We've been here before. With two competing transit visions up for consideration it seems that we are going back to basics.
But what makes former mayor David Miller's Transit City, so emphatically pronounced dead by his successor, once again alive? Just as importantly, what puts a vision on life support that was endorsed by electoral mandate a little over a year ago?Since the proposals advocated by Mayor Rob Ford and Miller have similarities and differences, perhaps we can compare the two views to figure out what it takes to build transit in Toronto.Both plans were born from political necessity. Transit City came from the provincial Liberals' need for a Toronto-centred plan to bolster support before an upcoming election. Transit lines were pencilled across the city as quickly as decency permitted. Similarly, Ford's transit vision for subways was a key campaign platform. In both cases, the overall vision came first, and a sketchy outline next. Details could come later.In any case justification for routes has a tradition of owing more to politics than demographics. Otherwise it would be hard to explain why the Spadina subway extension travels through low density, and ends in a nearly vacant lot. For its part, Toronto's new Sheppard line has very few riders.Neither Miller's nor Ford's plan came with adequate funding. Transit City was designed to embarrass the federal government into support. For a time there was the risk, or benefit, that the Liberals would get credit for the proposal without building anything. Similarly, Ford's program has run out of funds barely before it has begun. Nor do councillors particularly care about estimates. In both administrations, councillors refused proposals to examine less costly alternatives. From strictly a transit viewpoint, this disregard is justified. A quick look at the municipal balance sheet shows that the city is almost always ready to pick up debt for transit. Just recently Toronto used its surplus to fund subways. Although presently the province has its own financial challenges, for years it funded billions for transit. And finally, given the provisions of the City of Toronto Act and the report from the mayor's consultant Dr. Gordon Chong, it is obvious that governments have many ways of finding the money, should they wish to do so.After discounting what seem to be critical issues such as ridership and funding, there remains one key factor that determines whether a transit project gets built. Nothing will be built without the firm hand of a powerful patron, with enough influence to see a project to completion.The best example can be seen when the current mayor, flushed with his strong election mandate, was able to get Premier Dalton McGuinty to support a completely new direction for provincial funding. That was the moment of unlimited possibilities. Technical and financial problems were resolvable. Opposition was marginalized.Now the situation is far less certain. It is not clear whether the mayor's original election pledge will be honoured, and even more doubtful if a second subway will be constructed.Nothing has changed, except the mayor has lost power. A few weeks ago, council wrested control of the budget from the mayor. More recently, Ford needed to defer the sale of community housing stock, and a proposal to sell shares in Toronto Hydro.Those opposed to Mayor Ford's perspective correctly sense that he has lost the ability to have council approve controversial matters. If his plan for subways were to immediately come before council, the result would be uncertain. In addition to the possibility of defeat, Ford's advisors must now seriously consider the risk to the rest of his term if he is weakened further. For the sake not only of transit in Toronto, but also for other parts of the mayor's mandate, he needs to establish positions that are not only consistent with his view, but also have the likelihood of council support.