… and did not like what he saw today.

Auditor General Jeff Griffiths responded this afternoon to a request from Ward 3 (Etobicoke Centre) Councillor Doug Holyday, who has spent much of the last decade steamed about the $53,100 office budgets that councillors have to spend on everything from dinners out to coffee machines to the actual cost of running their offices each year. He’s gotten a lot of attention in the media, but scant little among his colleagues, who by and large like those office budgets just the way they are.

That may change, after Griffiths’ response to Holyday’s request, to look more closely at the generally unregulated way city councillors spend their budgets. Griffiths gave a preview of the report he’ll be sending to the January meeting of the city’s Audit Committee.

Griffiths will be recommending a much more accountable system. Councillors expenses ought, he said, to be posted online every quarter - letting the public look and see who’s ordering multiple bottles of wine with their meals, who’s taking taxis from Metro Hall to Bolton, and who’s printing up newsletters and photocopying reports.  There should be an independent body that oversees and approves unusual expenses, and those expenses should be routinely dismissed by the city clerk. The rules for what is and is not a business-related expense - and council will have to think hard about whether expensing the cost of getting to or from work is allowable. If so, the expenses would become taxable benefits.

It’s good to see Griffiths - Toronto’s politically independent watchdog - taking such a reasonable eye to what has for the past decade been such a politically charged, and often petty, debate.

Well, we know answer to that one already: sandbag the mayor in a close vote on the land transfer tax (thank you, Brian Ashton, for that object lesson).

But one wonders about the effect of public comments - like the ones that Ward 7 (York West) Councillor Giorgio Mammoliti made advocating military action in his ward following a shooting incident - on one’s tenure on Mayor David Miller’s Executive Committee.

Mammoliti wasn’t talking to The Mirror today to clarify himself, but here’s the gist of what he told other media: the Canadian army ought to take over policing in his ward, to put a stop to gun violence. Soldiers, by the long-time councillor’s reasoning, are much more capable of dealing with street criminals than are members of Toronto’s Police Service - not, according to the councillor, being as beholden to the laws of due process as are the police.

One wonders whether Councillor Mammoliti is thinking about the same military that operates with honor and restraint under Canadian law - and not some bizarre amalgam of the A-Team, Dirty Harry and the old Guatemalan Army. One does wonder if he’s kidding.

The mayor obviously thought he was, when he told reporters today: “I don’t think anybody particularly takes Councillor Mammoliti’s call for the army seriously. I hope not.”

Well if it’s a joke, it’s an awful joke for an elected official to make - particularly one who serves on the Executive Committee as chair of Toronto’s Affordable Housing Committee.

Here’s what Bill Blair, Toronto’s Police Chief, said in a statement released later today:

“Councillor Giorgio Mammoliti’’s comments do a disservice to the men and women of the Toronto Police Service and to the citizens of Toronto.

“The anti-violence strategies of the Toronto Police Service, together with the cooperation and commitment of the residents of communities affected by violence, have in fact led to an increase in the number of arrests in such incidents.

“It is unfortunate that Mr. Mammoliti chose to make the remarks he did without knowing the facts.

“I want the members of the Toronto Police Service to rest assured that I, and the majority of Torontonians, continue to appreciate their efforts.”

Violence in communities across Toronto is a serious issue - and it’s one for the police to deal with, in combination with the kind of communities of support that Mammoliti is ostensibly trying to build with his work on the Affordable Housing Committee. Last term, when Councillor Mammoliti was not in the mayor’s good graces and he led the fight to keep former Police Chief Julian Fantino on board, he seemed to understand that.

That was then I guess. Now, the mayor should think seriously about the company he’s keeping.

It’s certainly seeming that way here at Toronto City Hall some days.

Today, for instance. Toronto’s Medical Officer of Health Dr. David McKeown released this report, re-stating an assertion that the city’s health department has been making for years: that smog - in this case, automobile-generated smog - is a killer, or at least an accomplice to killing, contributing to 440 premature deaths a year.

The Board of Health has been playing mine-canary on the smog file for years. In 2004, the board released a report linking smog to 1,700 early deaths a year; this one narrows the focus to the automobile.

The fact that it is is hardly a co-incidence; because in addition to a small debate about taxes, the biggest story for Toronto’s long-term future is the extent to which Toronto Council has gotten behind Mayor David Miller’s climate change plan. The plan was a key plank in Miller’s 2006 platform, and it’s fascinating to watch its smog-busting recommendations insinuating its way into so much other policy. Councillors overwhelmingly endorsed the plan at their July meeting, passed another sustainable transportation plan at its October meeting. Now, in almost the manner of an affirmation, McKeown and Toronto Public Health has weighed in, advocating many of the same solutions.

Bottom line: Torontonians need to get out of their cars whenever they can, and when they do, they need to have reliable public transit and safe bicycle routes and inviting pedestrian spaces as alternatives. Overall, if Torontonians reduce their vehicle emissions by 30 per cent, 200 fewer people die from smog.

It’s a good thing to see so much consensus on this agenda on Council. If they can’t agree on taxes, at least they can agree on death…

I conclude this after spending some time looking over Toronto Auditor General Jeffrey Griffiths’ report detailing the extent to which city employees are skiving off work surfing the Internet. And for someone like me, being paid to skive off work and write a blog that should amuse a few of those workers, the news is very discouraging.

Turns out that Mr. Griffiths found of all the city’s 10,000 computers, just 200 per day were found to log excessive Internet use. That’s defined of users with more than two hours of Internet activity, with more than 500 page views to 10 different sites that don’t have anything to do with work.

That represents just two per cent of the city’s workforce - and perhaps, wrote Mr. Griffiths, not even that.

“Given the way computers are used and how the related usage information is recorded, it is difficult to be definitive as to the amount of time an individual user spent viewing particular Web sites. As an example, if a user has set up their internet browser to stay connected to an email or a chat messaging Web site, the log for that computer will likely show that the site is accessed every few minutes and it could appear as if the user is constantly reviewing that Web site. This is related to the software automatically updating the computer for activity on the Web site and happens without the user taking any specific action. In our analysis, we have attempted to make allowance for such activity by setting our thresholds very high and filtering out as much of the automated activity as possible.”

And he goes on to point out that it’s impossible to tell if the same user was surfing all those pages through the day. So it could be that the amount of reading of this blog by city employees on the taxpayers’ dime is in fact quite miniscule.

Depressingly, it’s likely to get smaller still. Mr. Griffiths recommends that the city start monitoring individual Internet usage more rigorously, to prevent even those few city workers who read this blog now from doing so in the future.

Oh well - it could be worse. At least this isn’t one of those smutty blogs - or worse, Facebook. Those, according to Mr. Griffiths, are utterly locked out of the city hall computer system and have been for some time.

Something to cling to…

Okay, so maybe that’s a little mean. But I’ve been wanting to work a Monty Python and the Holy Grail reference into this blog since it became a blog,  and what better opportunity than in this entry, noting Ward 34 (Don Valley West) Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong’s speedy exit from the news conference marking the launch of the mayor’s pitch for new taxes - before Minnan-Wong’s arch-nemesis, Ward 20 (Trinity Spadina) Councillor Adam Vaughan could get his teeth into him.

It was a particular disappointment for this blogger, whose vacation schedule meant missing the memorable dust-up between the right-of-centre suburbanite from Don Mills and the left-of-centre downtowner from the Annex. Adam accused Denzil of shirking his council duties and maintaining an over-large office; Denzil accused Adam of shirking his council duties by having a television show.  Things got quite intense.

Yet today, when the mayor stepped away from the microphone and the assembled media looked around the room full of tax-loving councillors, community activists and theatre people for some smidgen of dissent, the question presented itself:

Where was Denzil?

Downstairs in his allegedly over-large office was where.  Once the assembled media had gotten their sound-bytes on Miller’s tax plan, the question arose: Why are we having this scrum in your office?

“I thought it would be best, given the previous occurance in August,” said the councillor. “My residents want me to stand up and advocate for government and low taxes. I go to these news conferences in order to find out what the city’s doing. However, there are some councillors who want to make a three ring curcus out of these events. I want to talk to the public and the most effective way todo tahat and avoid the three-ring circus… I thought it was best to listen to what the mayor had to say and come here.”

Some councillors? Would Councillor Minnan-Wong be refering to, erm, Councillor Vaughan?

“Well I think the last occurance with Mr. Vaughan on his part was very deliberately organized and I think the residents of the City of Toronto expect better from their representatives. I am happy to debate Councillor Vaughan on the floor of council, but  I don’t think the public wants to see members of council getting into a shouting match.”

This wouldn’t be a complete blog entry, of course, without some reaction from Councillor Vaughan.

“He’s a chicken,” said Vaughan. “He’s a chicken. And it’s not me (he’s a chicken about), there’s a room full of people who would have attacked him this time…. He’s getting so afraid these days.”

***

An addendum: There is clearly more than one room full of people who are not afraid of a little rhetorical blood in the sand in this town.  The mayor’s campaign for the taxes features a web-site, which lets residents send email comments on the tax plan to councillors. Only trouble is, the form email starts so:

“Dear Toronto City Council,

I support a fair tax plan for Toronto — one that will provide the funds we need to build our great city. Please vote in favour of the new taxes.”

Well, the emails started coming in to councillors’ offices almost immediately — many of them with comments that don’t really reflect the sentiment of the first paragraph.

A sampling  (provided without names by Councillor Minnan-Wong) follows:

• “Mayor Miller, You are without a doubt, the worst, most petty, childish and vindictive mayor this city has ever seen. You are hell-bent on ramming through your ill-advised taxes on the backs of Toronto taxpayers by maliciously threatening to make cuts to core public services…”
• “I don’t support a raise in taxes. I think union wages are what’s bankrupting the city, as well as too much staff. Check out your average community centre on a given day; the janitors are half the time just sitting around gabbing. If you support health, you will not close community centres.”
• “I can’t believe how you guys are tricking people… why is it that every page that i click for my comments, thoughts or contact you this comes up and it says i support the fair tax plan WHICH I DO NOT………………….”
• “You have bankrupted the city with incompetent management. Turn operation of the city over to the province.”

Now, I’m sure there are lots of other comments that indicate support for the new taxes - another councillor’s office told me they’re getting emails 60 per cent in favour of the tax plan, 40 per cent opposed - and the source of them, Councillor Minnan-Wong, is making something of a career being cross about the taxes. So it’s probably not vitriol all the way down.

But in the absence of a proper Minnan-Wong/Vaughan rematch, this is the best I got.