Things Are Not Always What They Seem

The Mayor often complains about issues being discussed elsewhere than at the council table. While at the same time, it becomes harder and harder to get a word in edgewise with the Mayor
in the chair.

In back room meetings, a torrent of language is instantly launched, designed to suck all the oxygen from the immediate environs.

Any effort to obtain answers is inevitably reduced to a demeaning tussle with the presiding member, unlikely to produce anything sensible.

Even if discussion was productive, I am no longer convinced, it would make a difference.The majority is secure.Decisions appear to be pre-ordained. All that's left to accomplish is the illusion they were council driven.

One winter day, I watched pine gross beaks feasting on peanuts and sunflower seeds. The food was scattered aplenty on top of a snow-covered picnic table. The beautiful big green males were eating greedily while at the same time chasing away the smaller, drab females.

There were however,only three or four big raucous birds, resplendent in colour. More than a dozen smaller ones darted in on every side to get what they needed.

Stooping to stealing what is rightfully mine and yours does not appeal.

So I have done some digging.

The Decision of a Divisional Court Hearing was added to the agenda of Feb.9th Council Meeting. It was made on Feb.4th. It could have been circulated with the meeting agenda.

Why was it not?

It was fourth of four refusals for a Joint Board hearing on the Westhill Development application. It was the first presented to Council "for information" That meant, although it was on the agenda, no public discussion was likely.

Being added to the agenda, allowed for a recommendation for a closed door meeting to receive solicitor/client advice on the matter.

I have previously posted on being informed the town's decision to file Leave to Appeal the fourth of four refusals, was out and about even before Council had received the decision.

I have been asked why.

Damned if I know why.

But I can follow the trail and discover what is not immediately apparent.

The court procedure is as follows:

The town must file Notice of Leave to Appeal within 15 days of the decision. i.e. February 19th

With an application for Leave to Appeal pending, a date for an Ontario Municipal Board Hearing will not be set.

Within thirty days of notice, the Town has to file it's motion of record. It's the statement to support the request for leave to appeal; March 22nd.

The other party, who argued successfully four times out of four, have 25 days to reply; i.e.mid April.

Town can reply within ten days.

Judge has 36 days to read and review.

Optimistically, that could take until July or August

If Joint Board Hearing is granted, despite four times out of four being refused, six weeks needs to be set aside for the hearing and the decison is likely to arrive or not, in the middle of the election.

Costs will be expected to pale to insignificance beside the valiant fight to protect the Oak Ridges Moraine. It worked before. Why not again?

How's that for manipulation? With at least some Councillors not even being aware of how they have been used. I give them the benefit of doubt. Though I may be the naive one.

The first history text book I ever saw, I was five, had a picture of Queen Boadicea. She was driving a two wheeled Roman chariot. In breast plate armour and helmet, her whip was raised above her head, twirled for an almighty lash, and the huge wheels of the chariot were spinning furiously into battle.

No enemy was in sight. They didn't need to be. We just knew they would be there.