If it's successful,it's clever politics

There is a  detail in the Mavrinac issue I may or may not have told ready.

When the  separate school board decided they were not going to need the 6 acres  for a school ,the town were not informed. It  didn't matter because the 5%  entitlement  for parks under the Planning Act was already in hand.

The  clause that required the developer to sell the land to the town at the school board price was not known to staff  and they had never seen such a clause  before.

I have  but leave that for now.

Councillor Gallo canvassed homes in the neighbourhood and informed them of the site not  being required for a school and he felt it to be in their interest if it became a park.

He reserved the Council Chamber and invited residents  to a meeting to hear about the matter.
They turned out in numbers like any other neighbourhood would.

One after the other Councillors jumped up and declared themselves in favour of a park.

We are talking about a neighbourhood who were led to believe theexpectation was
entirely reasonable by their elected representatives.

The decision to litigate against the developer is seen as righteous . The town must protect the town against the interest of developer., Council did not have to have their hides pinned to the wall to make it
 happen. They adopted it with full enthusiasm.

It was not a unanimous decision.

Now here's where I have seen a clause like that before.

The town had a small parcel of land for sale and sold it. The Sale agreement was presented for approval .  A Councillor insisted on a clause requiring the land be sold back to the town  at the original price if not used for the purpose of building town houses.

The town solicitor argued against the clause.
 Council paid no mind.
The clause  went in
The  developers signed the deal.

Months later ,back they came.  At the point of organising financing ,the clause ws discovered.
When the bank saw the clause ,  "Whoa there.... No can do"

The  clause had to be removed for a mortgage to be obtained.

Something similar was tried with the Region of York with a sale of land for police purposes.

Here's the thing. I don't remember the Minto  clause  being proposed.  Likely I would have, had I   ben there.

If I wasn't ,John Gallo wasn't  either.

Someone must have whispered in his pearly white ear.

Most likely the one who suggested it  in the first place..

Seems to have slipped by the developers' lawyers.

Councillor Gallo 's revelation was a surprise to all but one.

When that fellow McDermid  was invited to Council by the former Mayor to accuse Councillors of being handmaidens to the development industry ......the thought occurred;

 Man, you can't imagine how political decisions are made. How much money collected in taxes are used that way.

The residents of Mavrinac have been  led  by their Leaders, to believe the cause is just.

They are not putting  pressure on their Council.

They are lending support.