This article is part of a series by Christopher Balkaran on ways to approach and engage with the municipal election campaign.
This past week, the two leading mayoral candidates, Brad Bradford and Olivia Chow participated in another mayoral debate at the Rotman School of Management. Moderator Steve Paikin began with the following question:
“Neither of you have the power of a Prime Minister or a Premier. How can a Mayor actually put a dent in housing affordability?”
This question is even more important for a City like Toronto. While candidates promise better transit, infrastructure, and affordable housing, who has the power to make decisions?
The situation during the COVID-19 pandemic was unprecedented for municipalities. As government protections ended, Toronto was confronted with approximately 15,000 individuals experiencing homelessness. In 2020, the Toronto Transit Commission, which once relied on fares for two-thirds of its revenue, was losing $20M weekly.
By 2024, the City of Toronto faced a projected $1.5B operating shortfall. Lower transit ridership and higher shelter use placed enormous pressures on the City. As a result, Toronto and the Province of Ontario negotiated a New Deal: $1.2B split between transit and emergency support. Ontario also agreed to take over the Gardiner Expressway and Don Valley Parkway and the City negotiated for new subway cars on Line 2.
And yet, the Province is only one part of the equation when it comes to helping the City with its plans. Property taxes, for example, cannot on their own fund and attract multi-billion-dollar housing development projects. For that, the City needs to rely on the federal government.
Federal funding creates a different tension. In December 2023, Toronto secured a $471M commitment through Ottawa’s Housing Accelerator Fund (HAF), linking financial support to if the City increased its housing supply. Part of the conditions from the federal government, however, included for the City to expand the types of housing it allowed (e.g., fourplexes, sixplexes). Because the City did not permit sixplexes fast enough, the federal government directly penalized the municipality by cutting its HAF by $10M.
This financial help can also determine how neighbourhoods and communities look, which muddies how much say the municipality has in the actual city design. City planners may be examining how to build affordable housing units, but will need to consult CMHC’s definition of ‘affordable’. Developers, likewise, would have to use national metrics on affordability before a shovel is in the ground, instead of looking at metrics specific to the City. Federal funding also designates affordable housing units for priority populations (e.g., seniors, refugee claimants) and how much rent can be.
And this is the challenge presented to voters as we head into the municipal election: while the City manages its own operations, it lacks the financial backing for the plans ahead. After all, the Province possesses the authority to override city zoning, have a say in environmental assessments, and expropriate land if the City refuses cooperation. Layer in the New Deal and the City can find itself in a challenging position when negotiating on its own behalf.
What does Toronto need in a Mayor?
And maybe, this is what the Mayoral race is about: not who has the most ambitious plans for the City, but who is the better diplomat-in-chief – a person who can work with all levels of government, with competing political agendas, under a shared vision. The role of the Mayor is to be chameleon-like in their approach, understanding federal demands on housing, facilitating fast transit expansion by the Province, and bringing forward real concerns from City Council and local residents on issues like density and affordability. Likewise, revisioning what zoning bylaws look like to facilitate greater investment from the federal government would make the City an even more indispensable partner.
The next Mayor must also not lose sight of this simple fact: Toronto is the economic engine of Canada and its success is the nation’s success. The City must start negotiating with this as its core premise. When residents complain of gridlock, entire supply chains are being put to the test. When there are not enough housing options, high-priced talent begins to leave and so does a potential tax base. Securing long-term funding for Toronto is a national act of economic self-preservation.
But the blueprint for the design of the vision of Toronto’s future must be left to Toronto. The next mayor must bring these concerns into subsequent agreements and explain these clearly to the electorate. Voters deserve to know what a candidate intends to deliver, whose support is needed and what compromises may follow.
Paikin’s question therefore belongs beyond the debate stage: how will the next mayor use their powers to draft a long-term vision and make meaningful advancement on fulfilling it?
Christopher Balkaran is a Toronto-based policy professional and host of the Open Minds Podcast, where he explores public policy, civic life, and the questions shaping Canadian society.
