IN TORONTO Alexandra Flynn a Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty

RE-IMAGINING LOCAL GOVERNANCE: THE LANDSCAPE OF “LOCAL” IN TORONTO Alexandra Flynn A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Osgoode Hall Law School York University Toronto, Ontario July 2017 Ó Alexandra Flynn 2017 Abstract In 1997, the Province of Ontario formed the City of Toronto, amalgamating one regional and six small municipalities into a single city government. This action altered the formal institutions of local governance, replacing what was once regional with a City Council meant to represent “city-wide” issues, and without providing a clear model for local or smaller-than-city decision-making. The purpose of this dissertation is to conceptualize the meaning of “local governance” within the City of Toronto as a result of the overlap of wards (as represented by councillors), community councils, business improvement areas and neighbourhood associations, each of which claim geographical boundaries as justification for the representation of locally-based populations, and claim to be open to participation to some degree. This research asks whether the overlap of these bodies has unrecognized consequences, in particular, the effect on historically marginalized residents. This dissertation offers a theoretical conceptualization of “local governance” grounded in legal pluralism and legal geography that presents the city as a set of uneven and overlapping local legal spaces operating on multiple scales. Using a mixed methods approach that includes doctrinal review, case studies, and semi-structured interviews, the dissertation finds that wards dominate the law and practice of local decision-making, and do not represent an inclusive local governance model in Toronto. BIAs and neighbourhood associations are unevenly distributed across and the city, exist mainly in the socio-economically privileged areas and have grown in number and broadened their mandates since Toronto’s 1997 amalgamation. Toronto’s community councils, which were initially conceived by the province as a means to provide “local” access to municipal decision-making, have failed to achieve their legislative potential. The dissertation concludes that reimagined community councils, grounded within a normative understanding of the urban commons, serve as a means to create a more inclusive and participatory local governance model in Toronto. ii Acknowledgements I am ridiculously grateful for the many people who have helped, inspired and cared for me on this bumpy, zig-zaggy road. I would not have started or finished this project without my many mentors and colleagues at Osgoode Hall Law School, and especially my outstanding doctoral committee. Stepan Wood was a perfect supervisor, calmly talking me down from the proverbial ledge, correcting passive voices and incoherent arguments, and nudging (shoving?) me farther, always with kindness. I cannot thank him enough for taking on this exhausting role amidst his many other activities. Dayna Nadine Scott and Lorne Sossin were invaluable chapter analysts, editors and sages, with each bringing wisdom and clarity to this project (and life generally), and with good humour, too. I am also grateful to Liora Salter, who at pivotal moments challenged me to think deeper, better and with more bravery, and to Peer Zumbansen, who is the reason I began this degree. The classrooms and halls of Osgoode provided a safe and warm community as I slowly shifted my lens from practice to theory – thanks to the staff, students and faculty, and especially to Signa Daum Shanks, Sara Ross, Ghuna Bdiwi, Roxanne Mykitiuk and Janet Mosher. This journey was enormously enriched by the friends and colleagues that I made along the way. To Estair van Wagner, for Skype calls across the ocean, crazy adventures in Denmark, and heaps of wisdom. Roza Tchoukaleyska, for crucial geography translations and for introducing me to the best writing group an unrooted Ph.D. student could ask for. To Ronit Levine-Schnur, who politely but firmly urged me to get this written and then to move on. To the property law grrrls: how fun to do this together - when and where are we celebrating? Thanks, too, to my new colleagues at the University of Toronto, who have warmly welcomed me into the fold, providing advice and support as I finished this dissertation (mercifully with cake at regular intervals). And a humble appreciation to Mariana Valverde, Nick Blomley and Doug Harris – who provided critical feedback on portions of this work at conferences and over coffee. iii DRAFT (5/11/17) – PLEASE DO NOT CIRCULATE I am deeply grateful to those who agreed to be interviewed, many of whom I met during my years working at the City of Toronto. This dissertation could not have been written without their thoughtful perspectives and their commitment to the City of Toronto. Thanks especially to Lynda Taschereau and the late Peter Notaro, who provided support as I juggled meetings and classes during the crucial first two years of this degree. The staff at Toronto Archives deserve a medal for their patient explanations. And many thanks to Sara Levy and Jeff Allen for their GIS know-how, and to Jennifer Code for interview transcription. My friends and family provided encouragement, celebration, and love at all the right moments. A huge tribute and big hugs especially to my ever-cheerleading mom Florence Flynn and my dear friend Cassandra Atherton, as well as to Jennifer Orange, Judy Taylor, Dagmar Timmer, Maia Kareda, Alex Dosman, Fiona Koza, Shona McGlashan, Laura Tamblyn Watts, Ummni Khan, Ygal Leibu, Judith Leibu, Myra Leibu, Jennifer Code, Naomi Lightman, and Marika Samson. And to the late Sheila Moore, whose passion for politics continues to make me smile, even though I miss her terribly. Thank you all so very much for believing in me, even when I struggled and doubted. But, there are three people – the lights of my life – whose love propelled me to push through this project, to wake up before the sun to get words written, and who overlooked heaps of family time in favour of my finishing this beast. To my boys, Jonah and Simon: their sweet voices, encouraging drawings, and invigorating energy motivated me to say something meaningful and to try, however small, to make a better world. Now, I promise: backyard camp-out, Minecraft, and a much more fun mom. And to Daniel, my love and my rock, who knows more about this project than anyone else in the world (poor him!). All the best clichés come to mind when I think of how much amazing he is and always has been, in big and small ways, in good times and hard ones (see, there I go). So, I’ll just say this: elephant shoe. iv Table of Contents ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... II ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................... III TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................ V LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................... VIII LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................ IX LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS .......................................................................................... X INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 I. WHY LOCAL GOVERNANCE? ......................................................................................... 2 II. MAPPING TORONTO: COMPETING TALES OF PROSPERITY AND INEQUALITY ............... 5 III. THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................ 8 IV. CASE STUDIES: EXPLORING “LOCAL GOVERNANCE” IN “CITY-WIDE” DECISIONS ... 10 V. STRUCTURE OF THE ARGUMENT ................................................................................ 12 VI. THE NORMATIVE ASPIRATION ................................................................................. 15 CHAPTER 1 – A THEORETICAL MAP-MAKING OF “LOCAL GOVERNANCE” ............................................................................................................ 17 I. LEGAL GEOGRAPHY: INTERLEGALITY AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF SPACE .................... 18 II. CONCEPTUALIZING LOCAL GOVERNANCE .................................................................. 36 1. A pluralist conception of local governance .......................................................... 37 2. State iterations of local governance ..................................................................... 38 III. CHARACTERIZING LOCAL GOVERNANCE AS AN URBAN COMMONS ........................... 57 1. The meaning of the urban commons ..................................................................... 58 2. Connecting the urban commons and local governance ........................................ 62 3. The urban commons as a normative framework for local governance ................ 66 IV. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................ 69 CHAPTER 2 – THE METHODOLOGICAL PUZZLE ............................................. 71 I. DOCTRINAL ANALYSIS: TEXTUAL REVIEW OF CASE LAW AND LEGISLATION ............... 75 II. CASE STUDIES ...........................................................................................................

Load more