rbt
Senior Member
I voted Bailao mostly because I'd like her to try again in 2026.
|
|
|
2023 Toronto Mayoral by-election
- Thread starter SJD_Toronto
- Start date
TonyV
Senior Member
Very weird that The Star endorsed Ana Bailão. Their columnists would probably disagree with the editorial position.
Ana is the status quo. That is not acceptable.
Bad Star!
Ana is the status quo. That is not acceptable.
Bad Star!
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Not the first time - remember the Globe and Mail 2015 election endorsement - where the owners overrode the editorial board?
AoD
EddyMCD
Active Member
There are many new rental buildings in development/construction across the City, and all of them are by REITs or typical condo developers. We need these to continue being built. Even if they are expensive, the additional supply of these theoretically eases pricing pressures on older buildings. I have seen first hand on multi-building site developments where the City offers additional floors on condo buildings to developers in exchange for more rental units.
If ultimate rent control is implemented, no new rental units will be constructed, and the housing crisis will get worse. Everyone wants public rental building to be constructed, but the reality is that the City is simply not capable of doing that themselves, they need private partners. The City just approved the multiplex zoning, who the hell is going to lay out the money to build a multiplex if they can never raise rent?
It's a very bad policy.
Northern Light
Superstar
There is very limited new purpose-built rental construction and it is not significantly higher since rent control on new builds was lifted, again, by the province.
'
This is not correct. The City absolutely has the financial means to build, its a question of whether they choose to raise the requisite sum and prioritize housing construction with same.
Rent control in Ontario has never completely frozen rent; its generally permitted to increase every year in line with inflation.
Landlords in Ontairo can also seek above-guideline increases beyond that inflationary amount for large capital projects.
The discussion here would be about the extending that level of rent control to new buildings, for existing tenants (vacancy de-control is also normative right now, meaning when a tenant leaves the rent can be re-set to market)
zang
Senior Member
Because no one will rise to meet demand? I'm sorry, but that just never happens.
Only for those looking to enrich themselves at ungodly rates.
There are plenty of countries with both strict rent control and money-making developers. They're not mutually exclusive.
EddyMCD
Active Member
My initial post was raising concerns over Chow's platform which states she wants to remove vacancy de-control, meaning once rent is set when a unit is built, the rent can never be raised beyond the allowable inflation rate (unless an AGI is used). This is what I was flagging as a concern, I don't have any major issues with rent control brought in by Wynne.
zang
Senior Member
Why is keeping prices in line with the rate of inflation such a bad thing?
You're ultimately advocating for jacking prices simply to make money. (see the entirety of the last decade of price increases)
EddyMCD
Active Member
Keeping prices in-line with inflation is ok if we actually match inflation. But the average inflation rate in Canada in 2022 was around 6%, but the rent control approved inflation rate was only 2.5%.
And developers would still be very weary of unforeseen costs that aren't quickly captured by inflation (IE. spikes in Natural gas prices, or future carbon taxes). I know everybody here seems to altruistically think that developers will build rental housing for minimal profits, but we don't have any evidence in Canada to suggest this will happen. And if it doesn't, then the housing crisis will only get worse.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
That's why you need non-profit and other modes of housing (co-ops, etc). Whatever rental we're getting is by and large targeted towards the upper-middle segment. It's cream-skimming.
AoD
AoD
Last edited:
Northern Light
Superstar
Now, this gets into the murkiness of statistics, damned statistics and lies. LOL
(not an accusation, but a set-up for an explanation)
First, we need to know that the stated intent of the 'inflationary' increase is to reflect the actual increase in a landlord's costs year over year.
While the reference is Ontario CPI; the cap was meant to reflect that an existing building's costs are function of (typically) fixed rate mortgage, utilities, property tax, staff.
These rarely shift at the speed of CPI, or at rates reflective of swings in volatile costs like food.
In a related vein, CPI as currently composed is a poor reference for increases in minimum wage, because it substantially under-weights housing costs (I'd have to look it up, but historically about 25%) vs the actual portion of a typical household
budget which is closer to 50% for many Torontonians.
Developers are often not the owner/operator of rental housing stock, but assuming they were:
Volatiles prices often swing down as well as up; you should only be allowed to capture the increase in rental rates, if you also pass on the decrease. For the record, that type of increase IS permitted in Ontario with exactly those rules.
A landlord can apply to cover the cost of an extraordinary increase in Utility bills, but when those costs go down they are obliged to lower the rent again. (this is also true, by the way of AGIs, though few tenants know they are entitled to those levies being rolled back at a future date)
***
Also, the initial market-rent should capture room for volatile pricing.
I don't think anybody makes that assumption, and I'm not sure why you derive that idea.
I think those who invest in a given sector have an expected rate of return in that sector; and they will make their decisions based relative to a given norm. For the last couple of decades the ROI on real estate has been much higher than its historic norm. This is true of many formerly regulated sectors like Telcos as well.
If the normal ROI in a given sector is 7% there will be investors at that level; its only when the norm is 20% that you get people turning off the taps temporarily when the ROI falls to 7.
Before I hear.....but they could just put there money in stocks.............
There is a very robust bond market in Canada with yields (ROI) generally in the 3-5% range.
It turns out lots of investors like the security of gov't backed bonds, and/or blue-chip company bonds, and will happily trade a higher ROI potential in favour of predictable, safe, annual income.
Real Estate can be, and for a long time was , structured similarly as a market. You accepted an ROI of 6-8% quite happily, in exchange for a steady income and long-term security (land will always have a value) .
The market was altered over the last three decades to a more financialized model and one I don't think has served us well.
I would argue, among other things, for eliminating REITs entirely......but I digress.
I think we're really getting a bit far off from the Mayoralty here......
A more apt discussion might be does Toronto even have the legal authority to eliminate vacancy de-control?
zang
Senior Member
So, isn't that what AGIs were created for?
And not say, a means of renovicting residents like so many are already?
We have plenty of evidence it happens in other places. What makes Canada so damn different?
Except that maybe we've got an insane population growth, meaning much more stock is required. Lots of money to be made, even if less per unit.
DSC
Superstar
Member Bio
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2008
- Messages
- 19,698
- Reaction score
- 28,331
- Location
- St Lawrence Market Area
John Tory finally backs a candidate in Toronto mayoral election
Tory revealed Wednesday he endorses Ana Bailão in Monday’s byelection, while Doug Ford warned an Olivia Chow victory would be ‘unmitigated disaster’ for the city.
www.thestar.com
John Tory has named his preferred candidate in the election to succeed him, despite previously declaring he would stay out of the race.
The former Toronto mayor confirmed to the Star on Wednesday that he will endorse Ana Bailão in Monday’s byelection. Bailão, a former councillor for Davenport, served as one of his deputy mayors.
Her campaign is expected to issue a formal statement Wednesday afternoon.
Northern Light
Superstar
John Tory finally backs a candidate in Toronto mayoral election
Tory revealed Wednesday he endorses Ana Bailão in Monday’s byelection, while Doug Ford warned an Olivia Chow victory would be ‘unmitigated disaster’ for the city.
John Tory has named his preferred candidate in the election to succeed him, despite previously declaring he would stay out of the race.
The former Toronto mayor confirmed to the Star on Wednesday that he will endorse Ana Bailão in Monday’s byelection. Bailão, a former councillor for Davenport, served as one of his deputy mayors.
Her campaign is expected to issue a formal statement Wednesday afternoon.
What bothers me here is not his choosing to endorse someone, its that he publicly stated he would not, and now has.
Same pattern Deputy Mayor McKelvie followed.
christiesplits
Senior Member
Tory also said he would only run two terms.
I’m not sure what impact the endorsement will have on Bailao’s support.
On the one hand, people have largely tuned out of the election, and might only be making their decision now. On the other hand, weather is getting nicer and families are preparing for the holidays, so the late endorsement might not make much of a difference.