Toronto's gridlock is now rated as the worst amongst 19 major metropolis', including Los Angeles, New York and London.
This morning both Gregor Robertson and Dianne Watts (by conference call) participated in the Big City Mayors’ Caucus (BCMC) meeting as part of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) festivities occurring in Toronto this week.
I am happy that the mayors have taken to the national media to push the issue of transportation infrastructure within municipalities, as it is very clear that funding, or a lack thereof, are one of the major obstacles in terms of competitiveness for Canadian cities.
In British Columbia, and more specifically Metro Vancouver, we have experienced a stretch of significant investment prompted by the Olympics, giving the region a skewered view of the realities of provincial and federal support for our cities’ aging infrastructure.
For the rest of the country that didn’t have the benefit of hosting the world as a catalyst, the picture is far bleaker.
The Canadian Urban Transit Association (CUTA) estimates that transit systems across the country need $20.7 billion for infrastructure between 2006 and 2010, or about $4.2 billion annually, which would cover rehabilitating and replacing existing systems, as well as expansion plans to accommodate increasing numbers of riders. Of the $20.7 billion required, 44 per cent is needed to rehabilitate or renew existing infrastructure, while 56 per cent is needed to expand service capacity to serve more riders.
The Toronto Board of Trade has just published a study which shows that while the city is economically competitive in a number of areas, it ranks last amongst 19 international cities when it comes to gridlock and commuting times – behind cities like Los Angeles, New York and London.
Bottom line? Transit in this country sucks when compared with the likes of cities in Europe or Asia, and as the FCM is pushing, “we need to replace short-term, ad hoc funding with longer term, more predictable commitments from all orders of government that come closer to addressing the outstanding needs.”
Municipalities have a real problem on their hands. With regards to the most pressing files acting as determinants for the future success of our cities – transportation, housing, infrastructure – there is no money within municipal coffers to make any kind of dent in the gaps.
That is why this group – the Big City Mayors’ Caucus – needs to start taking a different approach, and collectively push for either constitutional recognition for our forgotten third-level of government, or new relationships with their respective provincial governments, spurred by collective lobbying efforts.
The FCM is an effective and well-run organization. But it is the profile that the BCMC has within its midst that can take these seemingly mundane ideas and put them on the radar of the PUBLIC consciousness.
Maybe it’s Gregor taking a lead role in promoting the concept of a national strategy for homelessness and housing. Perhaps it is the City of Toronto’s David Miller (or his soon to be successor Smitherman or Ford) that will talk about the city’s aging infrastructure.
Regardless, these are the best salespeople the municipal front has in the country, and it is time that they start using their political capital to raise issues to the point where the public is demanding funding and involvement from their provincial and federal governments.
These press releases are great for one-off stories, but at the end of the day, a relentless, coordinated and sustained campaign to raise the profile on the plight of our cities is in order.
The poorest kids on the block of governmental hierarchy need to start banding together and putting the fire to the feet of their provincial and federal counterparts.
I would venture a guess that less than 3 in 10 people understand how limited municipalities are when it comes to revenue raising, and how little municipalities are regarded when it comes to the higher levels of government.
Public education needs to happen now, and the only way that is going to happen is if the Big City Mayors make a commitment of political will to test the waters and collectively say “We aren’t going to take it anymore.”
Doubtful of course, considering how beholden Mayor and Council are to their political masters, but hey, a commentator can dream.
Sigh.
Good to see recognition of financial limitations of cities. To bad Vision council didn’t appreciate that when they ran up a $11m 08 surplus + $61m deficit last year when all other Metro cities managed to keep balanced books.