I tried to structure the post to indicate that I was reporting on an issue that sparked my interest during the week, rather than the results of a deeper study. I developed a curiosity about this after hearing these two news items and I thought it was worth sharing with others. I think that it is important to think about how other governments structure their resources and to compare their structures with our own.

My comparison with New York could certainly be more complex. As I tried to allude in the post, there are a number of other important factors at play that I did not address. Geography is the most obvious. Toronto radiated out from a much more central location than New York (New York has a central harbour and large river around which it could develop). Issues such as the amount of funding, relationship to other municipal services and levels of government, and economic and industrial development all also play an important role in shaping the urban landscape and issues of historical preservation.

I certainly did not want to suggest that anyone working for the city was not pulling their weight or that HPS was inefficient. What I was trying to ask is whether the structure of government shapes broader patterns. Throughout the piece I tried to emphasize the areas that I think could be better represented, but also those areas where I think that the city excels. I used the Culture Division’s presentation of Toronto’s history (which is exceptional) to discuss the areas that I think are underrepresented and I also tried to stress the really great work done by Heritage Toronto and Archaeological Services Inc. in telling the city’s history.

You seem fairly familiar with Toronto’s history and municpal infrastructure. Do you agree with my assessment that certain aspects of the city’s history are underrepresented? If so, how do you think that this underrepresentation came about, and what can be done to rectify it?

Thank-you for pointing out my error. The difference between 4 and 14 is really important.

http://www.toronto.ca/city_directory/pdf/divisions/city_planning.pdf

HPS staff includes one manager (acting), one senior preservation coordinator, one preservation coordinator, six preservation officers, two preservation assistants, one archaeological coordinator, an administrative assistant and a support assistant. One preservation coordinator position and one preservation officer position are vacant.

I’ve met nearly all of these folks, so I know they are real and that they are dedicated to their work. Should there be more of them working for the city? Probably, but hyperbolic comparisons with other cities aren’t going to make that happen.

I’ll just draw the attention of readers to a round-up of some recent developments, compiled by Tom Peace: http://activehistory.ca/2010/07/active-history-annoucements-july-18-24/#more-2138