Olivia Chow...Mayor?
- Thread starter elmo
- Start date
Hey maybe she wouldn't be too bad. She has proven she can look the other way when it comes to Rub & Tugs. :biggrin1:
Citation needed.
So, you really think Joe public could score 3 suites in the same government subsidized downtown apartment, or would it require someone using the influence of their public office to pull it off?
With Ford trying to end this insider scam in TCHC is no surprise people are pissed.
You are confused yet again Fuji. Ford has run a city and Harper has run a country. Chow has run for the bus.
OMG! Really? Now fuji is counciling the rest of the board on hypocrisy?
Coming from the biggest hypocrite on the board- that is rich my friend. Very rich! :hand:
Same citation given above. He did not score a subsidized unit, he paid full rate. I don't know how Chow's mother got on the list nor how long she waited.
I bet neither do you. You are picking accusations out of your nose and flinging them around. It's grossly inappropriate behavior.
From wiki
Layton and Chow were also the subject of some dispute when a June 14, 1990, Toronto Star article by Tom Kerr accused them of unfairly living in a housing cooperative subsidized by the federal government, despite their high income.[36] Layton and Chow had both lived in the Hazelburn co-op since 1985, and lived together in an $800 per month three-bedroom apartment after their marriage in 1988. By 1990, their combined annual income was $120,000, and in March of that year they began voluntarily paying an additional $325 per month to offset their share of the co-op's Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation subsidy, the only members of the co-op to do so. In response to the article, the co-op's board argued that having mixed-income tenants was crucial to the success of co-ops, and that the laws deliberately set aside apartments for those willing to pay market rates, such as Layton and Chow.
Layton and Chow were also the subject of some dispute when a June 14, 1990, Toronto Star article by Tom Kerr accused them of unfairly living in a housing cooperative subsidized by the federal government, despite their high income.[36] Layton and Chow had both lived in the Hazelburn co-op since 1985, and lived together in an $800 per month three-bedroom apartment after their marriage in 1988. By 1990, their combined annual income was $120,000, and in March of that year they began voluntarily paying an additional $325 per month to offset their share of the co-op's Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation subsidy, the only members of the co-op to do so. In response to the article, the co-op's board argued that having mixed-income tenants was crucial to the success of co-ops, and that the laws deliberately set aside apartments for those willing to pay market rates, such as Layton and Chow.
Yup. You forgot to quote this part: " In June 1990, the city's solicitor cleared the couple of any wrongdoing"
Also worth noting that would be about $1500 today. With the extra they paid, around $2100 per month. Probably more as rents have risen faster than inflation in the city core.
So you are assuming that the 3 of them just happened to score 3 suites in the same downtown government subsidized apartment building in a city the size of Toronto by coincidence. I'm assuming it happened by design.
Chow was already living there with her mother when Layton moved in. Layton acquired one apartment for which he paid the full, unsubsidized market rate. Later Layton moved in with Chow at which point they traded two smaller apartments for one larger one.
By "assuming" you mean you are making things up.
I believe the original point was whether Chow had run anything or had accomplished anything other than getting elected on Jack's coattails , which she hasn't. The point was not whether they were all elected officials or not which is what you are trying to turn it into. One presumes you are doing this either because you are confused or because you also realize Chow has accomplished nothing and want to cloud the waters.
You may argue that having accomplished absolutely nothing in her life is better than Ford's handling of the mayorship. Tell me though, one of Ford's few accomplishments was partially wrestling away garbage collection from the unions. Do you think Chow would have done that?
Not participating in this dabate, merely supplying some information that wasn't readily being given.
Last edited:
She was a fantastic councillor. Hard working, involved. Always out on her bicycle meeting people and helping them resolve their issues with the city. She has the best work ethic of anyone on council.
Compare and contrast with Pam McConnell. In theory the same politics but I live in Pam's ward and I never hear from her. Now and then I send in a complaint or an issue and I either get back nothing, or a form letter.
When Chow was my councillor and I sent in a complaint a few times she came to my home to talk about it.
You guys just don't like her politics. No one in the Toronto political scene works harder, no one is more involved in the community.
