely.

4) Outlawing the use of impermeable paving for parking pads, driveways and parking lots City-wide.

5) Requiring that new surface parking permitted show management of 100% of stormwater on-site. .
 
Last edited:
The Alcohol in Parks pilot is back for discussion with a report to the next meeting of Economic and Community Development Ctte.


In so many words, it turns out this trial did not cause the City to burn to the ground, so its not such a bad idea after all.

However, in typical Toronto fashion, the bureaucrats have muddled the policy response.

Instead of essentially legalizing alcohol in all parks, with restrictions in place, as appropriate; they've gone the opposite way.

They will make the 27 pilot parks permanent; they seek delegated authority to add additional parks, to the legal side of the ledger, to ensure at least one park per ward has legal drinking.......

Give me a break! You know, I don't think I've consumed alcohol in a park in more than 30 years (maybe as a teen, watching fireworks on Victoria Day). I'm in no rush to go out and do it again....... but why must we default to cumbersome
rules instead of defaulting to, "its fine if you behave responsibly."
 
The general public sentiment about alcohol in parks was assessed through a public opinion survey, representative of the Toronto population. The results indicate that 46per cent of respondents were supportive of allowing drinking in parks, 23 per cent were neutral and 30 per cent were opposed.

Thats honestly a suprising number of people opposed. I thought it was basically unanimous
 

Back
Top