Pro-City citizens group--Meeting tonight, 9/11

[Hydrogen]

I agree with what Urban Shocker has stated, and see no need to repeat the points.

Unimaginative, even if these new taxes had been introduced, there still would be fiscal problems with the city budget. The point is that, had these taxes been introduced, we would be further down the road to turning a problematic tax structure into a complete jumble. It's enough that MPAC assessments can boggle the mind, but adding on land transfer taxes in some jurisdictions, and charging more for some car registrations in some jurisdictions does not solve deeper problems.

There is little doubt that the city will face increases in taxes. And in their little way, they will contribute to housing being less affordable. The land transfer tax represents an increase in the cost of afforability, and amplifies that cost whenever house prices increase.

There is little doubt that some of the responsibility for turning responsible municipal taxation into mere politics lies with city councillors, but it does not lie with them alone. They do not control how assessments are evaluated. Nevertheless, municipal taxes cannot solve - and should not solve - a damaged system of funding provincial programs and services in the city (or any city in the province).

 

[brettrobinson]

I'll ignore the ramblings about the environmental boogie man that is the SUV driver, but paying based off vehicle length is poorly conceived. I bet a Toyota Corrolla is substantially more environmentally friendly car than a AMC Pacer, even though the Pacer is shorter at 171.8 inches versus 178.3 inches. Sports cars tend to be small cars but get potentially half the mileage of an economical ride. Some people need larger vehicles for work, such as pickups and vans. Some SUVs are shorter than minivans, yet pollute more. The Mini is 30 inches shorter than the Prius. Guess which one is more environmentally friendly.

Do you drive a SUV? Ok seriously, I do agree with you that vehicle length has no direct relationship to fuel economy. So, ignoring the environment side of it I think parking permits based on vehicle length is a smart way to go.

 

[junctionist]

If there are shortages on parking space on certain streets, it's the logical move. Otherwise, I don't see anything positive about it.

 

[Hydrogen]

I do agree with you that vehicle length has no direct relationship to fuel economy. So, ignoring the environment side of it I think parking permits based on vehicle length is a smart way to go.

But on what basis? Clearly not on environmental grounds. An SUV fits into the standard marked parking spots. If it's tough to park, that's a problem to the driver.

 

[brettrobinson]

But on what basis? Clearly not on environmental grounds. An SUV fits into the standard marked parking spots. If it's tough to park, that's a problem to the driver.

I am talking city of Toronto Street Parking Permits on residential streets not municipal parking lots or private lots. http://www.toronto.ca/transportation/onstreet/

Other options that other cities do...

This one is based on your cars CO2 emissions.

http://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/conten...sionid=EF54D8337B8E55B2F39B43112DD53F3F.node2

and

http://www.richmond.gov.uk/parking_chrages_consultation1.pdf

 

[unimaginative2]

Hydrogen, I wasn't talking about the land transfer tax, though. I was simply talking about property taxes. 905 municipalities enacted double digit tax increases year after year. Toronto froze taxes for several years and then held increases to 3%. The 905 doesn't have the same financial problems as Toronto. Doesn't that seem like a rather reasonable explanation?

 

[Hydrogen]

What are they going to have a person do? Come in and report on how much they drive every week? Anyone who drives a small car every day can easily put out more emissions that someone driving a larger vehicle less fequently. Emissions also depend to some degree on how much work a given engine must do to move a certain weight, so a loaded vehicle used far less frequently (and possibly more efficiently) can be penalized when compared to an empty vehicle being used constantly.

Regardless of all of this, all these efforts are a means to glossing over the substantial systemic problems of city budgeting and provincial responsibilities with respect to this issue.

 

[brettrobinson]

What are they going to have a person do? Come in and report on how much they drive every week? Anyone who drives a small car every day can easily put out more emissions that someone driving a larger vehicle less fequently. Emissions also depend to some degree on how much work a given engine must do to move a certain weight, so a loaded vehicle used far less frequently (and possibly more efficiently) can be penalized when compared to an empty vehicle being used constantly.

Regardless of all of this, all these efforts are a means to glossing over the substantial systemic problems of city budgeting and provincial responsibilities with respect to this issue.

Then go back to my original suggestion. Street parking permits based on vehicle lenght with no link to emissons. Bigger the car the more room you take on the street to park, the more you pay.

 

[poppajojo]

Hydrogen, I wasn't talking about the land transfer tax, though. I was simply talking about property taxes. 905 municipalities enacted double digit tax increases year after year. Toronto froze taxes for several years and then held increases to 3%. The 905 doesn't have the same financial problems as Toronto. Doesn't that seem like a rather reasonable explanation?

Commercial property taxes are much higher in Toronto.

 

[lordmandeep]

then increase the property taxes at 4-5% and then reduce commercial taxes by 1%...

 

[Conrad Black]

And how exactly does that raise the $575 million that the city needs to balance the budget?

 

[Hydrogen]

^It doesn't of course, it just shows that everyone can get very creative on how to tax others.

Unimaginative, as I have pointed out, the city government is not without sin with respect to municipal taxes. But, if suburban municipalities are raising their taxes in double digits as you point out, then it begs the question as to why they must do so!

Are we to simply accept that tax rates must go up at such a constant rate on a continuous basis?

 

[junctionist]

What's next, some sort of one cent Toronto GST?

 

[urbandreamer]

How about a pedastrian tax? yes every pedastrian must pay $1 per day for the privilege of using the sidewalk!

The main reason Toronto is facing a fiscal crisis? The fools that run the city!

 

[Hydrogen]

The city is running a deficit. The federal government has been running huge surpluses for years. The Harris government hid its tax cuts in downloaded services it pushed onto the city. For a period of time, Ontario was the only jurisdiction in North America not to fund public transit.

There is lots of blame to go around.