My comment was in response to those who don't think city funds should be used to fix the Gardiner - it's the middle ground between the two extremes. Homeowners already pay for water, sewer, and garbage collection and we haven't fallen down any slipper slopes. I think it's safe to say that the current consensus in Ontario is that education and health care meet the definition of "public good" and should not be operated on a user-pay basis.
Yeah, Hawc's POV doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
It's funny how people get used to things. Used to be, not so very long ago, schools were not paid through property tax the way they are now. Used to be, not so very long ago, the TTC got 1/2 its operating funding from the province. Used to be, not so long ago, the City of Toronto (and every other Ont municipality) didn't have to fund social housing on its own or a bunch of other things. But now it's normal, begging the question of whether we were on some "slippery slope" before.
Putting a toll on a public park may SEEM far-fetched but how different is it from the user fees on public pools or other recreational facilties where a portion of the costs are part of the tax base and thee rest user fees? It's not a slippery slope, it's a fine line. One could go onto a whole separate thread about revenue tools to fund transit. Why do we assume roads are a 'public good' to which we are entitled but we have to have a years-long debate about even remotely proportional funding for public transit? It's a complete hypocrisy by any objective measure.
Meanwhile, a "world-class" city like New York has tolls all over the place, property taxes that put ours to shame (and, sure no "free" healthcare etc.) and yet no one is worried that city is on a "slippery slope." Indeed, it's their bridge tolls that allowed them to build so much infrastructure in the first place, to say nothing of maintaining it.
So, IMHO, if they are actually going to rebuild the Gardiner implementing a toll strikes me as a perfectly reasonable way to pay for it. Or you can lump it onto property taxes and push the city closer to its debt limit, I suppose.
Personally, I think this soul searching about the damned highway has gone on way too long. Everyone knows the damage it's doing to the urban fabric and waterfront development is clearly a major part of the city's future. Cities all over are ditching or trying to ditch elevated expressways like the Gardiner so I don't see the point doubling down on at this point. There will be short term pain as traffic patterns re-adjust etc. and then life will go on.
