Globe: What's wrong with Toronto? Nothing a good mayor couldn't fix

[Irishmonk]

Can you suggest a potential alternative to Miller who might be better? If not, the whole arguement is moot, the mudslinging pointless.

 

[afransen]

Good god. They call that journalism? Take a position and then twist the facts the support your thesis?

Vancouver builds a line to its airport, while Toronto talks about it and does nothing. Therefore, Toronto thinks it's more important to quickly get to the airport so they can get the hell out of Dodge? This sealed the deal: this woman is a moron.

 

[syn]

Syn, nobody is claiming he is evil or completely worthless.

And I'm not claiming he's without flaw.

The issue here is whether he is the mayor that Toronto needs right now while so much seemingly unbridled development is happening, while the roads are clogging up, while the public infrastructure is languishing.

Public (or at least Transportation) infrastructure looks to be getting the biggest boost it's had in many, many years with the Transit City plan.

There is also the issue of underfunding, which is one of the main reasons Toronto doesn't have the infrastructure it needs. Underfunding by senior levels of government is one of the things Miller has spent a good deal of time on in his time as Mayor.

I'd like to see more assertiveness and consistency from Miller, but the city is progressing better than it has in quite a long while as far as infrastructure is concerned.

Aside from the fact that I would disagree with some of your major points - as Urban Shocker indicates, some of the things you cite clearly happened in spite of him - the points you make that are or may be valid are hardly signifiers of greatness, or of the kind of leadership Toronto leads right now.

Which points, exactly? What kind of mayor does Toronto need now and who would be better for the job?

 

[Tewder]

Can you suggest a potential alternative to Miller who might be better? If not, the whole arguement is moot, the mudslinging pointless.

I can't criticise Miller because there's no one better? Interesting point of view.

Besides, that there is supposedly nobody better is not the issue here. Miller *is* the mayor, period. This is his second mandate, and it is not unreasonable to question how effective he has been. Criticising is not mudslinging.

 

[Irishmonk]

I can't criticise Miller because there's no one better? Interesting point of view.

Besides, that there is supposedly nobody better is not the issue here. Miller *is* the mayor, period. This is his second mandate, and it is not unreasonable to question how effective he has been. Criticising is not mudslinging.

There's constructive criticism and there's unconstructive criticism which is what I call mudslinging. Constructive criticism with regards to Miller deals with the man's performance within the highly constricted confines of the limited powers he has at his disposal. It should offer alternative suggestions for how the current situation could improve, while ackowledging the actions that have succeeded. Cheapshots like the "city is succeeding in spite of him" neither acknowledge nor offer anything in their claim. They are the tool of choice for Wente, Royson James and others of their ilk who like to take potshots at the guy because he's a big target and its fun.

Despite Miller's shortcomings and the fact that he hasn't quite delivered what was promised--or what the media hype suggested would be promised when he was first elected--he is still, IMO, the best mayor this city has had since Crombie and deserves some recognition as such.

 

[adma]

I still think Barbara Hall might merit credit as a "proto-Miller"--trouble is, she barely had a chance betwixt Eggleton/Rowlands and Megacity; and then, she blew it vs Miller in '03...

 

[syn]

There's constructive criticism and there's unconstructive criticism which is what I call mudslinging. Constructive criticism with regards to Miller deals with the man's performance within the highly constricted confines of the limited powers he has at his disposal. It should offer alternative suggestions for how the current situation could improve, while ackowledging the actions that have succeeded. Cheapshots like the "city is succeeding in spite of him" neither acknowledge nor offer anything in their claim. They are the tool of choice for Wente, Royson James and others of their ilk who like to take potshots at the guy because he's a big target and its fun.

Despite Miller's shortcomings and the fact that he hasn't quite delivered what was promised--or what the media hype suggested would be promised when he was first elected--he is still, IMO, the best mayor this city has had since Crombie and deserves some recognition as such.

I agree. Tewder, you keep saying the city is doing well in spite of Miller, and that he's not the mayor this city needs, yet you don't really offer any examples or explain what you're saying. You just keep repeating the same basic thing.

 

[adma]

I may have said this before, but I can see Mike Thompson emerging as a palatable, non-wishy-washy "anti/post-Miller" alternative, esp. as someone with promise of "taking action" a la Daley/Giuliani.

Not endorsing. Just stating.

 

[EnviroTO]

Michael Thompson as a contender for Toronto mayor? That would be one hell of a shift to the right. Other than a pro-racial profiling statement the guy hasn't been too newsworthy. If he was leadership material I think he would have been able to make a case and a lot of noise on the Scarborough RT subway replacement issue. He really failed at rallying public support and councillor support. That discussion has pretty much fallen silent now. Adam Vaughan and Chris Ford make much more noise although most of the times I roll my eyes at what they are saying.

 

[TrickyRicky]

On the current issue of the new taxing powers I like how Miller has been steadfast in pushing through the land transfer tax in the face of vocal opposition. This is an example of strong leadership. The city needs money and Miller is unapologetic in defending council's decision. My problem of course is that I think of all the taxing powers the city chose the most gutless option for political reasons and the one that will likely have the largest long-term negative impact on the city.

My problem as Joe taxpayer is that city council and the mayor have still not been convincing in their assertion that the city is cut to the bone. The thousand pound gorilla in the room in the delivery of city services is the productivity of city workers in all departments from policing to sanitation. I'm not saying city workers are lazy or over paid (although in many instances they may be) but that there is no evidence presented that city service labour is being optimized in the delivery of said services. The often cited study comparing the delivery of city services between municipalities recently published was incredibly uninformative to the point of useless. Keep in mind that optimizing labour productivity isn't just about getting people off their asses, it is also about streamlining the procedures and processes that say make a worker less able to fulfill their core duties. So the city conveniently glosses over the whole issue of labour and labour productivity that make up the vast majority of departmental costs, looks at a budget say they have cut 2 trucks out of their 30 truck fleet and hence are cut to the bone.

 

[Tewder]

I agree. Tewder, you keep saying the city is doing well in spite of Miller, and that he's not the mayor this city needs, yet you don't really offer any examples or explain what you're saying. You just keep repeating the same basic thing.

...but I don't know how many other ways it can be said? It has already been discussed ad nausium, here and elsewhere.

 

[syn]

...but I don't know how many other ways it can be said? It has already been discussed ad nausium, here and elsewhere.

Simply saying that Miller is doing a bad job and that the city is doing well in spite of him isn't saying much at all.

 

[Tewder]

I think if you read through the thread again you will see that a lot of the issues have already been raised.

 

[syn]

I think if you read through the thread again you will see that a lot of the issues have already been raised.

Raised by others, but you don't address them and ignore the questions posed to you.

 

[Hydrogen]

syn, you stated that:

Politicians talk about things all the time. He took action.

Miller could not take action. He is a mayor and as such could not enact any such legislation. So you are wrong there.

As for action, the land transfer tax is bad action. It is being brought in because Miller failed to convince the province to pick up the cost of social services that should be supported by the provincial government. Miller's response is to take his new powers and institute in new taxes. Nothing particularly creative there - and worse - it does not address the actual problem anymore.

I don't know if you've noticed, but since Miller arrived there has been greater attention paid to aesthetics. Planters are in better condition and there's better upkeep too. There's still a long way to go, but it's a start.

We also now have a design panel.

As for the arts, whatever Miller has done wrong I don't think he can be faulted for his support of the arts. Nuit Blance wouldn't be here if it wasn't for him, and Luminato probably wouldn't either.

When I made by original post, there was no design panel. It remains to be seen as to how useful it will be. And just because SOME planters are in better condition does not automatically indicate it is just because of the mayor. Concerning the arts: Nuit Blanche is a good idea that has been mounted in other cities. And during Luminato is was hard to find Miller. Again, can you prove these are directly instigated by Miller, or did other people actually motivate Miller into whatever role he actually played?

GST? Thank the feds for that. There is nothing that states they must share it. Besides, it is hardly due to the efforts of Miller alone. Singling him out as some hero is highly innacurate.

As for the waterfront, are you going to bother giving any credit to the Waterfront Redevelopment Corporation or other governmental organizations that have played a role in getting these projects underway?