Ford backs down from cuts, for now

Mayor Rob Ford has talked the talk on the need for budget cuts. He declined to walk the walk when he had the opportunity on Tuesday morning.

In a significant concession to public opposition and to queasy council allies, Ford voted at the end of a 20-hour executive committee meeting to reject some proposed cuts and to put off decisions on almost all of the others to the 2012 budget process, which begins in November and ends in mid-January.

The votes call into question Ford’s ability to usher a hawkish fiscal agenda through council. They suggest that even some of the mayor’s loyalists have not yet mustered the fortitude to put their jobs on the line by endorsing cuts in the face of widespread disapproval from their constituents.

“Surprise, surprise,” Councillor Mike Del Grande, the blunt-talking budget chief, said, sarcastically, with a wary smile.

“Again, even some of my own committee members still have a hard time to grapple (with the fact) that (the budget situation) is unprecedented. I guess they’re looking for a Hail Mary pass — to, hopefully, you know, somebody’s going to come along, maybe the (provincial) election’s going to be over and somebody’s going to sprinkle all kinds of money on the city.

“We’re deferring, delaying, but at some point, by January 17, we’re gonna have a budget, and we have to have a balanced budget.”

Josh Matlow, a council centrist who has been critical of Ford, said he believed there had been “a bit of an uprising” on Ford’s executive. And Deputy Mayor Doug Holyday was asked why the committee did not endorse cuts now, saying: “Sometimes things just don’t work that way. Sometimes you have to take things as they come. There’s a committee there. You have to have the consensus of the committee.”

The committee rejected library closures and cuts to the following services: community grants; grass-cutting in parks; snow-plowing; the program that removes snow from the “windrows” at the bottom of suburban driveways; and late-night TTC buses.

The committee also voted against the closure of park farms and zoos, and specifically in favour of engaging community groups to attempt to seek a “new partnership” for the Riverdale Farm by the spring of 2012. The chair of the farm’s advisory body had told the committee that there were numerous possible operating models to consider.

The committee voted against approving the elimination of 2,000 child care subsidies. Instead, it voted to urge the federal and provincial governments to work with the city to “develop a strategy to expand the number of affordable child care spaces” over the next two years.

The committee referred the following proposals, among others, back to city staff “for consideration as part of the 2012 and 2013 budget process”: eliminating city pick-up of pets owners want to surrender; eliminating Community Environment Days; eliminating the four free garbage tags; eliminating the Hardship Fund; reducing street-sweeping; reducing support to Business Improvement Areas; eliminating the dental program for the poor; reducing library hours and days of operation; and reducing new affordable housing development.

The committee approved the closure of little-visited city museums, the elimination of the requirement to have paid duty police officers at construction sites, and the termination of city funding for the Christmas Bureau, which helps non-city organizations like the Star’s Santa Claus fund distribute gifts to needy children. It also voted to authorize city officials to try to sell the Toronto Zoo and the three city-owned theatres.

Almost every centrist and left-leaning councillor present at the meeting argued that council has not been given enough information to endorse cuts. Though the city’s top bureaucrat, city manager Joe Pennachetti, estimated that his proposals would together produce $100 million in savings, councillors were not even provided a breakdown of exactly what savings each individual cut would produce.

“We don’t have the numbers, we don’t have what it means in terms of service implications, we hear it’s $100 million but we don’t have it itemized. I think this is where the political process is really, really weak,” said left-leaning Councillor Joe Mihevc.

Under questioning from councillors, Pennachetti made two statements that undercut Ford’s budget rhetoric. He said the city faces a budget shortfall of $500 million to $600 million, significantly less than the $774 million figure he has always used in official documents and that Ford has repeated in virtually every interview. And he said such a shortfall could hypothetically be filled with a tax increase of 15 to 20 per cent, far less than the 35 per cent figure Ford has used.

Ford again promised a tax hike of no more than 2.5 per cent. Since no councillor has actually advocated a hike of 15 or more per cent, it remains unclear how the budget will be balanced — especially if there is little appetite for cuts. The city will also hike user fees.

Left-leaning Councillor Adam Vaughan derided Ford as “the do-nothing mayor.” But he and other Ford critics refused to declare victory.

Councillor Janet Davis noted that the committee approved a buyout package for 700 employees, which she called “an immediate service cut.” And she noted that Ford has demanded a 10 per cent budget reduction from every city department. The departments, she said, may propose some of the same service cuts in an attempt to meet the target.

“We’re going to see these things all over again in November,” she said.

“I think the people of the city have made their voices heard very clearly. My worry is that people’s defences may now be down. This is not over. . . I want the people of the city to understand very clearly that there still is nothing off the table here today.”

The meeting began at 9:30 a.m. Monday morning and ended just before 5:30 a.m. Tuesday. The committee heard from 205 members of the public, according to city staff; about 200 spoke against cuts. Councillor Norm Kelly, a member of the executive, told the crowd that the committee’s decisions were evidence that members had listened to their views.

“You can't be criticizing on both ends of this thing,” said Councillor Giorgio Mammoliti. “We hear people criticizing — 'Oh, we haven't had enough input.' And then when we want to bring it to budget, we're being criticized for bringing it to budget. It's either one or the other.”

Asked after the meeting if he had punted the tough decisions, Ford said “not at all.”

“We’ll have to go through the budget process on a few issues. We’re doing as much as we can,” he said, his voice breaking with exhaustion.

“We’re going through everything thoroughly. At the end of the day, I was elected to clean up the financial mess that we inherited.”

The 13-member executive is solely composed of Ford allies. Some members, however, are far more agreeable to the mayor’s small-government ideology than others, and some criticized him last week.

Jaye Robinson rejected Ford’s preferred plan for the waterfront Port Lands and said she was uncomfortable voting immediately for service cuts. Michelle Berardinetti also broke ranks on the Port Lands; Peter Milczyn spoke critically of the administration’s handling of the Port Lands process.

Robinson and Berardinetti were notably absent from a Monday afternoon news conference at which most of the councillors on the executive stood with Ford.

The meeting ended on a humorous note. Ford finished his last speech by saying, “On that note, thank you very much, and goodnight everybody.” He had to be reminded that the committee had not yet voted.

The committee’s decisions are not final. Council will consider the proposals at a meeting next Monday.

Origin
Source: Toronto Star