"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

Saturday 27 April 2013


St Andrew's College got their agreement for deferral of development charges  approved on Tuesday.
Except for the Mayor, it was a complete switcheroo of the vote at Committee. 

A  pattern emerges. Something goes on between meetings and decisions  are  reversed.

Mr. Sifton , a Board member and the  Headmaster  of St Andrew's delegated to Council  

We heard  a litany of good works St.Andrew's does  in the commnity. How building plans would  be cancelled if development charges had to be paid. 

Councillor Thompson  noted when developers have to pay DCs ,they can just pass costs on to new homebuyers.  But  St Andrew's would have to increase their fees. 

The Mayor talked about  summer programs in support of Children's Aid Society. 

Recreation Director talked about  St. Andrew's soccer fields being available for community use.

The Mayor talked about the College hosting York Region Special Olympics this summer. 

Finally, the  decision was  approved to extend deferral of Development Charges until  use ofthe property   changed or the property was sold. 

Total relief of development charges for Board of Education,Town and Regional  combined  for an  ice arena, and addition  to kitchen  is  two million,two hundred and fifty-seven thousand nine hundred and  sixty- two  dollars.

It's a tidy sum. 

At what point I wonder does charitable giving cease and  become very expensive cost rccovery.

Despite being classified as a non-profit, charitable organisation, St Andrew's College 
is a  school for children of  wealth and privilege  to cement their future.

That is it's purpose.It has no other.

At the same meeting, representataives of Aurora Rotary Club delegated.  They came to present a second cheque for $15,000. of $50,000  previously committed by the Club for improvements to 
Rotary Park .

Rotary is a small club. They raise funds with golf tournament, beer gardens and selling hams. 
They work hard. 

They contribute to helping programs throughout the  world as well .

 They contributed $100,000 to building the town's new library.

They don't ask  for anything. They  simply make regular contributions to the community's well being.

How ironic. 

On Tuesday, they were squished between  St. Andrew's and million -dollar -mansion dwellers 
in the vicinity of a white tripod tower,outlined in a blue sky, with a shroud to conceal the workings at the top .  They demanded the Town fight Bell Telephone with  an injunction  to  take down that tower which so offends their sensibilities.

 It's  in a neighboring municipality . It's legal. 

To add to the farce, Councillors ran around in ever decreasing circles like chickens with heads cut off , so very eager to please.

A snippet of  new information  has came forward .

The person slinging most abuse and misinformation had her house listed before the tower appeared .

The hullabulloo about how awful  it all was and who was to blame was  more like the shroud at the tripod, hiding  its real purpose. 


Anonymous said...

Almost a week later & I'm still trying to get my head around SAC being called charitable and nonprofit. Obviously I have some more beastly research ahead because those terms continue to confound. And it is important that I know where money is going and what it is used for when it comes to charity.

Anonymous said...

Right. You pay for a years' tuition & get a tax deduction for a charitable contribution. I don't think so. But the real difficulty is the difference in how groups are treated by Council. They do not give even a one-time donation to The Aurora Pantry BECAUSE they do not allow charity donations. Awesome stuff! Complete double-speak.

Anonymous said...

Neither a beggar or a borrower be.

Anonymous said...

I wonder how many developers' sons are SAC boys?

Anonymous said...

Do you remember that woman who led the charge against the train whistles that were driving her insane? She claimed the sound even lowered the value of residences near the tracks. And wasn't needed.
She got everyone into a dreadful tizzy & probably cost the town some money in trying to calm her anxieties. I think it went through a couple of councils before Councillor Pirri discovered that she was the sole complainant & had sold her house without anyone passing the information to Council.
Now we are going to have GO again on weekends. I still smile thinking how much that must irritate Councillor Wilson.
There has been no reduction in the prices of homes listed in the neighbourhood of Ballard's Babel Tower. Don't expect there will be any despite the sound and fury.

Anonymous said...

I used to think there was something wrong with the air or water at the Town Hall. Now I'm leaning towards the possibility that councillors just get a kick out of appearing benevolent. Without reaching for their own wallets, of course. Maybe they should each be required to actually sign the cheques instead of merely waving a hand in the air like royalty dispensing blessings.

Anonymous said...

Evelyn is quite right. Council is completely gullible when they are faced with clout. Man.... I had hoped we could do better.

Anonymous said...

4:33 PM
They have drunk the Kool-Aid.

Anonymous said...

There was a gal who stormed a past council because a light was shining in her windows from a nearby playing field. I think she had them stampeded into considering moving mature trees to impede the light and its terrible intrusion into her life. Turned out she, too, had sold her place.

Anonymous said...

4:01 PM
What do developer's sons have to do with the price of beans? Morris tried to play that card & her contributers for the last election have a few on board. Move it along, please. Even Dear Nigel had one in his record.

Anonymous said...

8:52 PM

What do Morris and Kean have to do with the comment at 4:01 PM? Look at the title of the post; it's about the rich getting richer, and the greedy getting their way - often on the backs of those that can't afford it.

Anonymous said...

I just remembered an attempt to rally residents around a false flag that failed. The way the tower issue should. It was back before the last election. Residents near a soccer field were thoroughly ticked off at the lack of washroom facilities that was treating them to the sight of individuals using their shrubs for relief.
Somehow it was determined that Council had deliberately been trying to reduce such facilities as part of some complex plan.
When the smoke cleared and a suitable box-thing was placed for the soccer players, Councillor Wilson toured the ' affected ' neighbourhood. Shaking hands & leaving notes that HE had resolved their problem.
Don't know how that group of tax-payers voted but he was no re-elected. But, perhaps there were other reasons for that?