Rob Ford's Toronto

[cdr108]

While this came out last Friday, it's still making the rounds today.

looks like RF's $70 million wasn't from 'gravy' from trimming budgets but city revenues, plus his stat of 80% of budget on payroll is also incorrect according to the article, and is actually 48%.

that's in line with one of the charts i pulled earlier from US municipalities, except for NYC which is >100%, yet i'm under the impression Canada provides more of a social net vs. US, so we're getting alot of value for our $$$.

-----

“And so if we can find 70 million, I’m sure we can find 700 million” – the amount the city needs to close its annual budget shortfall. There is only one small problem. When he says he has “saved” $70-million, he does not mean he has cut that amount from what the city spends. In fact, most of it comes from what the city collects in taxes.

Included in the $70-million figure is $64-million from the cancellation of the vehicle registration tax earlier this year. That is a plus for taxpayers, but a minus for the city treasury, which must make do with $64-million less each year to pay for the services it delivers. Mr. Ford’s tax cut has made it harder, not easier, to balance the budget. So the mayor is way off base to claim he has found $70-million in budget savings in six months.

Either Mr. Ford is misleading the public or he simply does not understand the apples-and-oranges difference between money taken in and money saved. To make matters worse, he told Mr. Oakley that the city spends 80 per cent of its budget on labour. The real figure is 48 per cent. “The last thing we want to do is lay off, Johnny, but when it makes up 80 per cent of your budget, there’s a lot of gravy there,” he said. Oh dear.

The sad thing about all of this is that most people probably support Mr. Ford in his drive to get city spending under control. But if they are going to go along with big cuts, they want to know they will be done sensibly and humanely. Mr. Ford’s performance this week did not reassure.

 

[Torontovibe]

Why am I starting to believe that all the facts and figures given out, are pure hogwash?

You really can't believe anything you read these days because it always turns out to be deception, used to manipulate the public into supporting political ideology. Why can't politicians just come out and level with us? (and that's BOTH, the right and the left) I'm tired of being lied to and having to find the truth somewhere at the bottom of a pit.

We are not being given the real numbers here. I'm sure of that.

 

[grey]

Adam Vaughan is totally making this report look like a hatchet scheme cooked up by the city manager and Rob Ford executive committee.

The individual department manangers that are being questioned don’t know jack all.

 

[js97]

Does this tarnish KPMG's rep in the business world?

lol. I wonder how many summer student/first year CAs they had working on this 'account'

 

[Thanos]

This report is nothing more than a blip to KPMGs image.
And it's not only CA's that work there.

I wouldn't be surprised if Ford used this report and the balanced books at the end of the year to make himself seem look like a magician.

 

[EnviroTO]

Ford was quoted as saying that the city pays four times more on labour costs than it should. This means that if all the city workers were kept there would be only a few salaries above the poverty line if the labour costs were in line with his thinking. Alternatively, if he believes that city services should not be cut as he said during the election, then he believes 1 in 4 city workers can be fired without an impact on services. Or maybe you fire half the workforce, and pay the other half 50% less than they make now and somehow that will create a motivated and efficient workforce. Basically Ford hasn't got a clue. He is full of sh*#. He has always been the council clown never making any sense and now he is mayor.

 

[TonyV]

And so, the mayor has turned to bean counters to back up his election claims.

I'll be the first to repeat the old maxim, no one ever came to fame for being a bean counter.

With regard to the KPMB findings, I recently witnessed this kind of bean-counting b.s. applied in a business (corporate) environment. All sorts of savings were identified but the problem was that in the end, the company threw the baby out with the bathwater, and the new "business model" still isn't working three or four years later. That is what could happen here if everyone sipped the KoolAid (fortunately there are some councillors around who are endowed with brains and a tad of courage).

At this point in time, the political games begin, and there will be enormous political posturing before all the facts are digested.

Now, spending money well - getting value for dollars, that is what city hall should ponder. I was one of 'em who was calling for the books to be opened during the Miller years whenever the budget issues hit the news. But I will venture to say that Miller (whom I both liked and disliked) understood terms such as "value" and "investment" whereas Ford is the type who will not consider what is gained with an expenditure.

Ford is just a bean counter.

 

[Irishmonk]

Ford is just a bean counter.

I would go one further and say that he is a bean counter who frequently loses count--i.e. not a very good one. (He also has the tendency to mix up "+" and "—" which exacerbates the problem.)

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

To protest the vote to approve PW5.1 the Toronto Cyclists Union arranged for a protest to "Take a Lane" to begin at Allan Gardens today (Wednesday July 20th) at 6:30pm. My bike seat got stolen, have to get it replaced so I couldn't make it but I took a few shots from my balcony. The ride looked to be about 2,000 strong, AMAZING!!!!!

Click on the thumbnail to enlarge, then click again on the image for full size.

Cyclists ride up Jarvis, turn west onto Wellesley Street and then north on Church Street.

 

[MetroMan]

I have a feeling we haven't heard the last about the Jarvis bike lanes. Cyclists will protest this over and over and disrupt the removal of it gets to that. Regular citizens will oppose spending $200,000 to remove bike lanes that aren't hurting travel times. Wong-Tam seems prepared for a fight on this and just because 23 councillors voted to remove them, it doesn't mean that the people who they represent agree.

My hunch is that by the time the Sherbourne lanes are in -- a prerequisite to eliminating the Jarvis lanes -- that cyclists and Torontonians in general will convince the hesitant councillors to get behind them in opposing such "gravy" spending. Jarvis bike lanes will still be there at the end of Ford's term.

 

[Admiral Beez]

My hunch is that by the time the Sherbourne lanes are in -- a prerequisite to eliminating the Jarvis lanes

I say let the cyclist mob keep Jarvis and cancel the Sherbourne separated bike lane project. Instead eliminate the current bike lanes on Sherbourne and make it five car-only lanes, with the alternate up the middle.

 

[Palma]

Well you got 2 choices: either gute the system or pay higher taxes.

Now if you want your taxes to be as low as possible, what are you prepared to give up to do that or see as well why??

As for Toronto vs. Mississauga, who has a huge debit and who has none? Why?? How many years of no tax increase??

Well for one, the infrastructure in Mississauga is nowhere as old as Toronto so of course their costs will be lower. But what happens in say another 50 years (not sure how old Mississauga will be then) when infrastructure needs to be updated then we will see if Mississauga will still be saying they have no debt. Young cities don't or should not have the debt that an older city has for the obvious reasons.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

Regular citizens will oppose spending $200,000 to remove bike lanes that aren't hurting travel times. Wong-Tam seems prepared for a fight on this and just because 23 councillors voted to remove them, it doesn't mean that the people who they represent agree.

It's actually roughly $500,000 (the City Manager didn't have firm numbers which probably means it will be higher) to remove the three lanes on Jarvis, Birchmount and Pharmacy. Further, he couldn't even tell Council what type of barrier(s) would be used to separate the committee's "separated bike lane network" from vehicular traffic. Finally, all these "bike lanes" through parks, ravines and hydro corridors that Ford champions will double as sidewalks that have to be shared with walkers, joggers, bladers etc. It's all a big friggen' joke.

My hunch is that by the time the Sherbourne lanes are in -- a prerequisite to eliminating the Jarvis lanes -- that cyclists and Torontonians in general will convince the hesitant councillors to get behind them in opposing such "gravy" spending. Jarvis bike lanes will still be there at the end of Ford's term.

This is why Minnan-Wong's Amendment to amend one of Wong-Tam's Amendments was so controversial, and was debated for over an hour. He altered the language in one of her three Amendments (in the event that PW5.1 passed, which of course it did) to read that the infrastructure on Jarvis be installed as soon as possible, mainly the electrical work, installing the switching and reversible lane lighting. That's a big part of the Jarvis St. expense so if that's in place, it's just a matter of re-aligning the road and re-painting the lanes. The elimination of the Jarvis lanes does however hinge on the completion of Sherbourne Street being resurfaced from top to bottom (Bloor to Queens Quay).

 

[TonyV]

I would go one further and say that he is a bean counter who frequently loses count--i.e. not a very good one. (He also has the tendency to mix up "+" and "—" which exacerbates the problem.)

It must run in the family, Doug can't count either.

http://www.thestar.com/news/toronto...ts-vs-books-in-ford-s-etobicoke-it-s-3-1?bn=1

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

I say let the cyclist mob keep Jarvis and cancel the Sherbourne separated bike lane project. Instead eliminate the current bike lanes on Sherbourne and make it five car-only lanes, with the alternate up the middle.

Where are you going on Sherbourne that you need an alternate lane? For that matter, where are you going on Jarvis? Both roads are ridiculously short for all the whingeing that goes on about the need for speed -- it can't take more than 10 minutes to go from Queen to Bloor in the worst of traffic.