Affordability
Accessibility
Recovery
I will be considering ways to make things more affordable, accessible, and support recovery in every meeting I attend, every city plan I review, every initiative or plan I propose or participate in. Overall, I will have this focused lens in mind during every interaction. And for the initiatives that reach beyond municipal influences, I will be fiercely advocating for our Spadina-Fort York residents.
Although there are so many areas I would like to start working on, advocating for and helping, I want to first acknowledge and appreciate all the blessings we do at this moment already have by living in this beautiful riding.
I also want to acknowledge those who lived in Spadina-Fort York before colonialism arrived. I apologize for all that was lost, and I hope we will be able to work closely together at the municipal government level towards reconciliation.
Any of the following platform suggestions I make, are out of love for this community. I want to invest in building on our strengths and repairing what is needed.
Affordability
with a focus on:
Food Insecurity
Housing
As of the 2016 Census data (click here)
17.3% of Spadina-Fort York households fall within the low income category. To give you some context, for a “1 Person” household that would mean their before-tax (gross) household income falls under $25,516. To see what that would change to depending on the household size, click here
5.10% unemployment rate
Our community needs our support.
Why the focus on the initiatives I have identified?
“New research by The University of Calgary identifies the direct link between government policy and food bank use. Using Daily Bread Food Bank data, the report reveals that food bank visits directly rise with increases in rent, with falls in minimum wage and with reductions in the disability benefits available to individuals requiring social assistance.” Click here to read their full report.
-
• Bolster support to local food banks
• Look for as many additional ways as possible to make life more affordable in our riding to free up more household income for buying groceries.
-
Based on the income range mix of households in our Spadina-Fort York riding, affordable (less than 30% of income) shelter costs (rent/mortgage, utilities, etc.) for:
• 13% of households would need to be less than $500/month; which is less than a $81,000 mortgage
• 19% of households would need to be between $500-$1,250/month; which is less than a $204,000 mortgage
• 21% of households would need to be between $1,250-$2,000/month; which is less than a $326,000 mortgage
• 23% of households would need to be between $2,000-$3,125/month; which is less than a $510,000 mortgage
• 24% of households can exceed $3,125/month; which is a mortgage for $510,000 or more
But given the current market pricing for renting and buying homes in Spadina Fort York:
• 44.6% of “Renter Households” current shelter is unaffordable
• 36.0% of “Owner Households” current shelter is unaffordable
There should be affordable housing available in Spadina-Fort York for all income ranges.
-
For Renter Households:
• Advocate for more housing for the existing “Rent Geared to Income” program which has well over a 10 year waitlist
• Advocate for the Landlord Tenant Board (LTB) to impose 1 year rent freezes, and then reassess if further freeze needed
• Advocate for more staffing at the LTB to help address the significant backlog of issues. An LTB file should not take over 2 years to be heard and decisioned.
For Owner Households:
• Create a financial need application that, if demonstrated, could help offset some of the property taxes owed to the city for 1 year (especially if affected by tenant rent freeze program).
• For any new condo building developments, etc., negotiate a certain percentage of units to be priced in alignment with all known Spadina-Fort York income ranges, where only those in that income range are permitted to buy the unit.
• Advocate to end external real estate speculation. The scope for the economics of supply and demand should be limited to the participation of people who actually live here or are Canadian citizens. The current practice is harmful to people who live here.
If we are able to relieve the pressure on the housing market by stopping external real estate speculation, the subsequent effect should also be to decrease the cost of rental units, because why would someone rent if shelter becomes more affordable to buy?
For the Un-Housed:
We need better more immediate solutions for safe, dignified places for people without a home to live.
We also need to proactively address many of the contributing factors that correspond to homelessness: supportive housing, more mental health supports, creating affordable housing, better support income for those with disabilities to name a few.
Not everyone has family or friends to lean on for help in times of need. We as a community need to give the same support programs to these individuals that we would hope to receive from our families and friends if we needed help.
-
To increase the monthly income support to a livable amount. For example, right now as a single person, you would only receive $1,169/month. Where in Spadina-Fort York can you live off that?
To increase the amount ODSP recipients are allowed to earn working from $200/month to a higher amount before support is reduced. If CERB was paying people $2,000/month and claiming that was “livable”, people on ODSP should be able to at least have $2000/month income before supports start to be reduced.
To maintain non-income ODSP benefits when the ODSP recipient converts to CPP at age 65
To give ODSP recipients free access to TTC
To create a subsidy program that employers and ODSP recipients can apply to participate in, whereby the employer pays less per hour for the ODSP recipients work, the ODSP recipient is paid more per hour than the standard rate, because ODSP would be subsidizing the difference. For more details, scroll down to see the “ODSP Employment Initiative”.
Accessibility
with a focus on:
Green Spaces
Year Round Public Washrooms
Traffic & Transit
Travel Safety
-
I want to advocate to:
Protect Ontario Place
Revitalize existing parks so that more of them (if their communities would like this) would have the beautiful care and ambience like Trillium Park and the Toronto Music Garden.
See if there is any way to revive the original Rail Deck Park vision, where all 22 acres would be public park space (not the up to 11 acres it digressed to) and if not, find other options to add greenspace to Spadina-Fort York
-
The lockdowns emphasized the absence of public washrooms in the downtown core.
For people with certain disabilities and health concerns, this can make the city much less accessible, as it can limit these people to a certain radius near their home or existing accessible washrooms, and cause anxiety that exacerbates the challenge.
We need more public washrooms, that are accessible, well maintained and that are open year round.
-
I am a big advocate of “short term pain, long term gain” when it comes to infrastructure planning. That is why I am a fierce advocate for more underground subways. I believe subways have the best impact on reducing traffic and increasing TTC ridership.
I think buses are a potential short term band aid solution for areas where ridership needs have changed.
But for core transit routes, they should be underground subways.
I do not understand why there isn’t already a Subway line that:
Runs on Queen Street parallel to the Bloor -Danforth line across the entire city the same distance as the Bloor-Danforth line.
Runs North/South in line with Pape Ave
Runs North/South in line with Lansdowne Ave
At minimum, I don’t understand why we don’t make an agreement to use existing GO Train lines for additional subway lines.
I am sure there are many factors at play, but as an outsider, this to me would just make common sense.
-
This topic is a tricky one:
Drivers voice that bikers need to stop cutting them off
Bikers voice that drivers aren’t safely observing the bikers, and that more bike lanes are needed
Pedestrians voice that they are scared of getting yelled at or hit by bikers (and drivers)
There must be a better way to all share this city. I think some things could help:
Yes, more bike lanes in key locations
Yes, safety dividers between bike lanes and car lanes in key locations
But also, safety dividers between bike lanes and pedestrian in key locations
There are some high traffic areas for example along the waterfront where the bike lanes remain and there is no pedestrian sidewalk, and that needs to be amended so there is also a spot for pedestrians
Some have requested more ticketing, but a change in perspective would be much more affordable for everyone:
Pedestrians, be mindful of the bikers on the path, and be as considerate as possible while sharing the space.
Bikers, pedestrians still have the right of way even if they are on the bike lane, just like they do even when they’re jaywalking in front of a car. A pedestrian being on a designated bike path does not give you permission to hit them with your bike or accost them, just like it wouldn’t give a driver permission. If you have specific training parameters, use a stationary bike or share the path with kindness
Drivers, please stay attentive, distracted driving could have life changing or life ending consequences for the pedestrians, bikers, drivers, or yourself.
Although not all fatal collisions are caused by distracted driving, remaining attentive while driving is the easiest way to prevent unnecessary harm in fatal collisions.
Recovery
with a focus on resources for:
Mental & Physical Health
Employment
Small Business Support
-
Medical Institutions:
Advocate for more funding support for our medical services, especially for hospital emergency rooms, and surgery backlogs
Advocate for more funding to be directly applied to hiring more frontline nurses, PSWs, doctors, etc. to relieve the cumulative strain placed on each of them these past 2 years especially.
Advocate for more funding for Centre for Addiction & Mental Health (CAMH) ER, inpatient & outpatient programs
Government Organizations:
Advocate for the return of the “Criminal Injuries Compensation Board” that the current provincial government ended
Other Health Supports:
Advocate for investments in greenspaces, art, music, sports, theatre that is accessible for all ages (youth and adults alike)
Advocate for & Protect Individual Bodily Autonomy:
Continue to advocate to protect individual bodily autonomy whether it be abortion rights, or other personal medical decisions
Proactively protect residents physical & mental health by advocating against lockdowns & mandates
Support those who choose to wear and those who choose not to wear masks
Support those who choose to have vaccinations and those who choose not to have vaccinations
-
Support employees who want to work from home (WFH) by creating incentive programs for employers. This would reduce the carbon footprint caused by commuters. To offset some of the impact that may have on vacant office space in the downtown core, there is an opportunity to discuss rezoning portions of unleased commercial space to potential housing
Support employees who want to Return to Office (RTO) with increased investment in various commuting options, explained in further detail in the “Traffic & Transit” section above
Advocate for hiring back the experienced and trained staff that lost their jobs solely due to mandates.
-
Work to create a plan that partially subsidizes the hourly rate of people on ODSP who are able to work part time, so that the employer pays slightly less than what they normally do for that role in wage, and the employee receives slightly more than they normally would in that role.
The goal would be to collaborate with the provincial level of government and ODSP directly for funding of this initiative.
Where did this idea come from? Real life interactions. As much as there is a general appearance of acceptance, when the “rubber hits the road” many people openly talk about how they would rather hire someone with 100% availability and no medical accommodations, than accommodate someone. Some with a sense of shame just looking out for their business. Others, laughing it off with an “it’s just business” mentality. But it is so much more than that to the person being overlooked for the position.
We can point out how wrong that mentality is, legal options, etc., which is obvious, or we can deal with it in the way a business is more likely to respond.
The subsidy would hopefully help the person living on ODSP:
Have a part time work experience, without risking losing their ODSP (negotiating more flexibility so they can do what is healthy for their body, which may look different each day)
Have additional part time income that possibly helps add to their support income so they can get to a more livable overall income without clawbacks (another thing to negotiate with ODSP)
To find a part time job that meets their abilities while making more than minimum wage
Have an opportunity to reintegrate into that part of society, and possibly even in some instances partially rehabilitate. Even if rehabilitation is not possible for them, letting them focus on what they can do for a change, instead of what they cannot, can be very beneficial for mental health as well.
The subsidy would hopefully help incent small business employers:
Struggling to find employees, have more candidates to choose from
Potentially help offset some of their lockdown expenses by reducing some of their staff costs, or potentially reallocate that savings to hire more staff: “Many hands make for light work”.
Offset some (if any) additional cost to the employer for any medical accommodations the ODSP participant may need.
-
I propose that we create an application process for our small businesses, where if they can demonstrate financial need in the application, some kind of relief could be provided in regards to their property taxes. The benefits of a decision in the small business’ favour would remain in effect for 1 year, with an option to re-apply depending on the circumstances.
For example:
For a small business that kept up with their property tax payments while accumulating additional debt related to the lockdowns, an outcome could potentially be paying less to no property taxes for one year to give the business time to hopefully recover.
For a small business that was unable to keep up with their property tax payments during the lockdowns, and are in arrears, an outcome could potentially be a reduction in their arrears (i.e. forgiving x% of the debt), and zero interest on remaining debt for 1 year, and during that same 1 year, zero increases to their property taxes.
For a small business experiencing significant impact to their revenue from the necessary disruptions to build the “Ontario Line”, an outcome could potentially be paying less to no property taxes for one year in an attempt to ease some of the financial pressure.
The key of course in each of these applicants would be demonstrating financial need, and the parameters for that would still need to be refined.
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
For more information, click here to read the related article for this section.
“Maslow (1943) initially stated that individuals must satisfy lower level deficit needs before progressing on to meet higher level growth needs. However, he later clarified that satisfaction of a needs is not an “all-or-none” phenomenon, admitting that his earlier statements may have given “the false impression that a need must be satisfied 100 percent before the next need emerges” (1987, p. 69).”
