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.

“This” being today’s abbreviated meeting of Toronto’s Community Development and Recreation Meeting.

The meeting collapsed when four like-minded members of the committee did a quick head count and realized they could force a debate on city manager Shirley Hoy’s decision to shut down community centers Mondays. Hoy’s unilateral decision may help calm the city’s $575 million budget crisis in 2009, but in 2008, it’s as calming as a weed-whacker in a wasp’s nest for Toronto Council’s unofficial opposition.

For the complicated procedural break-down of what happened, check out the insidetoronto.com website. As far as the implications of the day, for those who would like to make the case to the provincial government that uploading is important, indeed crucial, to the future of Toronto?

Frances Nunziata called Joe Mihevc a “dictator.” Denzil Minnan-Wong accused Mihevc and Mayor David Miller of “hiding behind Shirley Hoy’s skirts.” Mihevc called the bunch of them hipocrits.  Maria Augimeri shouted “farce” from the back of the room.

I’d pray for us if I thought it would do any good…

So tell me: do you want to see public transit in Toronto spiral into irrelevance, and live in a city where the best option for getting downtown from northeast Scarborough without a car is hitchhiking? Or do you want to pay a little bit more taxes?

That’s the choice that the Toronto Transit Commission is offering the public in their just-announced public consultation over the very detailed list of proposed cuts to the TTC.

Those cuts, as you may remember, included the removal of a whack of bus routes that aren’t used by many transit riders, and more notably, the complete closure of the Sheppard subway.

The TTC was looking at those cuts in the wake of council’s decision to hold off debate on two big new taxes, on land transfer and vehicle registration. The TTC has to come up with about $100 million in annualized cuts - $30 million this year. At the time, it looked like pretty serious stuff, and the commission didn’t want to go ahead with any of it until they’d heard from the public.

The 10-point online and paper survey is to be that consultation. No public meetings. No discussions with residents along the routes that might be slashed. Just a 10-question survey that asks people if they’d be all right losing some bus routes, paying higher fares and having a generally less useful transit system.

All of which points to a conclusion that many critics of the mayor have drawn: that the cuts to service that drew so much attention in July and early August were simply that: attention-getting devices to shore up support for the new taxes when they come up for debate in October.

Given that, it seems very unlikely that the TTC will approve any service cuts when it meets September 12 (so far, all the commissioners have done is held back on any expansion of service).  More likely, TTC Chair Adam Giambrone and his fellow commissioners will deliver a case for voting for those new taxes at council.

This is a very political move, but not necessarily a bad one. The cuts being contemplated in July were nothing but a bad idea; Toronto has significant gridlock pressure already, and closing off the one means we have to reduce that pressure would be a huge step backwards in the midst of a budget crisis that while very real is more than likely a temporary one.

Still - the one thing we have all learned is that when it comes to promising massive cuts to public transit, Mayor David Miller and TTC Chair Adam Giambrone are exactly as threatening as they appear.

Which is to say, not at all…

No more will you have to ask this question to your office-mate, your mom, or the night sky. Mayor David Miller has, as of today, posted a comprehensive package of .pdfs, pleas and arguments for the imposition of the two new taxes… right here. It says exactly what he’s thinking: the $356 million in new taxes are absolutely essential to the city’s future wellbeing, there’s no appreciable fat to cut at city hall, and property taxes are no way to finance a city the size of Toronto so vehicle registration and land transfer taxes are the way to go.

Earlier this week, Miller’s staff emailed a pretty much identical package out to councillors who might want to hold a community meeting or send out a newsletter.

For constituents of those councillors who might not want to help out (a big shout-out to Denzil Minnan-Wong, Case Ootes and Karen Stintz and their peeps), this package provides a handy alternative.

Or alternatively, those constituents could always click right here, and check out the swag from our editorial board meeting with Mayor Miller from a couple of weeks back. As swanky as the mayor’s package is, it doesn’t have movies. And ours does.

Nice to see that Toronto continues to rate in the top ten of the world’s most liveable cities, at least according to the Oxford-bred wits at The Economist. In these days of threatened subway closures, trimmed library hours and angry political recrimination from both ends of the spectrum, kind words from abroad are a balm. Even if they are a little, well… condescending.

Because liveable isn’t the same thing as exciting, world-class or, well… big. New York, Paris and London do not make the top 10. Zurich, Perth, and - oh yes - Vancouver do.

Toronto’s been trying hard to be an exciting, world-class and big city for a couple of decades now. We’ve tried to get Olympics twice and a World’s Fair once (barely). We have a fine Pride Day parade, a well-regarded film festival, and some unusual new architecture bedecking our cultural institutions. And we do have some fine cultural institutions. We also have big theater, even if the most recent example of it was an over-long and critically-panned attempt to give J.R.R. Tolkien the Andrew Lloyd Webber treatment.

And when it comes to big? Well, we’re flirting with big city taxes; the city certainly seems awfully big to someone trying to get across it at rush hour; there are some tall buildings here and there, and they make things look big; and we do have the CN Tower, which for at least another week will still hold title as the tallest free-standing structure in the world.

But the other things that make big don’t seem to apply here. Astronomical murder rates, race riots, terrorist bombings - all of these things have happily and at least for the time being passed our striving mid-sized burgh by.

So I’ll take my pat-on-the-head from The Economist. At least they’re not telling us to impose a congestion charge like all the proper cities have.