the Mayor got a second opportunity to press his argument against spending $1.1 million dollars on a third park in Mavricland. Problem is, the vote is taken. The Mayor persuaded no-one.His influence is. Nil to Zero.
There is no more substance to his argument than there is to the arguments of the seven who voted
In support of the park.
The Mayor sent this project on its trajectory before the last election when he voted for legal action to compel the developer to surrender the 6 acre site to the town.The town had no legal justification
to force that sale. No law that would have allowed expropriation for a park.
That may have been the moment the former solicitor realised Aurora had no need for a legal department and he did not invest in a career in law to be employed by a town without respect for law or logic.
Municipal decisions are determined, in the main, by various acts of Provincial law.
The Planning Act requires a developer to dedicate 5% of a developable parcel for a park.The
municipality cannot ask for more.
School boards may requisition sites for schools but they must pay raw land price.
Municipalities must calculate development charges covering needs in a five year period .
Master Recreation Plans must be reviewed every five years for identified needs to justify Development Charges.
It means home buyers pay for the park in their neighbourhood. The town pays ten per cent to
Make it a community affair.
Amenities in new home developments shall not increase the tax burden for existing residents.
There is method in the madness.
Legal fees were incurred to compel the Mavrinac developer to surrender a six acre site not required by the separate school board.
Legal costs have not been disclosed.
$2.3 million was paid for the land. $1.1 million is estimated to build a third park within a klick of two other fine facilities.
Nothing supports the project. Neither law, logic nor equity between taxpayers.
The decision was purely political. Votes from the Mavrinac neighbourhood were the prize. They still
As I recall,Councillor Michael Thompson quietly witheld his support to acquire the land. He now argues for the expenditure.
No-one asks about the source of funding.