Skip to main content

Toronto Mayor Rob Ford was in full campaign mode Wednesday, pledging to save the city $50-million "easy," and railing against a proposed property-tax hike – even as the budget committee compromised with a smaller increase than originally recommended.

The city's budget committee wrapped up its final 2014 budget meeting Wednesday, voting to approve a 2.25-per-cent property-tax increase. The increase is lower than the 2.5 per cent proposed by city staff. But for the mayor, who is in favour of holding a tax hike at 1.75 per cent, this wasn't enough.

"He knows and I know and everyone knows we can get down to one and three-quarters," Mr. Ford said, referring to Deputy Mayor Norm Kelly and other members of council who favour the 2.25-per-cent increase. "This is what the people want."

Story continues below advertisement

The mayor added that, once the budget is passed at executive committee and presented to council at the end of this month, he plans on bringing forward a list of potential savings that could see the city save $50-million. Mr. Ford said it would be "easy"to save the city that money, but declined to say what services might have to be cut.

He hinted, however, at privatizing services such as tree-planting and garbage collection east of Yonge Street. "If you contract some stuff out, if you see that as a service cut – I don't see that as a service cut. I see that as better service if the private sector is delivering instead of the government delivering them."

Late last year, many of Mr. Ford's powers were transferred to the deputy mayor, and the two have butted heads over the city's response to a recent ice storm. Both Mr. Kelly and the mayor denied that politics are at play in their disagreement over taxes.

"This is not a competition," Mr. Kelly said. "This is my desire to create a budget that is well-rounded, balanced, that's a win-win budget fiscally and socially." He added that he's reaching out to members of council to "make sure that this budget has the widest support possible."

Others, too, called Mr. Ford's position on the property tax "not achievable."

Councillor Michelle Berardinetti, who first brought forth the 2.25-per-cent motion, said that the city is expecting to receive more revenue from the land-transfer tax than currently budgeted for, part of which could be used to cover the $6-million cost of a 2.25-per-cent increase instead of 2.5 per cent. With Mr. Ford's numbers, she said, "unless you're going to have major cuts, that is not achievable."

But Councillor Doug Ford, who is running his brother's re-election campaign, claimed that 1.75 is still possible. "There's still, in my opinion, a couple hundred million dollars in savings if they really want to dig down and find the savings," he said. He declined to say what those savings might include.

Story continues below advertisement

Another issue that Doug Ford and the mayor have focused on recently – the land-transfer tax – was also discussed by the budget committee Wednesday. The mayor wants to reduce the tax by at least five per cent. The committee decided to leave the tax alone.

Wednesday's final budget meeting – which saw the approval of a wide range of city issues, including restored funding to the High Park Zoo and the standardization of library hours – was heated at times.

At one point, Councillor Janet Davis was asked to apologize after she used "inappropriate language" in speaking with Doug Ford.

"I shouldn't have said what I said," Ms. Davis said afterward. Her temper flared after she said the councillor spoke disparagingly of an art program she cares about. "I reacted to it. I shouldn't have."

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter
To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies