Rob Ford's Toronto

[toraerach]

I've always supported bicycle licensing for anyone older than 16, $10-15 is reasonable. You write an exam just like a driver, you either pass or fail and carry the license when your cycling. That also helps educate cyclists and would only help improve cyclists obeying the rules of the road which could only be an improvement on what's going on out there now. Further, every bicycle including Bixi rentals should be plated. I am a cyclist and I see the craziness out there as any cyclist will attest to. Further, repeal the vehicle registration tax and toll all highways.

Regardless of the merits of bike liscensing (and I'm not convinced it would do all that good), there are several problems with the idea that would make it if not impossible then very difficult to implement. First, I doubt the city even has the power to unilaterally do this without the province/MTO on board. Second, consider the fact that the new province-issued photo ID cards cost something like $30 in order to break even, and that's without a written test or any new space or staff requirements as it's all being done through already existing Service Ontario kiosks. There's no way you could set up an entire liscensing program and charge a fee on only $10-15 without losing significant amounts of money. Finally, though drivers' liscences are almost universal across the planet, implementing a cyclist liscence would be something completely new and (as far as I know) unique to Toronto. I don't know how you could successfully do this without making it nearly impossible for tourists and other out-of-towners to cycle here.

If the main concern is that cyclists are breaking existing traffic laws, then the answer would seem to be better enforcement of those laws. Afterall, even if you were to liscense them, nothing would change unless people breaking the law actually had to face the consequences of doing so. Perhaps punishment for breaking these laws, at least in cases of repeat/reckless offenders, should be cycling safety classes with a test at the end of the program (paid for by the offending cyclist).

 

[Urban Shocker]

I live just outside Toronto so I don't have a horse in this race - but as an observer I have to wonder if people think that playing to the gallery and getting applause from people who already support you really counts for much, or anything at all. Those who wore costumes or raised a ruckus, pat yourselves on the back for teamwork, but I 90% of the dog and pony show was a complete waste of everyone's time.

It was an unscripted media event, always a dangerous situations for the Fords because they can't control what happens. They tend to go for quick photo-ops - the launch of Caribbean Carnival, or cleaning graffiti off a wall, rather than the Pride flag-raising for instance - at situations that they can control. Ford, I noticed, was decidedly nervous at the New Year Levee at City Hall where he had to shake hands with pinko fags like me.

 

[jn_12]

I don't think peoople would be too impressed with a 13% tax hike .

I added every revenue steam and cut everything possible, and they were still nearly $80 million short. Once I added a 10 cent TTC hike and a 3% tax hike the city finally had a small surplus. It's pretty obvious there's a revenue problem.

Why? What's wrong with a 13% tax increase? If you want, consider a 4% chunk of it as making up for not implementing an increase last year. So 9% really. If we look at the results of the public consultations from the Core Services Review (you know, the one where 12,500 Torontonians responded) you'll find that maintaining services at current levels are the largest priority for citizens (page 7). On top of that, the average proposed property tax increase from citizens was 5.15%. 20% of respondents said they wanted a 5% increase in their taxes, while the second highest (19% of respondents) was a 10% increase (page 8). Also, consider that 57% of respondents wanted a tax increase of between 5 and 10%. So there is clearly an appetite for higher taxes and absolutely no appetite for service cuts.

Also, since when are taxes bad? Don't tell me you've caught the American Anti-tax flu as well?

 

[GraphicMatt]

Regardless of the merits of bike liscensing (and I'm not convinced it would do all that good), there are several problems with the idea that would make it if not impossible then very difficult to implement. First, I doubt the city even has the power to unilaterally do this without the province/MTO on board. Second, consider the fact that the new province-issued photo ID cards cost something like $30 in order to break even, and that's without a written test or any new space or staff requirements as it's all being done through already existing Service Ontario kiosks. There's no way you could set up an entire liscensing program and charge a fee on only $10-15 without losing significant amounts of money. Finally, though drivers' liscences are almost universal across the planet, implementing a cyclist liscence would be something completely new and (as far as I know) unique to Toronto. I don't know how you could successfully do this without making it nearly impossible for tourists and other out-of-towners to cycle here.

Yes, exactly. The City of Toronto has looked at bike licensing several times over the last twenty years and each time has determined that, to cover the administrative overhead of such a program, the cost-per-license would need to be so high that it would discourage a significant number of people from riding bikes.

I do think there is opportunities for more bicycle education type programs, though, and indeed more enforcement.

 

[tkip]

Do you cycle? If you don't let me tell you it's madness out there on downtown streets, laws are being broken at every turn and something needs to be done. Things are only getting worse as more and more people take to cycling. I feel that licensing and plates would get some level of control over those who don't obey the rules of the road, which I'd say is about 70% of cyclists. Children shouldn't be licensed, I never suggested that. Kids riding bikes around neighbourhoods & parks are doing what kids do, but come 16 if they start cycling on city streets and paths I think it's time they get licensed. Along with Police being able to get a handle on cyclists doing all things illegal, there's also a revenue stream to be explored here too.

The answer isn't making people pay for licenses to ride their bikes. It's making people obey the rules of the road and using their common sense. Same as drivers. Same as pedestrians. Just ticket people when they break the rules. Hit them in their pockets. But my original statement stands. A bike license is still a money grab.

Same as the pet license nonsense introduced by the city a while back. It's just another way to pick your pocket. We're also over regulating everyday life now to a ridiculous extent.

When I rode my bike as a kid, all the kids were riding them all over the city streets and this included the major ones as well. No one was dying and we all came home safe and sound with the exception of the occasional bruise or cut. The problem is that everyone now is in a rush and people live in their own bubble world where they think the rules don't apply to them.

 

[MetroMan]

The possibility of cutting Ford out

While we don't have recall legislation in this city, I asked a councillor that night what he thought of council shutting Ford out.

Off the record, he said it's a real possibility as we approach the 2012 budget. They'd need to have 2/3rds of council voting against Ford and taking over the Exec Committee to effectively run the city while completely ignoring and bypassing the Mayor.

It may end up that concessions are made and councillors aligned with Ford compromise this time, but if Ford continues to be as combative and dictatorial like, most of council will turn against him before the 2013 budget. At most, Ford has 2 years as Mayor and 2 years whining that nobody is listening to him.

 

[Automation Gallery]

Thats a whole lot of rubbish, you would be hard pressed to get 1/2 of the council let alone 2/3.... anyways its wishfull thinking for many, and keep dreaming.

 

[MetroMan]

Take away some of these reticent Ford supporting councillors and the centrists will also leave. You're left with maybe 5 or 6 hard core Ford supporters and even they don't want to lose their career in the next election over being complicit with a destructive Mayor. Heck, even ass kissing Mammoliti will jump ship if he doesn't see anything in it for himself.

 

[Automation Gallery]

I doubt that, for every Torontonian that want things to stay as is, there are probably two or more that want changes to our finances...you would never know it by being on UT and associating with the downtown dwellers...remember this great city of ours is more than just the core, and for that reason we have Ford and a right leaning council.

they don't want to lose their career in the next election

I believe that.....losing their career in the next election , would have more to do with not listening to the folks that voted them in.

 

[ibhattac]

In principle, Metroman is correct, securing the support of as many Councillors as possible is what needs to be done. The challenge, however, is being able to demonstrate to someone like, say, Cllr. Minnan-Wong, or Cllr. Berardinetti, that there are 9,000 people prepared to vote against them in the next election because of x/y/z reason.

And that is where I think Automation Gallery is spot on. UT contributors may, in fact, be preaching to the choir. There's a difference between saying thousands of Torontonians south of Bloor, between the Humber and Don are opposed to x/y/z. It's another thing entirely to be able to show Councillor Minnan-Wong that 9000 of his residents in Don Valley East are opposed to x/y/z. And that's precisely what the next 1185 days to October 27th, 2014 have to be about. Never mind all the budget cycles and associated frenzy every year in the lead up to that.

You can be damn sure that this the metric with which the Mayor's advisors are working as of yesterday.

Also, any thoughts on the Mayor's CFL picks made during the Executive Committee meeting?

 

[CanadianNational]

Thanks for that note, MetroMan.

Certainly, Ford and his gang are betting that infuriating downtown will not impact their suburban re-election base. And why not? So far, the suburbs, on the surface, seem set to lose much less than dense old complicated downtown. It will take some time for the suburbs to feel it. They're ignoring it on paper now.

However, when the suburbs begin to see downtown's problems coming to actually roost in their own parks, community centers, libraries, maintenance, crime rates, garbage pickup, transit, sewers and backyards - well, that's when I suspect things will really hit the fan.

I don't think we can ever expect a huge group of people who oppose a good situation to ever "see the light" all of a sudden. I certainly wouldn't want to wish ill will on them, because it will only make the ugliness worse. Watching the goodwill and intelligence of the country's discourse fray under Harper has made me reluctant to wish bad things to happen as a corrective. Bad things happening don't show people how to do good things. They usually make the good things more difficult to sustain.

I do hope, however, that our intelligence and better judgement in this city does keep us as we have been in the past - a civic-minded, progressive, civil, intelligent city. We would be foolish to think we are somehow immune to the trials that wrack the rest of the world, and idiots to bring them on.

Wanting to reform the city's finances is one thing. But insulting it's goodwill and debasing it's discourse is another. If legal measures can be taken to reign in further destruction, the lowering of intelligence and the spread of ill-will and division, I believe that is a good thing. Mainly because it is simply impossible to get something back once it is lost.

 

[MetroMan]

Thats a whole lot of rubbish, you would be hard pressed to get 1/2 of the council let alone 2/3.... anyways its wishfull thinking for many, and keep dreaming.

I'd like to point out that there have already been instances of not just 2/3rds of council but EVERY councillor voting against Ford (i.e. AIDS support) -- even his own brother voted against him. I don't expect unanimous opposition, but I can easily put together a number of over 2/3rds of council who are not extremists.

There have been 10 years of precedents of Ford being outcast and only less than a year of some councillors lining with Ford because he's in the honeymoon phase and wields power and popularity. The honeymoon is pretty much over and his popularity has already begun to fall. It will likely plummet by the time the 2012 budget gets into real consideration. Ford depends on his ability to hand out powerful positions, and that's the only reason why some councillors are aligning with him. If the tide turns, then he loses that ability and those ass kissers will go to where the power is.

This councillor whom I spoke to seemed to believe that Ford wouldn't implement his agenda, specially as councillors begin to think about the next election -- usually mid term. We've already seen two of Ford's inner circle go on record against closing Libraries and other of his policies. I firmly believe that he won't get what he wants for the 2012 budget and if he continues to be heavy handed, his inner circle will turn against him.

I don't expect the left to take over council, but a centrist compromise could have city council gather around somebody like Josh Matlow or maybe a right leaning moderate like Michael Thompson if Ford proves to be as extreme and dangerous as we know he is.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

The answer isn't making people pay for licenses to ride their bikes. It's making people obey the rules of the road and using their common sense. Same as drivers. Same as pedestrians. Just ticket people when they break the rules. Hit them in their pockets. But my original statement stands. A bike license is still a money grab.

Same as the pet license nonsense introduced by the city a while back. It's just another way to pick your pocket. We're also over regulating everyday life now to a ridiculous extent.

I'll concede that licensing/plating may not be the answer to the problem, but it's a problem that does need to be addressed. If licensing costs so much administratively then it's a non-starter, many/most cyclists would likely resist the cost needed to make a bicycle licensing program turn a bit of a profit.

 

[Ak2809]

I think many are missing the point of potential bicycle licensing/plating. This is not just to recoup some money or make sure cyclists know the rules concerning them, but also to make them accountable. If cyclists were able to be reported and dealt with for breaking the law it would bring a lot more order to the streets than currently exist.

 

[GraphicMatt]

I think many are missing the point of potential bicycle licensing/plating. This is not just to recoup some money or make sure cyclists know the rules concerning them, but also to make them accountable. If cyclists were able to be reported and dealt with for breaking the law it would bring a lot more order to the streets than currently exist.

Cyclists already are accountable if they're caught by police violating a traffic law. A license would allow, I guess, penalties that include stripping them of their bicycle license, but those with suspended bike licenses could still head out on the road. Enforcement is so lax that it's not like they'd run a great risk of getting caught.