New Land Transfer Tax

[EnviroTO]

While City Council and taxpayers had the right to be upset about the process taken, city councillors who voted to defer the vote are all a bunch of chickens in my opinion. They failed to see the bigger picture on how this new tax would go a long way to help stablize the city's financial future and in turn the betterment of the entire City of Toronto for all. If it wasn't this new tax, the money still has to come from somewhere and that is still the same taxpayer at the end of the day.

Well the argument is that if the land transfer tax doesn't go through the property tax will need to be raised. Well so what? Land transfer tax is a property tax. It is the same taxpayer in the end. Land transfer tax is a bulk up front payment of property tax and somehow that is supposed to be better? If people can't afford the property tax increase that would raise the same amount of money spread over the lifetime of home ownership how can they miraculously afford it as an upfront payment? I don't understand the new math. It is like telling people that you are understanding that they can't afford monthly car payment increases of $100/mo for 24 months so just pay for the whole increase of $2,400 upfront. Huh? How can that possibly be easier?

I got a great deal for you Miller. Take the amount you pay for cable service per month, multiply it by 40, pay me that now and I will give you equivalent free cable for 3 years. Easy monthly payments of $0 after your initial payment, your monthly regular payment will be reduced 100%!! Think of the monthly savings!! Act now or doom and gloom you will have to pay your cable bill every month for the next three years.

The city council is chicken first for coming up with the land transfer tax idea in the first place with the goal of pulling the wool over taxpayers eyes, and even more chicken for not even deciding whether they are going to do it or not. This whole land transfer tax idea is stealing from future Torontonians to pay for current and past stupidity rather than saying hey current citizens, you voted for the retarded and spineless city and provincial administration that held property tax artificially low for years, mismanaged budgets, and downloaded so now you have to pay. Nothing like spending future citizens money to pay for todays stupidity I guess. Way to go Miller for coming up with an idea to balance the budget with the money of our children and future immigrants! Your voters will love you for managing to keep property tax rates artificially low yet again.

 

[Admiral Beez]

How about we do what everyone else does (or should do), i.e. reduce the city's expenses to the level at or below its income? Yes, that means some pretty nasty decisions, and they'll be some harsh service cuts and perhaps CUPE and other gov't worker layoffs and privatization of some municipal services. Cuts to non-essential cash hand-outs such as to the arts and to associations and events should begin immediately.

And I know, a lot of you will now paraphrase and quote bits of the above and state that these are important services or how this or that is not possible, but then I challenge you to find a way for the city to operate with its existing revenue. If it can't then it should declare bankruptcy and allow the province to run the city directly.

 

[Chuck]

And I know, a lot of you will now paraphrase and quote bits of the above and state that these are important services or how this or that is not possible, but then I challenge you to find a way for the city to operate with its existing revenue. If it can't then it should declare bankruptcy and allow the province to run the city directly.

Maybe not the province, but I think that too many services and functions are operated and performed by the municipal government.

As for the recent vote on the new taxing powers, as against them as I may be, I"d rather have closure on this issue, regardless of how it turns out. Think of how much more foolish city council now looks after fighting so vociferously to get these new powers, only to cower in fear when it comes time to implement them. I'm glad I voted for whatever her name was for mayor in the last election.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Maybe not the province, but I think that too many services and functions are operated and performed by the municipal government.

Yes, but that's the reality. Now we have to decide to cut some of those services or functions to a level at which we can afford.

 

[Edward Skira]

Ok so what do you cut to raise $500 million?

Go to page 6.
http://www.toronto.ca/finance/pdf/bs06_far05_vol4.pdf

 

[ShonTron]

The province is largely to blame, but I can't believe City Council. I'm writing a strongly worded response to my councillor, one of the "mushy middle" types that voted against.

Levy and James are frothing over this 'defeat' of Miller's plans.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Ed,

Like Denzil Minnan-Wong, Rob Ford, Doug Holiday and the likes are going to go for that piece of fat.

Actually, I am happy certain members of the council decided to put this off - when the Province came back with a big fat no to the demands, it is this group of councillors that will a) have to bite to bullet and find the sources of funding and/or b) have to come up with the supposed fat that they're going to trim such that they can get to the point of balancing the budget without raising hell from their constitutents. Going after the measy/easy arts and cultural grants is definitely going to do that, no doubt. It should blow up in their faces and do wonders to their credibility real nicely.

AoD

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Let the games begin! From CP24:

Layoffs And Service Cutbacks To Follow Tax Plan Deferment
Tuesday July 17, 2007
CityNews.ca Staff

Monday night's vote to delay two proposed tax hikes until October may have pleased defiant concillors and citizens of Toronto, who are fed up with having their pockets gouged, but the deferment won't come without a cost. Mayor David Miller, who vehemently pushed to pass the plan and was dejected by the outcome, quickly announced several cost containment measures Tuesday, effective immediately. The city, Miller warns, could see a trim in emergency service workers and the mayor has also ordered all departments to find budget cost cutting measures.

The taxes, targeting homebuyers and car owners, would have brought in almost half-a-billion extra dollars, but now it appears service cuts will make up the shortfall.

"You're gonna have to lay off people, which means you're not going to have as many police officers, you're not going to have as many firefighters," adds Counc. Brian Ashton.

Despite the threat of reduced services and layoffs, some still believe the delay sends a strong message to the mayor.

"I think the public gave him a spanking today, and him having the gall to say he has a mandate to bring in these new taxes without talking about it in the last election," said Councillor Denzil Minnan Wong.

By deferring the vote until after the provincial election, the city has essentially shifted its money problems to the doorstep at Queens Park. The strategy is to make Toronto's fiscal mess an issue in the upcoming campaign, but it appears the government isn't giving in.

"I think you'll have to come to the campaign announcements for campaign commitments, I don't see this as a big political issue," said Ontario Finance Minister Greg Sorbara.

http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_12961.aspx

AoD

 

[Hydrogen]

Provincial parties unmoved by city's plea for money

Jul 17, 2007 05:21 PM
Kerry Gillespie
Queen's Park Bureau

Toronto council’s hope of using the upcoming provincial election as a lever to force Queen’s Park to give the city more money got off to a rocky start.
The governing Liberals and the opposition Progressive Conservatives and New Democrats all shied away Tuesday from firm commitments of an aid package.

On Monday, council narrowly voted to defer $356 million in new land transfer taxes and vehicle registration fees the city needs to balance its budget, to try and pressure the province to come up with more money for Toronto.

The Liberals offered vague promises of continuing to take provincial social services off the property tax base.

“We will continue down the road that we’ve been on and that is additional uploading of costs that municipalities have been bearing as a result of eight years of mismanagement by our predecessors,†Finance Minister Greg Sorbara said.

To downplay expectations, Sorbara pointed out the Liberals are already giving Toronto $668 million, five times the ongoing funding as it received under the previous Progressive Conservative government.

Despite that, Toronto still has an estimated $575 million budget shortfall and much of it, the city says, because it pays for provincial services like welfare, housing for the poor and drug costs for the disabled.

The Progressive Conservatives and the New Democrats, jumping into campaign mode, used the city’s plea for money to attack the Liberals for not doing enough to help Toronto and other municipalities struggling with the legacy of provincial downloading.

But neither party leader was willing to say exactly what they would do to help municipalities if elected on Oct. 10.

All Progressive Conservative Leader John Tory would commit to is speeding up a joint municipal-provincial review into downloading so it’s ready by the end of the year instead of early in 2008.

That report needs to be in hand, “before you start running around, getting into a bidding contest or declaring any particular amounts of money,†Tory said.

Downloaded services make no sense said New Democrat Leader Howard Hampton, but, he too was unwilling to say what his party would do about it.

“We’d be happy to talk about the specifics in the next few weeks. We’ve thought about this a great deal,†Hampton said.

Recent legislation giving Toronto the power to raise new revenues was designed to help end the city’s habit of foisting its annual budget shortfall on the province.

Mayor David Miller proposed an additional land-transfer tax, which would have added $4,244 to the average house sale in Toronto and a $60 vehicle registration fee to raise much needed revenue. Council voted 23-22 put off a decision on levying new taxes until Oct. 22.

Despite the addition of these new revenue tools, most councillors and many provincial politicians say these types taxes are not sufficient to solve the city’s overall budget problems caused, in part, by downloaded social services.

“The solution to downloading is not raising a number of regressive taxes. That is not the solution and I think that’s the message that has been sent in Toronto,†Hampton said.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

This MUST be a provincial election issue.

 

[Edward Skira]

Ed,

Like Denzil Minnan-Wong, Rob Ford, Doug Holiday and the likes are going to go for that piece of fat.

Actually, I am happy certain members of the council decided to put this off - when the Province came back with a big fat no to the demands, it is this group of councillors that will a) have to bite to bullet and find the sources of funding and/or b) have to come up with the supposed fat that they're going to trim such that they can get to the point of balancing the budget without raising hell from their constitutents. Going after the measy/easy arts and cultural grants is definitely going to do that, no doubt. It should blow up in their faces and do wonders to their credibility real nicely.

AoD

Agreed. Can't wait to see how they propose to balance the budget. Cutting 1/3rd of the police force would do it. Let's see if Ford brings that up.

This MUST be a provincial election issue.

Exactly.

 

[ShonTron]

Good that Miller's giving the councillors something to chew on. Going for the jugular, like cutbacks in police and fire or hiring slowdowns - smart move, rather than mentioning TTC, rec centres, arts, stuff the Etobicoke and east Scarborough bunch couldn't give a shit about.

All the easy cuts have been made a long time ago, otherwise you'd see them gone. I am sick of the armchair pundits say that the city must get its own fiscal house in order. But the city should increase residential taxes higher than it has next year.

 

[Junglab]

How many of these armchair pundits have ever bothered to read the city's budget papers? More to the point, how many of those lazy, crapulent ideologues who actually HAVE read these things continue to trot out tired, pathetic little rants on "efficiencies" and "waste", yet play the crime card come budget and election time? I'm sick to death of the hard-done-by voters who want low taxes, clean streets, vibrant culture, a cop on every street corner, and affordable after-school programs for their children - and expect their electged officials to work 14 hours a day and subsist on salaries they themselves wouldn't seriously consider for a New York (oh, is that slef-obsesed a reference?) minute. Perhaps Bryan Caplan is right after all...

 

[TrickyRicky]

Taking a look at the budget:

-Police services and board $504 million

We really need to hold the line on this item. Frankly I think they could substantially reduce the number of paid officers. Anyone who has ever dealt with the police or knows a police officer personally knows that officers are doing too much paperwork, administration and marginal duties (like standing around during road work). It isn't that this work isn't important but you don't need to pay someone $70,000 a year to do it effectively. Anyone with inside information in a neighbourhood also knows that neighbourhood police work is incredibly inefficient. The police don't seem to know or care to know what goes on in a neighbourhood and hence how to target crime or deal with disturbances efficiently even when this information is common knowledge among residence and businesses.

-Social services $185 million

I assume this amount will be slowly uploaded

-Shelter, housing $194 million

Why is the city in the business of housing in the first place? Trouble is that the city is the worst slum lord so offloading their property assets might prove difficult. The city should entice private interests to buy said properties by offering development incentives conditional on a fixed market-unit to subsidized split. Whatever, point is this line item should be a fraction of the amount covering basic temporary shelter and special needs housing services.

-Solid waste management $117 million

They are moving to a pay for collection system anyway so f-it just privatize the whole thing and reduce this line item to only include cleaning of public spaces such as streets and parks and handling depot centres. Private residence should pay for their own trash just like apartment dwellers do now.

These are examples of real hard isues to tackle regardless of if you believe in them or not. Meanwhile the city cuts giraffe feeding times at the zoo and throws their hands up in the air saying there is nowhere to reduce costs. A culture of inertia, ideology, political pressure, interests protecting their personal fiefdoms, these are the reasons solutions cannot be reached. If the budget balances then go ahead and do what you want but if it doesn't and you need it to then stop these games and just get it done.

 

[Hydrogen]

Web comment from the Globe:

Timing is everything

Adam Radwanski, 17/07/07 at 12:08 PM EDT

Much as he's being cast as the big loser from yesterday's Toronto council vote, David Miller doesn't have all that much to worry about. By the next mayoral election, in 2010, nobody's going to remember how a vote on land transfer taxes played out three-and-a-half years earlier.

Three months from now, though, it will still be very top of mind - especially because you can bet that local politicians won't shut up about the city's budget shortfall and all its dire consequences until every last vote in the October provincial election has been cast. So the interesting guys to watch, the ones who are under real pressure, are Dalton McGuinty and John Tory.

It's a fair bet that McGuinty's Liberals will unveil some sort of package between now and election day aimed at lightening Toronto's load; they're already hinting at such. Whatever they promise will be cast as inadequate by a contingent of the City Hall crowd and by the NDP - the Liberals' main opponents in big chunks of the city. But odds are McGuinty will do enough not to get too badly burned on it.

Tory, though, is a wild card. Here we've got not only a Torontonian but a former mayoral candidate - one who's pragmatic enough to have no problem opening the coffers if he needs to. But he's running a party with a mostly rural and small-town base that would be thoroughly peeved by too much focus on Toronto. So either he's going to be villified in Toronto for abandoning his own city, or he's going to be subject to all kinds of grassroots grumbling that he's abandoning his party's principles.

On a purely strategic level, the smart move is probably to avoid wrapping himself in the Toronto flag. The Tories don't currently hold a seat in Toronto, so there's no risk of losing ground on this issue, and they'll be lucky to pick up a handful no matter what they do. Better to go after votes in the surrounding 905-belt, where nobody much cares how much tax the downtown types are paying.

If that's how it plays out, it would theoretically work to the advantage of the NDP, which has made some inroads in Toronto and can promise the world without fear of ever actually having to deliver anything. But on the evidence of his two previous election campaigns, it's a fair bet Howard Hampton will find some way to screw it up.

***

Update: John Tory comments via a press release. "Accountability" seems to be the buzzword of choice, with mention of a "municipal fiscal review" and a "value for money audit." Those who believe a picture is worth a thousand words will note that Tory is hovering over a distinctly 905-ish neighbourhood in the graphic at the top of the page.

***

Update to the update: It's been pointed out that Tory is in fact hovering over an assortment of neighbourhoods, on account of images up top rotating. Amazing what you can do with technology these days.

-----------------------------------------------------------

It's on the radar and it ought to stay on the radar. Time to start bothering your local MPP.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Why is the city in the business of housing in the first place? Trouble is that the city is the worst slum lord so offloading their property assets might prove difficult. The city should entice private interests to buy said properties by offering development incentives conditional on a fixed market-unit to subsidized split.

An excellent idea. The city should not be involved in providing housing. Immigrants who can't afford housing should have it provided by the Federal gov't, which brought them in.

-Solid waste management $117 million - They are moving to a pay for collection system anyway so f-it just privatize the whole thing and reduce this line item to only include cleaning of public spaces such as streets and parks and handling depot centres. Private residence should pay for their own trash just like apartment dwellers do now.

I 100% agree that this should be privatized. It's crazy that we have to pay high union wages to gov't workers for this role when there are private waste management firms willing to compete for the biz.