At this point in time I’ve pretty much used up almost my entire vocabulary of expletives and colourful adjectives for Rob Ford so I’m not gonna go down that road.

Nope.

Let me just say that I find Ford latest behaviour extremely disappointing.

I’m referring to the latest news that has Robbie calling a special rush-rush meeting to decide what to do about his unfilled Deputy Mayor seat.

The meeting, in and of itself, is sensible considering the recent departure of Doug Holyday for provincial pastures. Hard to find fault with that. But, as usual, that’s only about five percent of the story.

The fact that Holyday would be running, and that the Deputy Mayor seat could be vacated was hardly a secret, so this meeting that Rob is calling probably didn’t have to be so last minute.

But so what? Aren’t meetings part and parcel of Council’s job?

Yes, but it sucks hard to be told that you need to cut short your vacation time because Fordo couldn’t see past his limited imagination a few weeks into the future and instead waited until the ball was already in the net.

This is especially egregious considering how Rob Ford skipped out of a Council meeting not more than a month ago, so that he could take off early for … guess what? … a vacation!

And let’s not forget how Rob Ford famously skirted his responsibilities as ambassador to this city (more than once), for the Pride event that draws millions of people from all over the world, in order to go for … guess what? … a vacation!

In between vacations, Robbie seemingly has an overabundance of free time, which makes the whole thing extra slap-in-the-face-y. Yet Ford seems to be so disconnected from reality that apparently this doesn’t bother him in the least. This is evidenced by the additional facts that he’s seriously considering getting back into coaching football, despite all the trouble that his obsession has led to, and despite the fact that his last coaching gig ended up with a lot of pissed-off people.

I mean, that’s Robbie right? The same man who’s administration is internally so unstable that it continues to bleed staff (another “personal assistant” this time), like it’s going out of style.

My adjectives dwindle with every passing day.

The tradition of the so-called “right” to be offended by nothing in particular is being continued by the unqualified air-heads of the Toronto Taxpayers Coalition who decided they just couldn’t stand the commentary coming from Councillors Adam Vaughan and Mike Layton.

The TTC were so infuriated, in fact, that they filed official complaints with the office of the Integrity Commissioner which subsequently requested that the two members of Council apologize. Which they did.

So what foul sentiments did these two ne’er-do-wells express?

[City manager] Pennachetti had estimated that the city would get an annual “hosting fee” payment of $111 million to $148 million per year, tens of millions more than others anticipated, in exchange for hosting for a casino downtown. He also said the casino should be far smaller than the province wanted.

Layton (Ward 19, Trinity-Spadina) said Pennachetti’s figures were “fictitious.” Vaughan (Ward 20, Trinity-Spadina) said they were “fantasy numbers” and “ridiculous.”

“The casino is cut in half and the hosting fee is higher. There is nothing real in this report,” Vaughan told CBC.

Leiper said Vaughan was entitled to express his views. But she wrote that “the repeated use of the phrase ‘nothing real’ when applied to the report is an unfair portrayal of the report. So was the use of the word ‘fantasy.’

There are numerous other examples of the Fords’ benevolence and high regard for fellow human beings, which makes the awful, treacherous, evil words that the Councillors chose so much worse. Next they’ll just flaunt breaking the law like it’s going out of style while mockingly claiming that they know nothing about any rules or regulations (or anything about their jobs, for that matter) — can you imagine?!

The trusty Star reports today that Toronto has sunk deeper into debt under Ford:

Over the past two years, the city borrowed $1.5 billion to pay for capital costs — including transit equipment ordered by Ford’s predecessor — and repaid $700 million, thus increasing the debt burden by $800 million.

This doesn’t come as a shock, but it’s important to point out that the brunt of the burden comes from a couple of administrations ago, so it’s entirely fair to say that Ford inherited the problem.

But then he made it worse:

Ford has championed cutting the cost of government, scrapping the $60 vehicle tax shortly after taking office, and holding down increases in property taxes which are traditionally put toward capital costs, along with borrowed funds.

…

In 2011, on Ford’s insistence, the city froze property taxes. The next year he limited the increase to 2.5 per cent, in line with inflation.

About half of the borrowing was to pay for transit infrastructure, such as replacing worn-out vehicles. Other big-ticket infrastructure spending went to areas such as roads, parks and housing.

The Toronto Sun recently asked what councillors, and anyone opposed to a Toronto casino, have against jobs?

That’s “10,000” casino jobs as promised by Rob and Doug Ford, the same jobs that Rob outwardly rejected because Kathleen Wynne wasn’t prepared to bend to his irrational and completely made-up demands:

“If the province won’t agree (to) that $100 million, then folks, the deal is dead. We are not going to carry on the casino debate.”

The Sun, of course, conveniently left that fact out and instead (just like their heroes Rob and Doug), pointed fingers at everything and everyone else. Had they included the most vocal and blusterous opponents of the casino — the Fords themselves — the following line would’ve taken on a whole different tone:

A really clever Toronto councillor would have cast aside their own prejudices for a moment and considered the wider public benefit.

It’s not fair to say that the Fords were solely against their pet project — the vote was 40 to 4 — so clearly other councillors were involved. And the numbers indicate that those councillors weren’t just the “lefties” that the ignorant Sun writers keep bashing.

In fact, at least one of those “lefty” councillors wanted to know how much Ford’s hare-brained casino idea was going to cost Toronto, something the Fords never bothered to question in their quest against “gravy” — just like the $3 million KPMG report Ford indiscriminately sole-sourced to simultaneously ignore the wishes of taxpayers in order to “save” money for the city.

In the end, councillor Mary Fragedakis got her answer: $370 thousand

The Sun (and others), were quick to distance Ford from this jaw-dropping waste, even though this was his and his brother’s baby from day one, and is yet another example of how Rob Ford is wasting millions of taxpayer money, not saving it.

The story was framed as “the casino debate that cost taxpayers $370,000”, even though the debate was just part of regular City Hall business. It was all the research that went into the casino idea that cost nearly half a million dollars, and that came at the direct behest of the Ford brothers. In other words, Rob and Doug Ford cost the city $370 grand.

This came at the same time that Ford attempted to explain his boasts of saving the city $1 billion dollars, which sounded like a fabrication while Ford refused to elaborate on it, and is now seemingly more so:

Councillor Gord Perks dismissed the mayor’s math.

“The mayor doesn’t seem to understand the difference between addition and subtraction or between addition and multiplication,” Perks told the Toronto Sun. “This is a completely bogus claim.”

Perks argued Ford was counting some things twice — like the cut to the car tax and then the cut to spending.

“They seem to have forgotten the millions of dollars they’ve spent in consultants, the millions of dollars they’ve spent paying staff to go away, the tens of millions of dollars in cancellation of Transit City,” he said.

“Over 10 years they’re adding $400 million in transportation projects — that actually costs money, it doesn’t save money.”

The vocal Ford critic stressed residents are paying more tax under Mayor Ford than under his predecessor.

“The basic thing is a Torontonian pays more tax today than when David Miller was mayor,” Perks said.

As an interesting and informative aside, the brain farts on Ford’s former (?) cheer leading squad, the Toronto Taxpayers Coalition, pegged the potential benefits of a casino at $400 million. These same pinheads, led by a loser with absolutely no experience in either government or finance and who couldn’t hack it in the tech field, are constantly propped up by the same media seeking to explain their ever-growing canopy of misinformation and bizarre justifications.

Now that this ongoing waste is out in the open and really nothing has changed, including Ford’s fantasy math, and both he and his brother are vowing to renew the debate (with Woodbine Casino), potentially wasting another half million, it’s looking like the brothers Ford are already gearing up for the next round of the finger pointing game.

I don’t think the fact that the proposed Toronto casino was voted down is a surprise to anyone. Neither is the standard Rob Ford follow-up finger pointing and deflection:

“It seems no deal is good enough for this premier [Kathleen Wynne],” the mayor said. “The fact is she simply doesn’t want a casino, at least not in Toronto.”

Fact is, Fordo is the one who didn’t want a casino in Toronto unless it was entirely on his own invented terms. If you’ll recall, he didn’t even want to talk about a casino if Wynne wasn’t willing to concede to his demands, which almost everyone else agreed were unrealistic and overly optimistic.

There’s nothing to indicate Wynne wouldn’t have moved on a City Council motion to build a casino in the city, if that was what had been decided — it just wouldn’t have generated the $100 million that Ford pulled out of some bodily cavity.

The vote went ahead, and the casino was shot down as expected. No surprise.

I probably wouldn’t even be writing about it now, but I found it interesting to note how support for Ford and his ideas (assuming their his), has plummeted. I mean, support has hardly ever reached into the double digits (that’s with at least 22 votes needed to win a vote), but the fact that it’s dwindled down to 4 councillors backing Ford on this speaks volumes.

Ford chalks this up to undemocratic practices because it should only be him deciding on things and not “gangs” of councillors capable of building consensus and agreement among a majority. Presumably, that criticism also extends to his brother Doug — the vote included all 44 councillors and the 4 in support didn’t include him.

Then there’s the unfortunate fact that Rob himself publicly stated he wouldn’t be supporting the kind of deal he voted in favour of yesterday:

If the province won’t agree (to) that $100 million, then folks, the deal is dead. We are not going to carry on the casino debate.

Crack’s a hell of a drug.

Was the proposed casino supposed to bring revenue to the city of Toronto, or “10,000 jobs“, as Rob Ford repeatedly pronounced?

I suppose if the numbers were as high as Ford asserted ($100 million, minimum), a casino could’ve potentially brought both. But those idealized revenues turned out to be about half (or a quarter, or an eighth, depending on what day it was and how he was feeling), of Rob’s projections.

So faced with the reality of only about $54 million under the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Commission’s formula for divvying up casino spoils, Ford declared the project dead:

If the province won’t agree (to) that $100 million, then folks, the deal is dead. We are not going to carry on the casino debate.

Well, that’s it. Ford’s one and only source of potential income for Toronto projects has dried up (aside from the mysterious public-private partnerships that never materialized). So if the city can’t get a bigger chunk of cash out of the deal then it’s pointless.

Oh, and about those jobs — if the city can’t get a bigger chunk of cash out of the deal then they’re pointless too. Sorry, single moms, I guess it’s a future of frying up chicken for the foreseeable future.

Okay, snarkiness aside, I hope you see what I’m driving at here. Rob has no problem pulling the “jobs, jobs, jobs!” card out of his ass when it’s expedient for him, but when something like the casino fails we quickly see that it was never about jobs, his constituents, or the citizens of Toronto — it’s about gobbling up money for use by the government. Okay, yes, we do need transit funding, but we also need jobs, so to sacrifice one at the expense of another belies the true intentions behind the casino push.

Not that I believed the job numbers either, but that’s kind of beside the point.

At least there was a smidgen of honesty in some of Ford’s remarks:

Contrary to what many people have said, I’m not married to a casino, I never campaigned on a casino.

That’s true, unless you consider marriage to be an exclusive commitment. Then again, he never campaigned on subways either, but that never stopped him from claiming the opposite at every opportunity.

Rob Ford’s failures are easy pickings; they’re numerous and obvious. But every once in awhile, he also registers a victory which would be incredibly disingenuous of me not to mention.

Like yesterday’s vote, for example.

That Council item, made a top “priority” by Rob Ford, centered around the food concessions in the currently-under-renovation Nathan Phillips Square. Up until recently, those consisted of chips, chocolate, and fizzy drinks offered while the skating rink had blades on it. The rest of the time, the place was shuttered and the only place to grab a bite was at one of the food trucks parked on Queen Street.

But yesterday, led by Ford, Council flipped on a previous decision to not allow a local food chain to move in, and essentially greenlighted Hero Burgers for the location.

I need to point out that I have nothing against Hero Burgers. After Big Smoke and Gourmet, Hero is easily my third choice for tasty burgers (within walking distance). So I don’t have any issues with another Hero location opening up in front of City Hall. But it is interesting to point out the context…

Rob Ford made fatty fast food a top priority and managed to shove it down the City’s throat in record time. His push for subways was, and continues to be, a dismal failure. His repeated “guarantees” to remove or reduce the Land Transfer Tax are a lesson in how not to get things done. His constant threats to sic “Ford Nation” on various politicians is more or less a joke. And so on.

But let’s give credit where it’s due: when it comes to accessibility to greasy foods, you can expect Rob’s full support, undivided attention, and unrelenting determination. Rob also works tirelessly in other areas, like helping homeless Torontonians with a few temporary beds — and by that I mean being the sole dissenting vote against the simple, humanitarian measure.

Every once in a while I get to talking to random people on the streets about Rob Ford, and invariably the comment, “that’s some mayor you guys elected”, gets tossed out.

So just so everyone’s clear on this: NO WE FUCKING DIDN’T!

In fact, the record clearly shows that almost no one in the city proper voted for Ford. Just because he happens to have gotten elected by light thinkers living on the periphery of the vast region that comprises the city doesn’t mean that the city majority actually voted for him. In fact, in the final tally, only 25% of the Toronto borders, from Scarborough to Etobicoke, actually voted for Ford (about 50% of Toronto voted, and about 50% of those people voted for Ford). He didn’t get a majority by any means, he simply got the most votes in a race where votes were split between a number of people.

Ford Nation doesn’t seem to get this simple fact — adding 1 and 1 seems to be a feat for these people so that’s not surprising — and they maintain (usually on heady sounding boards like the Toronto Sun’s article response threads, brilliant groups like “I Hate The War on Rob Ford“, or brainiac power circles like the “Toronto Taxpayers Coalition“), that because he was elected by a “majority” (sorry, not even close), he should have dictatorial powers. And how dare the city practice representative democracy by allowing 43 other democratically elected Councillors to contradict His Highness on HIS  MANDATE! (doesn’t matter how many votes those Councillors got or how many people they represent).

This is why the remaining 75% of Toronto (probably much more at this point), are pissed off with Ford and his hand-up-the-ass puppet master / brother Doug.

They don’t represent us.

None of their efforts are benefiting downtown residents, which is seen by their supporters as a sort of “yeah, fuck you downtown!” response to those of us “elites” who live here (in neighbourhoods like Regent Park). And I get that the suburbs haven’t exactly gotten the infrastructure that they need, but that doesn’t mean that downtown residents are living some sort of glamorous lifestyle on the backs of taxpayers (oh, and we also pay taxes … shocker!) And they should know that — they use the same fucking transit lines and roads that they themselves congest, that we do. Or would, if only they weren’t such selfish fucks about it.

But that’s my own generalization and it’s unfair, in exactly the same way as putting all the focus on the suburbs and completely neglecting to take care of downtown is. Difference is that I can both see and admit to it. And that, along with a complete inability to see issues for what they are, are Rob-Doug’s abject failures.

Yeah, that’s right — removing the Jarvis Street bike lane based on a lie and at the taxpayers’ expense, isn’t going to ease any of the congestion issues anywhere else in the city, and barely on Jarvis at that (all the idiots that applauded this move are still sitting in traffic on the DVP, Gardiner, 401, etc.)

And cutting the vehicle registration tax saves drivers (again, mostly outside of the city), mere pennies a day amounting to a pittance in the pocket of fools who continue to rage at the real problems that are being ignored (you mean Ford hasn’t fixed traffic or parking or the price of gas?! Those damn Leftards!).

Oh, and that failure of the removal of the Land Transfer Tax (“guaranteed!” over and over again), would’ve saved people the same amount of money that Ford claimed the city was suddenly in the red for. In other words, he knew it would leave the city in a financial hole, lied about it, tried to blame it on his predecessor, and all openly under the noses of the same rubes that received Ford’s scorn because he didn’t get his way on the plastic bag tax. Yeah, he’ll turn on you faster than a rabid dog if he senses any trouble — and thanks for your support!

But at least we know that Fordo’s taking plentiful time out of his “busy” schedule (which no one’s allowed to see, but which doesn’t qualify as behind-closed-doors “skullduggery”), to coach football for his old grade school (abusing his position and city resources — and staff — while he’s at it, and telling everyone that his “commitment”  is on the field and not at City Hall), and helping out those poor, disadvantaged black kids.

http://torontoist.com/2012/02/rebellion-at-city-hall-everything-you-need-to-know-about-city-councils-special-transit-meeting/

Office of Toronto City Councillor McConnell
Attn: Councillor McConnell

Hey, Pam-pam! What’s shakin’, baby? Seems like it’s been ages since we chatted, huh? Come to think of it, I don’t think we ever chatted. We’ve never met, as a matter of fact. But with this new scrutiny about the plane trip you took this summer, I wanted to reach out and let you know you have supporters out there. At least one. Here.

In returning from Florida to put in your vote on this summer’s garbage strike, you helped to break the impasse put in place by the very people now pointing their fingers your way. I’m not sure that $1,100 was the cheapest flight you could’ve found, but compared to the waste and mismanagement proffered by the rest of Toronto Council, this is a pittance. If I contributed to your flight from my own exorbitant taxes, I want you to know that I’m not sore about it. Probably cost me, like, a hundredth of a penny. You’re welcome.

Besides, if you were required return to Toronto to do your job during that special emergency vote, it would have been negligent if you didn’t try to get back quickly. I wouldn’t take any flak from anyone over this if I were you. Show ’em a letter from your satisfied constituent if they think you’re pulling a fast one on them.

Basically, Pammers, don’t let them get you down. You’re doing your job, and you’re doing it well; the other councillors are just jealous. One day they’ll be in jail for whatever illicit underage sexual relationships they’re engaged in (aren’t they screwing the innocent?), and you and I will laugh about it over a couple of cold ones.

Stalwartly yours,
Patrick

To the cyclists of Toronto,

Okay, I admit it, I feel for you. A bit.

When cops start blocking bike lanes to stop off for lunch, that’s a little much. I think everyone’s in agreement that this is just not right. If it’s a fine for the officer, so be it. If there’s an additional reprimand, I don’t think it would be out of place. After all, if the police are going to be enforcing something, they should be following it, otherwise John Q. Lawman won’t be getting much respect around here.

Your beef with many car drivers is a perfectly valid one and this is a fine example. The problem I’m seeing is that there’s a whole lotta antagonism between both sides and no one is making any progress. I see you screaming at cars, many of whom have just made innocent mistakes, sometimes just to vent, sometimes for very good reason indeed. I see them shaking their fists back, neck veins so strained that a pinprick would just instantly fill the inside of the car with red. Woh-oh-oh-hoaw there! Just hang on a second, therre, Nelly. Is it getting hot out here? Let’s just take a deep breath.

I’ve been on both sides of that glass. There are most certainly jerk-hole drivers, and without a doubt jerk-hole cyclists. Jerk-hole pedestrians too. The conclusion I’ve come to is that I’m not going to depend on anyone out there, especially not the jerk-holes, to prevent my death. Besides, there’s plenty of opportunity for death at the hands of other types of drivers: tired, distracted, drunk, high, having a cardiac arrest, having a stroke, having a mechanical failure, etc.

So, you can point at the motorists all you want, but the onus is on you to take responsibility for your own actions first. It’s tempting to just say fuck it when your life is threatened so often, but I urge you to stick it out. Obey the rules of the road to the best of your ability. At the same time, you should expect no less from your fellow travellers. And now you also have a much stronger moral position from which to cuss people off. You can flip them a most righteous bird.

Or you also try talking to people. If they’re parked in the bike lane, why not give them the benefit of the doubt? Maybe they really don’t know what the lane is for. You’ve got tourists and other out-of-towners driving around and the signage around the city’s already pretty crazy. I drove downtown for years and still managed to do lots of inadvertently illegal stuff; rarely did I try to murder cyclists. The two aren’t related.

If I could leave you with one thing it would be this: imagine the surprised driver who, after dangerously cutting you off, finds himself having a friendly and relaxed conversation with you (instead of the usual scream) who explains why that maneuver back there really wasn’t such a good idea. Now you’re not just another jerk-hole cyclist, you’re a human being who’s just trying to get through the day. Just like the driver. Queue rapport! And … action!

Shift that paradigm, as we used to say in the nineties. Oh, and Pam McConnell’s on your side; let that lofty perspective keep you afloat.

I’m still convinced that the cyclist who died hanging off the side of Michael Bryant’s car was being a jerk, but he was just one individual with a mess of personal problems. If he’s going to be the poster boy for something, let it be the end of an era.

Pedestrianly yours,
Patrick

To the former From the desk of Patrick,

Awww crap. Sorry, pal. I thought I was using a copy, I swear, if I knew I was changing the original, I never would’ve done it!

I didn’t have the heart to try to re-write you. Also, I don’t have an idea what you were about. Something regarding sweaters? *sigh*

You’re up in post heaven now with all the other posts that get deleted by naive blog owners (when will they learn?!)

I hope you had a good life here, brief as it was. Your candle blew out long before your legend ever did. Sir Elton John.

Regretfully,
Patrick