"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

Sunday 23 January 2011

This and That

A poster comments:

With respect.... how have you come to the $500k cost figure? I hate it when numbers are pulled form thin air - what is the background of this cost?
*****************
One can never know for sure what an O.M.B. hearing will cost. Staff notes five weeks have been set aside for the appeal. I asked the external lawyer prior to the Westhill Hearing,the cost of a regular appeal. He said an average hearing would be $250K. Five weeks is twice the average.

That cost didn't include five times we went to the board and court in futile attempts to obtain a consolidated board hearing. To obtain a decision which apparently could have been determined before all that money was poured down the drain.The Board never did have authority to grant a consolidated board hearing.

We forked over hundreds of thousands to chase a will o' the wisp on the recommendation of the environmental lawyer first hired by opposing neighbours and then taken on as part of "our team" to fight the OMB Hearing after the neighbours decided they didn't want to spend any more of their money.

The half million I project is only the town's share. It doesn't include the property owners' expense.

Another poster claims I am selectively overlooking that the owner had to be stopped from moving soil about on his property. People often do stuff that bylaws prohibit. It's why we have the expense of a bylaw department.

It doesn't remove his right under the Planning Act to file an application and appeal to the OMB,if the town refuses it.

It will not improve our chances at the Board in the face of the town's planning advice, that the application is deficient in only two aspects and more than meets requirements in all others and we should accept the Board-ordered mediation route which permits neighbours to participate in the process.

Ms Walmer contends we should pay no attention to the planner's advice because the application contravenes all of the town's planning requirements.

It's not hard to decide whose advice to accept. We can also add the cost of the planning department,to the cost of an OMB hearing.

If the Board makes a decision in favour of the applicant,all those opposed can scream in unison with Ms.Walmer about the lack of integrity and competence of the Municipal Board,along with the Board of Education,Council,the town's planning
department and all and sundry other institution who dare to offer a different
perspective to Ms Walmer.

The lady has never chosen to put her name on a ballot. It has not stopped her from regularly presenting as a person with authority to speak for the community and ever ready to excoriate those who have that responsibility.

As noted in another comment,the law provides Ms. Walmer and all the rest of us with that right. It does not protect her or any elected representative from encountering opposition just as strongly expressed.

Someone else asked where is Elderberry Hills? It is near the south end of town on the west side of Yonge Street, The original proposal to develop the Elder horse farm had some very ambitious ideas for the Yonge Street frontage we are now discussing forty years later.

A hotel, an equestrian centre, riding trails were part of the original vision. If I had my druthers, the land would still be a horse farm.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

In a sense of fairness that is supposedly a cornerstone of our society, I don't believe someone should be allowed to enrich themselves by not following the rules.

If an unauthorized activity resulted in a more developable property, does Councilor Buck believe that a land owner should realize the fruits of his labours?