"Cowardice asks the question...is it safe? Expediency asks the question...is it politic? Vanity asks the question...is it popular? But conscience asks the question...is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but one must take it because it is right." ~Dr. Martin Luther King

Friday, 16 May 2014

Suspicions Arise

I  have to say, despite my snippy remarks, I welcome Tim the Enchanter's contribution to the Blog.

Perticulaly when references to town records  are provided.

I suspect The Enchanter  is  a professional; maybe in municipal service.  It  gives a  valid reason for anonymity and also an unlikely candidate in our upcoming electio

Something was  amiss with the computer yesterday. Everything wasn't coming through.

I sent a couple of notices of motion forward. One on the Farmers' Market Bylaw, the other on
employee vacation entitlement.  Staff wanted me to have the current  infrmation on vacation entitlement. It was sent but I didn't  get it.

I did receive a copy of  Monday's Heritage Advisory Committee Agenda with attachment. A report from the Heritage Planner, vetted by the Executive Leadership Team .appears to have been the main item of business.

 I don't know why the committee received the report.

It notes the following:

General Committee received HAC Report No,14-001 on March 4,2014 and recommended the item be referred to a Public Planning Meeting . On April 23rd, the Public Planning Meeting waas held to receive comments from residents. Council directed staff to report to GENERAL COMMITTEE  on May 20th 2014 addressing matters raised by the community at the Public Planning Meeting on April 23rd 2014.

The Heritage Advisory Committee had received recommendations from staff on Feb 14th and recommended the  recommendations be deferred  to the March 4th General Committee meeting
of Council.

I haven't seen the  GC agenda yet . I'm  informed  however despite a substantial majority of property owners adamantly opposed to  continuance  on designation ,the  Advisory Committee recommends  Phase 2 of the Heritage Designation Study be undertaken.

I am truly at a loss to explain why H.A.C. received further opportunity to advise on the issue.

Or why, after  the Public  Planning Meeting  when both sides  received full opportunity to present arguments, proponents were given yet another chance at the H.A.C.meeting.

Opponents  are  now compelled to repeat their arguments as  delegates at Tuesday's meeting.

Or why, when the Study was undertaken at the initial request of  a minority of property owners, it  has not been halted in the face of  powerful  opposition  by a substantial majority.

Getting a decision through the public process is  lengthy at the best of times .Mind deadening tedious at the worst.

But five times , February,March.April and twice in May is utter insanity.

It  seems it never did have anything to do with a neighborhood  objective.

One might even suspect the Heritage Advisory Committee is driving the bus.


Anonymous said...

After the Public Meeting, I figured the tires on that bus were flat. Even if they keep poking away, anything that squeaks of a heritage designation is going to end up in the courts.

Christopher Watts said...

Having attended that HAC meeting it appears that those in favor of the district are scrambling to find anything that can be used to advance it to phase 2, and I mean anything. What is being turned back to council is a more concentrated boundary for the study that shrinks the area, removing some of those opposed.
This contraction now begs more questions as to both the integrity of the proposed district and just who it is supposed to serve.

Even jettisoning some of the opposition the raw math is still not in favor of proceeding. 10+% in favor, 20+% opposed and 60%+ unknown.

The fact that there is such a large unknown should be reason to pause even abandon, but it is being used by those in favor as a reason to advance to phase 2. Everything will be worked out in phase 2, or course by advancing to phase 2 it sets a precedent of approval in principle. How can that be established with only 10+%?

Conservation districts are nothing if not a demarcation by boundary. We learnt at that HAC meeting that the reason the North East conservation district boundary fell short of Wellington was because of resistance. The South East boundary doesn't reach Yonge Street because they anticipated opposition.

So what is before council now is some mashed up thing that pretends that a part of our town grew up in isolation from its neighbors, and it will continue to morph and change until it captures the minimum # of those in favor to justify its existence.

Anonymous said...

Agenda is up

Anonymous said...

With all of the above said (and I am 11:42) I do have to give credit to John for getting into the race, putting himself out there and having a go at it.

With all due respect to Geoff Dawe, many votes last race for him were because he wasn't Phyllis Morris. So now at least it will be a race and Mayor Dawe will be forced to give us his vision, his ideas, etc. to counter Gallo's and why we should have him stay on.

Wisdom does not always come with age nor does age automatically equate with sound experience if we were never wise in our decisions along that path. Being the leader means you have to take on a completely different role than being one of the others sitting around the table. And it may be far from what you initially expected as I believe Mr. Dawe would admit to in his early days as mayor.

So in part, good luck to both, competition is good - and the outcome either way should be for a better Aurora.

Anonymous said...

The Banner has slight bios on provincial candidates.

Anonymous said...

Slight bios? There's a witch hunt going on in Richmond hill with the paper being head witch. The way they reported that shameful lawsuit Morris pulled infuriated me. Pathetic paper.

Anonymous said...

The word " slight " was an indication that I found them inadequate. There was one amusing detail - there was identical phraseology in the material provided by Cllr Ballard to that being used by Cllr Gallo running for a different position. Same writer ?

Anonymous said...

The Advisory Committee seems unable to understand the word " No ". The majority of those impacted have expressed their negative feelings. And people outside the proposed zone are alarmed because they feel their neighbourhood might be next. I guess they would call where I live the north-west district & it has plenty of homes with great history. But I, for one, do not want anyone telling me what to do with my own place. Nor would I presume to lecture my neighbours.

Anonymous said...


"and the outcome either way should be for a better Aurora.

I don't see how anyone can make that statement, whether serious or tongue-in-cheek.

Anonymous said...

Do you think Scotland will vote to separate from the UK in the fall?

Anonymous said...

I think that was a placebo from someone who had been upset with the way the discussion was going. I quite enjoyed it and it served notice that the next election is not going to be an entitled walk-on.
Just saying

Anonymous said...

That is right up there with my concerns about the Ukraine -Not.

Anonymous said...


The better and more relevant question might be can we take back our own water from the Region?

Might save a bundle and not have to drink Lake Ontario dry.

Anonymous said...

To 17:44 Have you thought to ask why we are drinking Lake Ontario dry, when we have a huge resource here?

Anonymous said...

Can you remove the "This comment has been removed by a blog administrator" as all of these raise questions in a first reader's mind?

Like "What the....?"

Tidies things up, so to speak.

More Like said...

Destroys the evidence, so to speak.

Anonymous said...

I presume you mean Your remarks.