Wednesday’s Headlines

5 comments

1. Hume: Ryerson’s glass vision a dazzler for Yonge and Gould [The Star]
   http://www.thestar.com/news/article/969462–hume-ryerson-s-glass-vision-a-dazzler-for-yonge-and-gould?bn=1

2. You should also include this item by John Lorinc:

   Ford’s unique approach to campaign financing: Borrow from family firm

   http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/fords-unique-approach-to-campaign-financing-borrow-from-family-firm/article1972613/

3. Vaughan politicians should advocate for our own Transit City [YorkRegion.com]

   Of course, for the sum being spent on the subway between Steeles Avenue and Vaughan “Corporate Centre” they could have a multi-line Transit City already and TTC wouldn’t be on the hook under contract for operating losses arising on the Spadina Line.

   As for “Unbuilt transit link in limbo”
   If money was required from Monarch for a transit connection, it should be spent on that and not whatever the councillor feels like spending it on. The developer paid development charges (presumably) which is supposed to go on civic improvements (something Rob Ford should remember when trying to hijack them for subway extensions).

4. I think about the selling off of the houses owned by TCHC and the floating proposal of selling off all the shares owned by the city of TCHC and it looks like the process of finishing off the government’s involvement in affordable housing is nearing the end.
   There were many steps made over the years to bring municial housing in this city to the state it is in now. Step one was eroding the federal funding of construction of municipal non profits and co-ops through the 1980s and 1990s. Step two came in the mid 1990s through the federal govenment’s termination of federal funding of affordable housing started by Mulroney just before he resigned in early 1993 and finished off by Chretien (who promised to stop the process in that year’s election) and subsequent downloading to the provinces, shortly followed by Harris terminating the construction of new buildings and downloading responsibility to the cities. Step three involved the physical decay of the existing buildings through cuts to capital maintenance and cleaning. Now it looks like step four is approaching. The upper levels of government dropped the ball and now it is going to crumble through the hands of the municipalities into dust. If the city does away with the entire portfolio I hope that at the very least those who have nowhere to go can be relocated even if it is in the 905 or beyond. And something close to that could very well happen. The opposition will try to fight it but it looks like the anger of the right has the upper hand this time. Brace yourselves, its going to be a bumpy ride…

5. Jordan, I don’t like the fact that Ootes has made the decision to sell these properties BEFORE a new Board is in place. But I also believe that it has been irresponsible for the TCHC to hold on to single-family dwellings given that such dwellings take up an inordinate amount of resources to maintain. Continuing to hold on to these resources means that the TCHC is not using resources effectively. PERIOD. Either they should be sold or the properties developed as multi-unit sites. But continuing to hold on to them as single-family dwellings is irresponsible. As for the widow who was given the right to continue living in a Beach property till the end of her days at the “market” rate of 1200/month, one has to wonder how her situation is covered under the mandate of an organization who’s mission is to provide social housing. She’s getting an extremely generous deal at the taxpayer’s expense even though she meets no “needs” criteria… thereby cutting into the TCHC’s ability to provide for those really in need.