Much is written how to attract birds to your yard. Nothing about how to deter a specific species. Grackles come down in gangs and chase away the pretty ones. They croak and strut, full of their own importance, pecking furiously and tossing leaves over their shoulders, checking out the larder. Seems like a futile exercise. There doesn't seem to be much under the leaves.
A red wing blackbird visited the bird bath last Saturday and stayed for a while. They tend not to hang around much in built up areas. The swamps at the sides of the roads are their favourite habitats. Judging by the deafening chorus of sweet clear sound, there must be thousands of them in the wet places of Bloomington Sideroad. On a warm day, it's like the air itself is vibrating.
Woodpeckers don't leave in the winter . I see them running up and down the upright maple tree branches. They visited the bird bath on Saturday as well.
But the first robin I've seen this year really made me chuckle. Robin walks about proudly with his chest out full in front.He looks like an usher at a wedding in his brown morning coat and coral coloured vest. He cocks head and listens. Every now and then his beak plunges into the ground and sure enough, he pulls up a worm.
But this was funny. The worm was so long and stretched so far , the robin literally staggered backwards.
A pair of beautiful mallards often visit for two or three days before leaving to find a better place for a nest.
Sometimes , a pair of mourning doves will stop for a rest on stones warmed from the sun. Apparently, they fly for days non-stop from North Carolina. When they come down in my yard, one sleeps while the other watches for a while. They spell each other before continuing on.
Some days the bird bath corner is a kaleidoscope of colour. Blue jays, cardinals, black and white chickadees and the perspicacious robins take turns bathing and perched on the bare branches of the magnolia. Later, yellow finches swoop around in families of ten or twelve. They look like dandelions surfing on an unseen ocean wave.
I know little about birds. Haven't consciously done anything to bring them to my yard. But there they are and very welcome too. I can sit inside and watch them from my comfy chair or later,
in the shade under the maple tree
Sometimes I think how barren this place was when we first came. How much has changed . And how often.
My back yard is sixty-three wide by fifty feet deep, in the middle of a seven hundred and fifty home subdvision. It is home to birds, rabbits ,raccoons and skunks, to say nothing of cats,dogs and humans.
I've seen a red fox, in daylight, sitting on the corner of Wellington and Bathurst, watching traffic.
At dusk, I've seen a shadow crossing Bathurst from woods to fields . At first I thought, that' s a pretty big dog before I realised to my excitement, that's not a dog it's a deer, by jings.
And I' ve thought.... what do those nutbar environmentalist know anyway when they carp and crake on and on about how human habitat destroys wild life ?
What a crock!
Wednesday, 24 March 2010
Tuesday, 23 March 2010
The Story Continues
I never know how a post is going to evolve. I sit down at the computer. Sometimes it's complete in my mind before I start. Sometimes it 's a hazy idea that has to work its way out. Sometimes it starts clear then takes off in its own direction. And sometimes it's a surprise.
The last two posts are part of a whole.
My daughter Theresa came home to live a couple of years ago. We have a familiar routine. Much like my childhood.
Every day my grandparents would settle in the afternoon, side by side, Grampa in his rocking chair with pipe and tobaccoand the Daily Express, a labour-oriented newspaper. Grannie, with a book, or a rug she was hooking, in her big comfy chair, much like the one I have now. A cheerful fire burned in the grate.
It was wartime. Two aunts, my older sister and my mother came home from work at different times. Each had a story to tell of the day's events, complete with characters,quotes, side-splitting laughter, and "the cheek of it"
Two married aunts visited; Mary on Monday and Jean on Saturday. Characters and events in their lives were part of the collegiality that was the family.
There was no television. But life was never dull. I concluded long since, it was a feature of our Irish oral culture.
Grampa never had anything to say. He was Scottish. He was also the only man in the house.But his shoulders shook with laughter along with the rest.
It lives on in my house.Theresa tells me about her day and reads my daily post. And we chat .
Last night I was ironing. After she read the post she said with a smile;
" I wouldn't be surprised if you hear from Mr. Rust D'Eye, asking you to stop citing his name"
I felt an unexpected surge of anger.
" I hope he does " I said. "it will give me the opportunity to tell him what I think of his conduct in the Council Chamber that night "
Unknown to myself, Mr Rust D'Eye had been summoned to the meeting and instructed by the Mayor.
Under no other circumstances, would he have engaged me in that conversation in that place at that time.Nor did he have the right then.
No social, legal, moral or ethical authority allowed him to engage me in that conversation. Let alone attempt to persuade me, I should not attend the business of the Council to which I have been elected and within which I have equal authority to any other member.
No vote authorised Mr.Rust D'Eye be retained. No resolution instructed him to do what he did.
Nothing more than instructions from the Mayor, acting without Council authority, using public funds to accomplish a purpose which had nothing to do with the municipality's interest and everything to do with the political intent of herself and Councillors MacEachern's and Gaertner, to destroy by legal means, if that's what it took, a political adversary; a part of the body which is Aurora Council. .
Looking back on it now, it seems the rot set in when, behind closed doors, Council authorised the Mayor to retain legal counsel to pursue action against former Mayor and political adversary for non-existent wrong-doing It took two years, two lawyers, unshared communications, unknown fees paid from the public purse before that effort was finally abandoned.
That's partly what caused Councillor Grace Marsh to abandon her commitment. Not just the threat to professional reputation and livelihood .
It was abundant experience in politics and my own confidence to manage that made me slow to realise exactly what I was dealing with.
I have this simple political philosophy;
If somebody does you dirt, don't fret .... Watch and wait.
When opportunity presents...and it always does ...you will know it the minute you see it.
Nothing in my experience allowed me to grasp the significance of lawyers, recruited at public expense, to service one side of the political spectrum. .
It was beyond my ken.
The last two posts are part of a whole.
My daughter Theresa came home to live a couple of years ago. We have a familiar routine. Much like my childhood.
Every day my grandparents would settle in the afternoon, side by side, Grampa in his rocking chair with pipe and tobaccoand the Daily Express, a labour-oriented newspaper. Grannie, with a book, or a rug she was hooking, in her big comfy chair, much like the one I have now. A cheerful fire burned in the grate.
It was wartime. Two aunts, my older sister and my mother came home from work at different times. Each had a story to tell of the day's events, complete with characters,quotes, side-splitting laughter, and "the cheek of it"
Two married aunts visited; Mary on Monday and Jean on Saturday. Characters and events in their lives were part of the collegiality that was the family.
There was no television. But life was never dull. I concluded long since, it was a feature of our Irish oral culture.
Grampa never had anything to say. He was Scottish. He was also the only man in the house.But his shoulders shook with laughter along with the rest.
It lives on in my house.Theresa tells me about her day and reads my daily post. And we chat .
Last night I was ironing. After she read the post she said with a smile;
" I wouldn't be surprised if you hear from Mr. Rust D'Eye, asking you to stop citing his name"
I felt an unexpected surge of anger.
" I hope he does " I said. "it will give me the opportunity to tell him what I think of his conduct in the Council Chamber that night "
Unknown to myself, Mr Rust D'Eye had been summoned to the meeting and instructed by the Mayor.
Under no other circumstances, would he have engaged me in that conversation in that place at that time.Nor did he have the right then.
No social, legal, moral or ethical authority allowed him to engage me in that conversation. Let alone attempt to persuade me, I should not attend the business of the Council to which I have been elected and within which I have equal authority to any other member.
No vote authorised Mr.Rust D'Eye be retained. No resolution instructed him to do what he did.
Nothing more than instructions from the Mayor, acting without Council authority, using public funds to accomplish a purpose which had nothing to do with the municipality's interest and everything to do with the political intent of herself and Councillors MacEachern's and Gaertner, to destroy by legal means, if that's what it took, a political adversary; a part of the body which is Aurora Council. .
Looking back on it now, it seems the rot set in when, behind closed doors, Council authorised the Mayor to retain legal counsel to pursue action against former Mayor and political adversary for non-existent wrong-doing It took two years, two lawyers, unshared communications, unknown fees paid from the public purse before that effort was finally abandoned.
That's partly what caused Councillor Grace Marsh to abandon her commitment. Not just the threat to professional reputation and livelihood .
It was abundant experience in politics and my own confidence to manage that made me slow to realise exactly what I was dealing with.
I have this simple political philosophy;
If somebody does you dirt, don't fret .... Watch and wait.
When opportunity presents...and it always does ...you will know it the minute you see it.
Nothing in my experience allowed me to grasp the significance of lawyers, recruited at public expense, to service one side of the political spectrum. .
It was beyond my ken.
Sunday, 21 March 2010
From A Distance
Perception grows and understanding takes its place.
November 13th 2007, Council went into a back room and instructed Mr Rust D'Eye. No prior or public notice of the meeting was given. No agenda provided of its purpose. In fact, the Mayor refused to disclose.
Obviously there had to have been previous discussion. From which at least one person was excluded. Me.
I was not among friends.
Council as a body is the sum of its parts. Aurora's Council is nine parts.
That night, apparently previously instructed, Mr Rust D'Eye attempted to separate a part from the body.
Now, with twenty-eight months intervening, it was truly an astounding concept.
It came to nought. How could it not?
Recommendations emanating from the secret process were two.
1. Council should appoint an executive committee of select members.
2. Council should adopt the Code of Conduct already in the works.
I know of no discussion of the first option. All that can be said for sure is, it didn't happen officially. Regular group discussions do occur after council meetings. Three Councillors McRoberts,Collins Mrakas and myself, do not participate.
We are all aware of :
The Code and First Integrity Commissioner, an ethics czar, hired;
Eight months later ,contract signed.
Days later, first Complaint filed and publicised with much bally-hoo.
Weeks later, first Decision rendered and delivered.
Concurrently almost, first Integrity Commissioner fired and dispatched.
Months later, Second Integrity Commissioner, solicitor at law, hired.
Mr. Rust D'Eye; apparently had little further involvement since first recommendations, written December 11th 2007, presented to Council May 6th 2008.
Can't hardly wait for next chapter.
November 13th 2007, Council went into a back room and instructed Mr Rust D'Eye. No prior or public notice of the meeting was given. No agenda provided of its purpose. In fact, the Mayor refused to disclose.
Obviously there had to have been previous discussion. From which at least one person was excluded. Me.
I was not among friends.
Council as a body is the sum of its parts. Aurora's Council is nine parts.
That night, apparently previously instructed, Mr Rust D'Eye attempted to separate a part from the body.
Now, with twenty-eight months intervening, it was truly an astounding concept.
It came to nought. How could it not?
Recommendations emanating from the secret process were two.
1. Council should appoint an executive committee of select members.
2. Council should adopt the Code of Conduct already in the works.
I know of no discussion of the first option. All that can be said for sure is, it didn't happen officially. Regular group discussions do occur after council meetings. Three Councillors McRoberts,Collins Mrakas and myself, do not participate.
We are all aware of :
The Code and First Integrity Commissioner, an ethics czar, hired;
Eight months later ,contract signed.
Days later, first Complaint filed and publicised with much bally-hoo.
Weeks later, first Decision rendered and delivered.
Concurrently almost, first Integrity Commissioner fired and dispatched.
Months later, Second Integrity Commissioner, solicitor at law, hired.
Mr. Rust D'Eye; apparently had little further involvement since first recommendations, written December 11th 2007, presented to Council May 6th 2008.
Can't hardly wait for next chapter.
Introducing Mr. George Rust D'Eye
The Mayor met the gentleman at the Ontario Municipal Association Conference in Ottawa in the summer of 2007.
Representatives of various legal, planning and other consultants are much in evidence at conferences. They sponsor various events and introduce themselves to Councillors from out of town.
The Mayor returned home in 2007 with news . Mr.Rust D'Eye had advised of recent legislation allowing municipalities to adopt a Code of Conduct. It was superior to a Code of Ethics in that it provided for penalties.
The prospect of meting out punishment clearly had appeal. "Bring it on" said Councillor Wilson. Staff were directed to prepare a Code of Conduct. How about that?
I had noticed a difference in relationship between appointed and elected officials since my return to Council in 2003. Many decisions were made without council consultation.Language of the Procedure Bylaw nuanced the subservience of Councillors.
It did not and does not sit well. Being the only Councillor who recognised the denigration in Council's role,opportunity to reverse the trend with either the last or current council seemed unlikely.
In discussion of the Code, I repeatedly referred to the complaint process. I warned it was a double-edged sword. It could not be one-sided.
Came the Big Emergency; the news story in The Auroran about the decision to refuse to sell land we had for sale, at the appraised value, to York Regional Police to establish the Regional Police Headquarters in Aurora.
The police have a presence in every urban municipality in the Region except Aurora.
What a story. We must have been the laughing stock of the region. Every person with a scintilla of sense knows the colossal advantage of Regional Headquarters of anything in your municipality. Hundreds of the best paid jobs in the Region are represented.
It's worth millions annually to the local economy.
We tossed it.
It's a habit we have.
We spend money as though it's printed in the town hall basement. And we cast aside opportunities to improve things for our business partners and ultimately our own economy.
The Mayor put on a great show of outrage when the story broke. In a voice trembling with indignation she announced Mr. Rust D'Eye's presence at the Council meeting to deal with the crisis.
I was only surprised the story took so long to get out. I had previously asked CAO John Rogers when the decision would be reported out. He said, while legislation required Council to report out decisions made behind closed doors, there is no time limit for that to happen.
Thirty one months later, it still hasn't. Now we know the significance of the legislation. If a Council doesn't intend what the law intends, they don't have to conform.
Of course, there's always the likelihood the story will out. Then ordinarily, secrecy has to be explained as well. But not if attention can be diverted.
I know I'm harping on this issue. It's because I still can't believe we did it.
As noted, on the night of "The Crisis" Mr. Rust D'Eye was present in the Council Chamber. Summoned by the Mayor. Council was in progress. The Mayor called a recess to go into closed session. She announced Mr. Rust D'Eye' had been retained to advise.
I asked if the Mayor intended to state the purpose of the closed meeting.
"Ah No, Councillor Buck" she responded knowingly "You will not draw me into that"
Councillors rose and proceeded to the back room. Then the Mayor was at my side with Mr. Rust D'Eye. He was introduced. I said we had already met. He made a presentation at the off-site orientation of the previous Council on the subject of Conflict of Interest.
(Councillors Morris,Keane and Gaertner did not attend on principle)
I was still seated. Between the two, they seemed to want to steer me out of the Chamber.
The Mayor explained Mr. Rust D'Eye wanted to have a few words .
"Fine" I said "Grab a seat, Mr. Rust D'Eye. We'll do it here"
He tucked the brief under his arm, placed his briefcase on the floor between his feet and sat down. A little awkwardly I thought, in a chair facing me and the audience.
The Chamber was busy that evening. Staff were in their places, as were TV cameras and operators. The late Dick Illingworth was there and some citizens.
Mr Rust D'Eye asked had I retained legal counsel.
"Why would I do that" I asked in surprise.
"Oh, I'm not suggesting it" he hastened to assure me.
From there the conversation moved in a circuitous route. There was reference to current Conflict of Interest legislation. How much more serious penalties are now than they were.
Finally, an intimation I should not attend the in-camera meeting, in the event there might be litigation. I might hear something which would be to my advantage that might place me in a Conflict of Interest .
I said I could not imagine a circumstance where I might be involved in litigation with the Town.
Ten or fifteen minutes had passed. People were waiting. Council was in a back room waiting.The purpose of the conversation was finally apparent.
"I am a member of Council"I declared emphatically. "I am entitled to attend any meeting of Council. And that's exactly what I intend to do"
Whereupon I rose and climbed the stairs, leaving Solicitor George Rust D'Eye to bring up the rear.
Representatives of various legal, planning and other consultants are much in evidence at conferences. They sponsor various events and introduce themselves to Councillors from out of town.
The Mayor returned home in 2007 with news . Mr.Rust D'Eye had advised of recent legislation allowing municipalities to adopt a Code of Conduct. It was superior to a Code of Ethics in that it provided for penalties.
The prospect of meting out punishment clearly had appeal. "Bring it on" said Councillor Wilson. Staff were directed to prepare a Code of Conduct. How about that?
I had noticed a difference in relationship between appointed and elected officials since my return to Council in 2003. Many decisions were made without council consultation.Language of the Procedure Bylaw nuanced the subservience of Councillors.
It did not and does not sit well. Being the only Councillor who recognised the denigration in Council's role,opportunity to reverse the trend with either the last or current council seemed unlikely.
In discussion of the Code, I repeatedly referred to the complaint process. I warned it was a double-edged sword. It could not be one-sided.
Came the Big Emergency; the news story in The Auroran about the decision to refuse to sell land we had for sale, at the appraised value, to York Regional Police to establish the Regional Police Headquarters in Aurora.
The police have a presence in every urban municipality in the Region except Aurora.
What a story. We must have been the laughing stock of the region. Every person with a scintilla of sense knows the colossal advantage of Regional Headquarters of anything in your municipality. Hundreds of the best paid jobs in the Region are represented.
It's worth millions annually to the local economy.
We tossed it.
It's a habit we have.
We spend money as though it's printed in the town hall basement. And we cast aside opportunities to improve things for our business partners and ultimately our own economy.
The Mayor put on a great show of outrage when the story broke. In a voice trembling with indignation she announced Mr. Rust D'Eye's presence at the Council meeting to deal with the crisis.
I was only surprised the story took so long to get out. I had previously asked CAO John Rogers when the decision would be reported out. He said, while legislation required Council to report out decisions made behind closed doors, there is no time limit for that to happen.
Thirty one months later, it still hasn't. Now we know the significance of the legislation. If a Council doesn't intend what the law intends, they don't have to conform.
Of course, there's always the likelihood the story will out. Then ordinarily, secrecy has to be explained as well. But not if attention can be diverted.
I know I'm harping on this issue. It's because I still can't believe we did it.
As noted, on the night of "The Crisis" Mr. Rust D'Eye was present in the Council Chamber. Summoned by the Mayor. Council was in progress. The Mayor called a recess to go into closed session. She announced Mr. Rust D'Eye' had been retained to advise.
I asked if the Mayor intended to state the purpose of the closed meeting.
"Ah No, Councillor Buck" she responded knowingly "You will not draw me into that"
Councillors rose and proceeded to the back room. Then the Mayor was at my side with Mr. Rust D'Eye. He was introduced. I said we had already met. He made a presentation at the off-site orientation of the previous Council on the subject of Conflict of Interest.
(Councillors Morris,Keane and Gaertner did not attend on principle)
I was still seated. Between the two, they seemed to want to steer me out of the Chamber.
The Mayor explained Mr. Rust D'Eye wanted to have a few words .
"Fine" I said "Grab a seat, Mr. Rust D'Eye. We'll do it here"
He tucked the brief under his arm, placed his briefcase on the floor between his feet and sat down. A little awkwardly I thought, in a chair facing me and the audience.
The Chamber was busy that evening. Staff were in their places, as were TV cameras and operators. The late Dick Illingworth was there and some citizens.
Mr Rust D'Eye asked had I retained legal counsel.
"Why would I do that" I asked in surprise.
"Oh, I'm not suggesting it" he hastened to assure me.
From there the conversation moved in a circuitous route. There was reference to current Conflict of Interest legislation. How much more serious penalties are now than they were.
Finally, an intimation I should not attend the in-camera meeting, in the event there might be litigation. I might hear something which would be to my advantage that might place me in a Conflict of Interest .
I said I could not imagine a circumstance where I might be involved in litigation with the Town.
Ten or fifteen minutes had passed. People were waiting. Council was in a back room waiting.The purpose of the conversation was finally apparent.
"I am a member of Council"I declared emphatically. "I am entitled to attend any meeting of Council. And that's exactly what I intend to do"
Whereupon I rose and climbed the stairs, leaving Solicitor George Rust D'Eye to bring up the rear.
Saturday, 20 March 2010
Confidential ! Yes or No
As a Councillor,Reeve and Mayor, until this council, I have never known dispute about confidentiality requirements.
No member was ever accused of "leaking" and harming municipal interest.
No lawyers were called in to "advise" if a Councillor had damaged reputations of other Councillors on the basis of strong opposition to a council resolution.
No councillor was ever accused of "undermining" or "frustrating the decisions of council" by casting a vote in opposition to the majority.
A vote is a vote. When the die is cast, the deed is done. It cannot be undermined or frustrated by a solitary vote in opposition.
Of politicians I have known in fifty, of one hundred and fifty year history of the town , only one hoisted herself on a pedestal, challenged the integrity of colleagues and avowed the need for a Code of Ethics and subsequently, for the added advantage of punishment, through the terms of a Code of Conduct .
Mayor Phyllis Morris may claim that distinction.
Six lawyers,at public expense, have been used to further her agenda..
Now a seventh , David Tzubuchi has joined the team. Mr. Tzubuchi is newly appointed Integrity Commissioner which office requires exercise of independence and impartiality.
Until the last term, no-one had difficulty discerning when the town's interest was at issue. Nor to recognise individual privacy.
Things became obscure when the municipality's interest was confused with political imperative.
Last week, I found a memo on a confidential agenda which did not meet the test It was dated June 2nd, 2009, within a day of a Council vote to retain Solicitor John Mascarin to carry out an investigation of me, myself a duly elected spokesperson of the Town of Aurora.
They did that at a special meeting held on the evening, prior to the Annual Civic Awards Ceremony.
Former Clerk, Lucille King submitted the memorandum, in response to a question from the Mayor regarding Town Insurance coverage for Councillors respecting litigation.
According to the Code of Conduct and the Procedural Bylaw, no member of Council has authority to direct staff to prepare a report.
Yet, there it is; a confidential memo setting out the question and direction from the Mayor.
The request was to report circumstances whereby a Councillor may or may not be protected against liability by the town's insurance provider, Public Sector BFL Canada Risk & Insurance Services Inc.
The memorandum included an e-mail response from an Officer of the Insurance providers. It was not qualified by a confidentiality clause.
It noted as follows ; "Members of Council are defined as "Insured".
"No policy covers for a claim by insured against insured"
There's more; three bullet points. Can't think why I never noticed it before.
Despite lawyerly admonitions, I do not agree such information mitigates against the municipality's interest. Nor that of individual privacy. It does not therefore qualify as an in-camera matter.
Clients of insurance providers are the people who pay the freight. Like any other corporation, officers of the corporation are protected. Clients are entitled to know terms and conditions.
If Mayor Morris believed council members needed to be aware of liability protection, and a report was required .....in accordance with the Code of Conduct and Procedural Bylaw, two Councillors, probably Gaertner and Granger needed to move and second a resolution to direct staff to prepare the report. The resolution needed to be supported by a majority for the report to become part of the public record.
Where's the harm to the corporation?
The process also needed to be in accord with the oft-trumpeted principle of "open and transparent".
I don't need a lawyer, instructed by the Mayor, to advise me when the municipality's interest needs to be protected. Or, when the real risk is to political posteriors exposed to the elements of public opinion.
No member was ever accused of "leaking" and harming municipal interest.
No lawyers were called in to "advise" if a Councillor had damaged reputations of other Councillors on the basis of strong opposition to a council resolution.
No councillor was ever accused of "undermining" or "frustrating the decisions of council" by casting a vote in opposition to the majority.
A vote is a vote. When the die is cast, the deed is done. It cannot be undermined or frustrated by a solitary vote in opposition.
Of politicians I have known in fifty, of one hundred and fifty year history of the town , only one hoisted herself on a pedestal, challenged the integrity of colleagues and avowed the need for a Code of Ethics and subsequently, for the added advantage of punishment, through the terms of a Code of Conduct .
Mayor Phyllis Morris may claim that distinction.
Six lawyers,at public expense, have been used to further her agenda..
Now a seventh , David Tzubuchi has joined the team. Mr. Tzubuchi is newly appointed Integrity Commissioner which office requires exercise of independence and impartiality.
Until the last term, no-one had difficulty discerning when the town's interest was at issue. Nor to recognise individual privacy.
Things became obscure when the municipality's interest was confused with political imperative.
Last week, I found a memo on a confidential agenda which did not meet the test It was dated June 2nd, 2009, within a day of a Council vote to retain Solicitor John Mascarin to carry out an investigation of me, myself a duly elected spokesperson of the Town of Aurora.
They did that at a special meeting held on the evening, prior to the Annual Civic Awards Ceremony.
Former Clerk, Lucille King submitted the memorandum, in response to a question from the Mayor regarding Town Insurance coverage for Councillors respecting litigation.
According to the Code of Conduct and the Procedural Bylaw, no member of Council has authority to direct staff to prepare a report.
Yet, there it is; a confidential memo setting out the question and direction from the Mayor.
The request was to report circumstances whereby a Councillor may or may not be protected against liability by the town's insurance provider, Public Sector BFL Canada Risk & Insurance Services Inc.
The memorandum included an e-mail response from an Officer of the Insurance providers. It was not qualified by a confidentiality clause.
It noted as follows ; "Members of Council are defined as "Insured".
"No policy covers for a claim by insured against insured"
There's more; three bullet points. Can't think why I never noticed it before.
Despite lawyerly admonitions, I do not agree such information mitigates against the municipality's interest. Nor that of individual privacy. It does not therefore qualify as an in-camera matter.
Clients of insurance providers are the people who pay the freight. Like any other corporation, officers of the corporation are protected. Clients are entitled to know terms and conditions.
If Mayor Morris believed council members needed to be aware of liability protection, and a report was required .....in accordance with the Code of Conduct and Procedural Bylaw, two Councillors, probably Gaertner and Granger needed to move and second a resolution to direct staff to prepare the report. The resolution needed to be supported by a majority for the report to become part of the public record.
Where's the harm to the corporation?
The process also needed to be in accord with the oft-trumpeted principle of "open and transparent".
I don't need a lawyer, instructed by the Mayor, to advise me when the municipality's interest needs to be protected. Or, when the real risk is to political posteriors exposed to the elements of public opinion.
Friday, 19 March 2010
The Devil is in The Oak Ridges Details
It's lovely to have leprechauns. They work all night long. In the morning, all shoes are repaired and polished to a high shine to the delight of inhabitants.
In politics, putting things in writing is always risky. If a comment doesn't reflect favourably on an adversary, one must be very sure of it's accuracy.
I referred to the sequence of events in the Westhill Development application yesterday.
Regional planning recommended to committee, committee recommended to council.
Mayor Morris was at the planning meeting.. A comment was made relating to town population forecast during the meeting. No reference was made to the Westhill application.
At Council on January 21st, in a verbal report, Mayor Morris noted without comment, pro or con, Westhill's application was approved and would be presented next day at Regional Council.
There was lunch with Mr. Lebovic, where he was given mayoralty assurance the application would receive town support.
Then came the Public Planning Meeting on March 24th 2008.
Neighbours represented by legal counsel, opposed the proposal .
Sue Walmer spoke against it.
A young lawyer from Earth Roots located on St Patrick's Street,Toronto joined the chorus. .
Mr Beaman, the town's external solicitor, was there that night to advise Council on issues of concern before the pending Ontario Municipal Board Hearing.
Staff recommended the application be approved in principle pending outstanding matters being resolved.
That was a no-go. Instead staff received marching orders in a hand written multiple- clause resolution written on the spot by Councillor Mac Eachern
.
Subsequently, the neighbour group indicated a legal argument requesting a Consolidated Board Hearing would be mounted. Mr. Beaman was instructed by Council to enjoin the fray on behalf of the neighbours.
Three times legal arguments led by neighbour- financed legal counsel, followed by town financed counsel were presented. Three times, they failed to persuade
They would have failed with only one lawyer presenting the argument. It was the same argument.
After the third failure, there was talk of compensating the neighbours for costs.That has not been spoken of again.
The fourth time the neighbours baled. The town went alone.
Now the town has launched a fifth attempt. Again with the public dollar.
A clarion call was heralded. Destiny and righteousness are at stake. The Mayor is ever at hand to help residents in need.
Evil must be vanquished. Mormac will prevail.
Oak Ridges Moraine, our home and habitat, must be protected, one hundred and fifty years late, from two- legged critters of the human variety.
In politics, putting things in writing is always risky. If a comment doesn't reflect favourably on an adversary, one must be very sure of it's accuracy.
I referred to the sequence of events in the Westhill Development application yesterday.
Regional planning recommended to committee, committee recommended to council.
Mayor Morris was at the planning meeting.. A comment was made relating to town population forecast during the meeting. No reference was made to the Westhill application.
At Council on January 21st, in a verbal report, Mayor Morris noted without comment, pro or con, Westhill's application was approved and would be presented next day at Regional Council.
There was lunch with Mr. Lebovic, where he was given mayoralty assurance the application would receive town support.
Then came the Public Planning Meeting on March 24th 2008.
Neighbours represented by legal counsel, opposed the proposal .
Sue Walmer spoke against it.
A young lawyer from Earth Roots located on St Patrick's Street,Toronto joined the chorus. .
Mr Beaman, the town's external solicitor, was there that night to advise Council on issues of concern before the pending Ontario Municipal Board Hearing.
Staff recommended the application be approved in principle pending outstanding matters being resolved.
That was a no-go. Instead staff received marching orders in a hand written multiple- clause resolution written on the spot by Councillor Mac Eachern
.
Subsequently, the neighbour group indicated a legal argument requesting a Consolidated Board Hearing would be mounted. Mr. Beaman was instructed by Council to enjoin the fray on behalf of the neighbours.
Three times legal arguments led by neighbour- financed legal counsel, followed by town financed counsel were presented. Three times, they failed to persuade
They would have failed with only one lawyer presenting the argument. It was the same argument.
After the third failure, there was talk of compensating the neighbours for costs.That has not been spoken of again.
The fourth time the neighbours baled. The town went alone.
Now the town has launched a fifth attempt. Again with the public dollar.
A clarion call was heralded. Destiny and righteousness are at stake. The Mayor is ever at hand to help residents in need.
Evil must be vanquished. Mormac will prevail.
Oak Ridges Moraine, our home and habitat, must be protected, one hundred and fifty years late, from two- legged critters of the human variety.
Thursday, 18 March 2010
Declaration of Office. A Pale Replica.
Evelyn:
Can you please provide the Oath of Office taken
by all members of Council?
Verbatim if you please
I found it. cut copied and pasted it, and was sternly admonished not to do that any more.
The web site is http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/
It's now called " Declaration of Office". "Malfeasance" is no longer the operative word.. That marvelously expressive medieval term has been replaced by mediocre reference to Conflict of Interest.
Is nothing sacred?
Even the Oath has been modernised and dumbed down. Despite the effort, there are those among us still who do not understand the term " Conflict of Interest"
Some declare it when they shouldn 't. Others don't when they should.
Is nothing sacred?
Even the Oath has been modernised and dumbed down. Despite the effort, there are those among us still who do not understand the term " Conflict of Interest"
Some declare it when they shouldn 't. Others don't when they should.
A Leprechaun
There's a little one who digs stuff out on occasion. I wanted to be sure of my information about the Region's decision on the Westhill Development application.
It was on the planning committee's agenda circulated in December 2007. Planning Committee approved it on January 16th 2008. It went forward to Regional Council , where it was accepted on January 24th 2008.
The Region audio tapes committee meetings. After the minutes are recorded, tapes are destroyed. All that shows in the record is the recommendation was approved.
No record of opposition exists to regional staff's recommendation by our representative at committee. There was no representation at Council, where the application received regional support.
It wasn't until it reached a Public Planning Meeting in Aurora that town staff advice was tossed. Councillor Mac Eachern wrote her own report at the table, on the hoof so-to-speak, for staff to follow.
Since then, there have been two Ontario Municipal Board and two Divisional Court Hearings. All unsuccessful in the quest for a Consolidated Board.
Three were funded by neighbours opposing the development. The town instructed a solicitor to support the neighbours' argument at our cost of course. .
The neighbours decided after the third failed attempt not to expend further resources.
The town continued with a fourth action. Again it failed.
The fifth attempt is a request for leave to appeal the fourth . We are proceeding alone.
I gather the losing side of any legal action is liable for the winners cost. We have instructed legal counsel to argue against costs.
We have a Municipal Board Hearing ahead of us .
Estimated cost for two weeks, $200ks.
A consolidated board would take six weeks. Triple the cost.
The decision in the end, as it was in the beginning, will still be in the hands of the Ontario Municipal Board.
A touch of irony. Sue Siebert, the towns retired Planning Director was called to testify on the town's behalf. Only Sue possesses the institutional memory.
Eyebrows rose and disgruntled comments muttered, when an invoice was presented for payment for professional services rendered.
It was on the planning committee's agenda circulated in December 2007. Planning Committee approved it on January 16th 2008. It went forward to Regional Council , where it was accepted on January 24th 2008.
The Region audio tapes committee meetings. After the minutes are recorded, tapes are destroyed. All that shows in the record is the recommendation was approved.
No record of opposition exists to regional staff's recommendation by our representative at committee. There was no representation at Council, where the application received regional support.
It wasn't until it reached a Public Planning Meeting in Aurora that town staff advice was tossed. Councillor Mac Eachern wrote her own report at the table, on the hoof so-to-speak, for staff to follow.
Since then, there have been two Ontario Municipal Board and two Divisional Court Hearings. All unsuccessful in the quest for a Consolidated Board.
Three were funded by neighbours opposing the development. The town instructed a solicitor to support the neighbours' argument at our cost of course. .
The neighbours decided after the third failed attempt not to expend further resources.
The town continued with a fourth action. Again it failed.
The fifth attempt is a request for leave to appeal the fourth . We are proceeding alone.
I gather the losing side of any legal action is liable for the winners cost. We have instructed legal counsel to argue against costs.
We have a Municipal Board Hearing ahead of us .
Estimated cost for two weeks, $200ks.
A consolidated board would take six weeks. Triple the cost.
The decision in the end, as it was in the beginning, will still be in the hands of the Ontario Municipal Board.
A touch of irony. Sue Siebert, the towns retired Planning Director was called to testify on the town's behalf. Only Sue possesses the institutional memory.
Eyebrows rose and disgruntled comments muttered, when an invoice was presented for payment for professional services rendered.
High School Student Population
Where do they come from? Homes of course. Makes sense doesn't it?
A few years ago, I did a bit of research into various taxes hidden in the price of a home. They amounted to about $40ks. The largest figure was for development charges. The region and school boards calculate their own and provide the town with the requisition .The town collects it We are the tax collectors.
So... the town collects for recreation facilities in anticipation of need created by new families moving into new homes. Developers are required by the Planning Act to provide 5% of their land for parks.
Therefore, families which produce students for schools, have already paid for parks pre-determined to meet their needs in the price of their homes.
Schools, particularly high schools, which provide indoor and outdoor recreational facilities,
and share them with municipalities, do not therefore generate a need for more parks.
When Elizabeth Crowe, Aurora/Newmarket Separate School Trustee, delegated to the town for exemption from the Cash in Lieu of parks payment , the request was valid.
The refusal was unbelievable.
In effect, the town was demanding the same parks be paid for twice.
Once by the developer who built the homes and charged the cost back the families who bought the homes and produced the children who attended the school which had to be built by the school board to accommodate the students who came from the homes ...etc etc etc.
And paid for again as Cash in Lieu by the school board.
The board had land surplus to their needs. It is contiguous to town land being developed as an arboretum. Ms. Crow offered to transfer title to the town as an alternate to Cash In Lieu.
That too was refused.
Cash in Lieu of parks charge is calculated on the basis of value of development land. The town didn't bother with an appraisal. They just named a figure which calculated to a fee of
$413 thousand dollars plus.
Both public bodies, the town and the board are currently engaged, at the expense of legal counsel, in negotiations to arrive at a settlement.
How is any of that in the interest of the taxpayers?
A few years ago, I did a bit of research into various taxes hidden in the price of a home. They amounted to about $40ks. The largest figure was for development charges. The region and school boards calculate their own and provide the town with the requisition .The town collects it We are the tax collectors.
So... the town collects for recreation facilities in anticipation of need created by new families moving into new homes. Developers are required by the Planning Act to provide 5% of their land for parks.
Therefore, families which produce students for schools, have already paid for parks pre-determined to meet their needs in the price of their homes.
Schools, particularly high schools, which provide indoor and outdoor recreational facilities,
and share them with municipalities, do not therefore generate a need for more parks.
When Elizabeth Crowe, Aurora/Newmarket Separate School Trustee, delegated to the town for exemption from the Cash in Lieu of parks payment , the request was valid.
The refusal was unbelievable.
In effect, the town was demanding the same parks be paid for twice.
Once by the developer who built the homes and charged the cost back the families who bought the homes and produced the children who attended the school which had to be built by the school board to accommodate the students who came from the homes ...etc etc etc.
And paid for again as Cash in Lieu by the school board.
The board had land surplus to their needs. It is contiguous to town land being developed as an arboretum. Ms. Crow offered to transfer title to the town as an alternate to Cash In Lieu.
That too was refused.
Cash in Lieu of parks charge is calculated on the basis of value of development land. The town didn't bother with an appraisal. They just named a figure which calculated to a fee of
$413 thousand dollars plus.
Both public bodies, the town and the board are currently engaged, at the expense of legal counsel, in negotiations to arrive at a settlement.
How is any of that in the interest of the taxpayers?
Wednesday, 17 March 2010
Come To Think Of It
Aurora is a ward. We are a ward within the Region of York. We have one representative. How much do we know of what's going on up there?
Are Regional Council Meetings televised? Does anyone care?
During my reading week, I absorbed the transcript from the first Municipal Board Hearing on the Westhill Development Application. I learned the application had been processed through
Regional Planning . The department recommended approval to the Region's Planning and Economic Development Committee.
The committee accepted and recommended approval to Regional Council. Regional Council approved the recommendation.
It occurred to me to wonder, since we hadn't heard, and considering the opposition to the proposal at our level, led by the Mayor, what position our regional rep(the Mayor) had taken on the issue at the Region?
As it turns out, Mayor Morris is a member of the regional planning committee. Attendance was noted when the application was approved for recommendation to the Regional Council. No opposition was noted .
Absence was noted at the subsequent Regional Council Meeting, where the application was once again approved.
A Regional staff person attended the Ontario Municipal Board Hearing. He did not ask for status. He was there as an observer.
Legal counsel for the developer noted regional approval.
We receive a regular Regional Report from our Regional representative (the Mayor)
From time to time, we hear vehement opposition from our Regional Representative(the Mayor) to what the Public School Board is contemplating or deciding.
We are currently before the Ontario Municipal Board on an appeal from the Separate School Board on the amount of Cash in Lieu of Parks they paid "under protest"
We were almost before the Board on a refusal to grant permission to build on land they had assembled for the purpose of building a beautiful new high school.
We frequently hear negative comments about the incompetence of the Ontario Municipal Board at the table
All from the same source.
But we didn't hear a dicky bird of opposition to the Region's decision to approve Westhill's Application.
Although our Regional Representative (the Mayor)is a member of Regional Planning Committee and of course, Regional Council.
Our representative is on record as committed to additional representation for Aurora at the Region.
While at the same time, there is no representation at all when our representative fails to attend
So...we don't need to await the Toronto election to make a judgement about merits or lack thereoff of a ward system.
We have our own experience. At the Region. With a single Representative. Who takes one position at the region and a different one at the local level.
Are Regional Council Meetings televised? Does anyone care?
During my reading week, I absorbed the transcript from the first Municipal Board Hearing on the Westhill Development Application. I learned the application had been processed through
Regional Planning . The department recommended approval to the Region's Planning and Economic Development Committee.
The committee accepted and recommended approval to Regional Council. Regional Council approved the recommendation.
It occurred to me to wonder, since we hadn't heard, and considering the opposition to the proposal at our level, led by the Mayor, what position our regional rep(the Mayor) had taken on the issue at the Region?
As it turns out, Mayor Morris is a member of the regional planning committee. Attendance was noted when the application was approved for recommendation to the Regional Council. No opposition was noted .
Absence was noted at the subsequent Regional Council Meeting, where the application was once again approved.
A Regional staff person attended the Ontario Municipal Board Hearing. He did not ask for status. He was there as an observer.
Legal counsel for the developer noted regional approval.
We receive a regular Regional Report from our Regional representative (the Mayor)
From time to time, we hear vehement opposition from our Regional Representative(the Mayor) to what the Public School Board is contemplating or deciding.
We are currently before the Ontario Municipal Board on an appeal from the Separate School Board on the amount of Cash in Lieu of Parks they paid "under protest"
We were almost before the Board on a refusal to grant permission to build on land they had assembled for the purpose of building a beautiful new high school.
We frequently hear negative comments about the incompetence of the Ontario Municipal Board at the table
All from the same source.
But we didn't hear a dicky bird of opposition to the Region's decision to approve Westhill's Application.
Although our Regional Representative (the Mayor)is a member of Regional Planning Committee and of course, Regional Council.
Our representative is on record as committed to additional representation for Aurora at the Region.
While at the same time, there is no representation at all when our representative fails to attend
So...we don't need to await the Toronto election to make a judgement about merits or lack thereoff of a ward system.
We have our own experience. At the Region. With a single Representative. Who takes one position at the region and a different one at the local level.
Crimes and Misdemeanours
The word "malfeasance" is an umbrella term. Deliberately so. It means bad faith, treachery,exploitation, bribery and corruption and everything else peculiar to a position of trust and authority.
I believe it's the operative word in the Oath of Office.
Being elected is not the determinate to taking office. A successful candidate is not a member of council until he or she has sworn the Oath of Office before a Justice of the Peace or a Commissioner of Oaths.
It is a binding contract. Break it if you dare.
Some assume being elected and taking the Oath of Office is a warranty of intelligence and integrity.
It isn't.
Warranty lies in numbers of people taking office. Nine independent minded persons on a council provides a reasonable assumption of responsible conduct.The odds are reduced with a gelatinous majority.
This week the R.C.M.P announced no charges will be laid in Toronto's computer leasing scandal of five years ago.
Whatever the reason, this much is true.
The Bellamy Inquiry cost the taxpayers of Toronto in the area of thirteen million dollars. Every stone was upturned. Disgusting and degrading aspects of human behaviour were uncovered.
Hundreds of thousands of tax dollars were shown to have flowed from the treasury without measurable return.
An elected representative, supposed to be minding the store, wasn't. He was living a life style
without obvious means to support it.
An appointed official was wined, dined, transported and bedded by a contract operator who became rich without obvious intellectual ability.
Names will undoubtedly be remembered. Reputations are destroyed.
My guess is, there is no prosecution because of the need not to further undermine public confidence in the ability of government to manage their affairs.
It is no small consideration.
Until now, Mayor David Miller has somehow managed to escape blame in the computer leasing scandal. Why was that?
Is the Mayor of Toronto so far removed, he could not have picked up on what was going on? Is there no scuttlebutt in Toronto City Hall?
How could that affair have flourished so long, so openly, so brazenly, before the whistle was blown.?
What about timing of the announcement of the police decision not to prosecute?
It's an election year. David Miller will not be a candidate. Adam Gambrione was. Will Mayoralty candidates pick up on the issue?
Will incumbents be called to account for failure to notice or sound the alarm?
How could that happen?
I can offer one possibility.
Toronto is a massive city.They have, I think, forty five Councillors. The city is divided into wards. Councillors have offices in their wards. In a ward system, they are responsible only for their wards. They will be re-elected or not, in their wards , on the basis of how the ward was served.
Will corruption - at- the- core matter to ward electors? Will ward councillors be held accountable for crimes and misdemeanours at city hall?
Toronto's election will be interesting to watch. The circumstances are a barometer on the merits or otherwise of a ward system.
Yet, considering the size of the city, they have no alternative.
In Aurora, the current population is fifty-three thousand people. It's not even the size of a city ward.
We do have an alternative.
A computer leasing scandal with thousands of tax dollars flowing out of the treasury without measurable return could not happen here. No Treasury official, male or female, could be wined dined, bedded and transported for months without somebody noticing
Trust me .... scuttlebutt would be sufficiently rampant. One person could not claim ignorance let alone nine.
Everybody would be accountable to all of the electors.
I believe it's the operative word in the Oath of Office.
Being elected is not the determinate to taking office. A successful candidate is not a member of council until he or she has sworn the Oath of Office before a Justice of the Peace or a Commissioner of Oaths.
It is a binding contract. Break it if you dare.
Some assume being elected and taking the Oath of Office is a warranty of intelligence and integrity.
It isn't.
Warranty lies in numbers of people taking office. Nine independent minded persons on a council provides a reasonable assumption of responsible conduct.The odds are reduced with a gelatinous majority.
This week the R.C.M.P announced no charges will be laid in Toronto's computer leasing scandal of five years ago.
Whatever the reason, this much is true.
The Bellamy Inquiry cost the taxpayers of Toronto in the area of thirteen million dollars. Every stone was upturned. Disgusting and degrading aspects of human behaviour were uncovered.
Hundreds of thousands of tax dollars were shown to have flowed from the treasury without measurable return.
An elected representative, supposed to be minding the store, wasn't. He was living a life style
without obvious means to support it.
An appointed official was wined, dined, transported and bedded by a contract operator who became rich without obvious intellectual ability.
Names will undoubtedly be remembered. Reputations are destroyed.
My guess is, there is no prosecution because of the need not to further undermine public confidence in the ability of government to manage their affairs.
It is no small consideration.
Until now, Mayor David Miller has somehow managed to escape blame in the computer leasing scandal. Why was that?
Is the Mayor of Toronto so far removed, he could not have picked up on what was going on? Is there no scuttlebutt in Toronto City Hall?
How could that affair have flourished so long, so openly, so brazenly, before the whistle was blown.?
What about timing of the announcement of the police decision not to prosecute?
It's an election year. David Miller will not be a candidate. Adam Gambrione was. Will Mayoralty candidates pick up on the issue?
Will incumbents be called to account for failure to notice or sound the alarm?
How could that happen?
I can offer one possibility.
Toronto is a massive city.They have, I think, forty five Councillors. The city is divided into wards. Councillors have offices in their wards. In a ward system, they are responsible only for their wards. They will be re-elected or not, in their wards , on the basis of how the ward was served.
Will corruption - at- the- core matter to ward electors? Will ward councillors be held accountable for crimes and misdemeanours at city hall?
Toronto's election will be interesting to watch. The circumstances are a barometer on the merits or otherwise of a ward system.
Yet, considering the size of the city, they have no alternative.
In Aurora, the current population is fifty-three thousand people. It's not even the size of a city ward.
We do have an alternative.
A computer leasing scandal with thousands of tax dollars flowing out of the treasury without measurable return could not happen here. No Treasury official, male or female, could be wined dined, bedded and transported for months without somebody noticing
Trust me .... scuttlebutt would be sufficiently rampant. One person could not claim ignorance let alone nine.
Everybody would be accountable to all of the electors.
Tuesday, 16 March 2010
The Nature of Things Political
The Province is in charge. The town is a creature of the Province. Various tasks are assigned to the municipality to be carried out under provincial legislation.
Ontario is responsible for how her cities, towns and villages grow; how they are governed and financed. They are also responsible for education. If they were to provide our children with an understanding of how their community is governed, they might have less trouble implementing laws they adopt and pass on to municipalities to carry out.
In 1971, Regions were created around Metro to plan for orderly growth and development.
Much like Metro was created in 1954.
The private sector builds homes and develops industrial and commercial facilities.
Government supports development by providing hard services; highways,water supply, sewage treatment, hydro and transit.
The Federal government controls population growth through immigration.
Economically, growth is perceived to be a good thing.
When Regions were created, the numbers of municipalities within were reduced . Urban boundaries were expanded into the countryside to allow for orderly planning and contiguous servicing.
It's a deliberate fallacy by some and misunderstanding by others to claim development outstrips services.
People like things to stay the same. Facile politics suggest we can live and work next to a burgeoning city, receive half the country's immigration and resist the pressure to grow.
In the 60's under Premier John Robarts, hundreds of thousands of dollars and several years went into a study to avoid making the mistakes of other world megalopolis and keep Toronto
a city of governable human dimension.
The Metro Toronto and Region Transit Study anticipated Green Belt parkways surrounding Metro to hedge in growth. From Port Hope/Cobourg to Niagara, hard services and transit were to follow lakefront to accommodate necessary expansion.It was completely logical.
York Region's role was to serve as the agriculture, recreational and lungs of the megalopolis.
We welcomed that plan.
It never happened.
Political will was overwhelmed by exigencies.Opposition to government re-organisation was growing fast. Regions around Metro were completed in haste. Regions further out were abandoned. MTARTS lies gathering dust somewhere on a shelf in Queen's Park
In 1971,Aurora's boundaries were extended into King on the west and Whitchurch to the east.
Almost forty years ago, it was decided by the Province, Aurora would grow out to her new boundaries by the year 2020.
Our town has grown slowly and carefully. Slower than our neighbours. We have not outstripped services. Neither have they. It is not within our control to do so.Authority to approve development has been transferred from the Province to the Region. Rigid control is exercised.
Aurora's new residents quickly become accustomed to her face. They assume nothing will change. Why is that?
When land changes hands within an urban boundary,there is every reason to expect the purpose is development.
An Official Plan designation has legal status.
There is no turning back. Millions of dollars, public and private, and years, have been invested to bring the property to that point.
The only questions left are the nature and geophysical aspects of the development proposed.
For urban residential the question is... are there sufficient unit allocations of urban servicing available?
A single unit, represents a single family. However many units have been allocated by the Region dictates however many permits can be issued.
It's horrendously costly to achieve this kind of control. It is a deliberate misrepresentation, totally futile and a complete waste of tax dollars to try to frustrate the process at the lowest level of the totem pole.
Ontario is responsible for how her cities, towns and villages grow; how they are governed and financed. They are also responsible for education. If they were to provide our children with an understanding of how their community is governed, they might have less trouble implementing laws they adopt and pass on to municipalities to carry out.
In 1971, Regions were created around Metro to plan for orderly growth and development.
Much like Metro was created in 1954.
The private sector builds homes and develops industrial and commercial facilities.
Government supports development by providing hard services; highways,water supply, sewage treatment, hydro and transit.
The Federal government controls population growth through immigration.
Economically, growth is perceived to be a good thing.
When Regions were created, the numbers of municipalities within were reduced . Urban boundaries were expanded into the countryside to allow for orderly planning and contiguous servicing.
It's a deliberate fallacy by some and misunderstanding by others to claim development outstrips services.
People like things to stay the same. Facile politics suggest we can live and work next to a burgeoning city, receive half the country's immigration and resist the pressure to grow.
In the 60's under Premier John Robarts, hundreds of thousands of dollars and several years went into a study to avoid making the mistakes of other world megalopolis and keep Toronto
a city of governable human dimension.
The Metro Toronto and Region Transit Study anticipated Green Belt parkways surrounding Metro to hedge in growth. From Port Hope/Cobourg to Niagara, hard services and transit were to follow lakefront to accommodate necessary expansion.It was completely logical.
York Region's role was to serve as the agriculture, recreational and lungs of the megalopolis.
We welcomed that plan.
It never happened.
Political will was overwhelmed by exigencies.Opposition to government re-organisation was growing fast. Regions around Metro were completed in haste. Regions further out were abandoned. MTARTS lies gathering dust somewhere on a shelf in Queen's Park
In 1971,Aurora's boundaries were extended into King on the west and Whitchurch to the east.
Almost forty years ago, it was decided by the Province, Aurora would grow out to her new boundaries by the year 2020.
Our town has grown slowly and carefully. Slower than our neighbours. We have not outstripped services. Neither have they. It is not within our control to do so.Authority to approve development has been transferred from the Province to the Region. Rigid control is exercised.
Aurora's new residents quickly become accustomed to her face. They assume nothing will change. Why is that?
When land changes hands within an urban boundary,there is every reason to expect the purpose is development.
An Official Plan designation has legal status.
There is no turning back. Millions of dollars, public and private, and years, have been invested to bring the property to that point.
The only questions left are the nature and geophysical aspects of the development proposed.
For urban residential the question is... are there sufficient unit allocations of urban servicing available?
A single unit, represents a single family. However many units have been allocated by the Region dictates however many permits can be issued.
It's horrendously costly to achieve this kind of control. It is a deliberate misrepresentation, totally futile and a complete waste of tax dollars to try to frustrate the process at the lowest level of the totem pole.
Monday, 15 March 2010
Reading ,Shredding, and Reading Some More
My dining room table is strewn with papers. I have to sort and file in alphabetical order.
Legal opinions will be the fattest file. They date from the first weeks of the first year of the term.
Three solicitors were asked at different times to advise on the same issue.
Does a confidentiality clause at the end of an e-mail carry weight?
Yes it does.
One opinion sought was whether or not I have the right to state an opinion.
Yes I do.
I received the solicitor/client advice from George Rust D'Eye written in December 2007. It wasn't presented to Council until May 6th 2008. It was circulated at the beginning and scooped up at the end of a meeting. No time to notice small details like a discrepancy in dates.
That was the schemozzle about the "leak" of the closed door decision to refuse to sell land to York Region to establish new headquarters for York Region Police Headquarters in Aurora.
The decision was made in September 2007. Hit the headlines in November. A slow leak I guess.
Thirty-one months later, the decision has yet to be reported out by Council to the public. Had there been no news report, the public would still not know they did that.
Some documents are missing from the mass. Opinions from two separate lawyers on the matter of phone logs being monitored," privacy being invaded", egregious wrongdoing by person known. Turned out not to be wrong at all. Legal fees paid by the town for that witch-hunt are still not known. No documents were ever seen by anyone except the Mayor.
Obviously... they will not be in my files.
There is the former to the former clerk's record of an interview he and the Mayor conducted with candidate Nitkin of Ethicscan for the position of Integrity Commissioner.
Mr.Nitkin's contract is in the pile. Signed eight months after he was retained. The Code of Conduct is there. Material from the single workshop he was allowed to conduct. Unattended by two Councillors and the Mayor.
During the workshop, Mr.Nitkin revealed there had been a meeting with "a committee".
But no committee had been appointed by Council.
His first decision is mine to behold. And share.
After that, there were a flurry of e-mails and nothing more.
There's former CAO John Rogers' first contract of employment. The Town's Procurement Policy. The Memorandum of Settlement . The Town's Recruitment Policy.
There's an up-to-date copy of the Municipal Act, which is something of a bible for municipal councillors. It helps to understand the purpose of regulations and how they have been interpreted and enacted for nigh on fifty years
Closed doors meetings are allowed to protect the municipality's interest.The privacy intended to be protected is not political.It is personal.
There is no such thing as political privacy. All that must be open and transparent.
Aurora's Procedure Bylaw, the longest in Christendom. Bourinot's Rules Order. Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules. Several landmark rulings by eminent judges, over the centuries, on the authority of a councillor or alderman to speak her mind frankly and freely, without fear or favour and to call a spade a spade in the course of her duties.
The exercise has been wearing and I'm not done yet. But it has been entirely necessary and satisfying.
Without resources to stand her ground in the face of adversarial jackanapes, a Councillor could find herself harried.... from pillar to post.
Legal opinions will be the fattest file. They date from the first weeks of the first year of the term.
Three solicitors were asked at different times to advise on the same issue.
Does a confidentiality clause at the end of an e-mail carry weight?
Yes it does.
One opinion sought was whether or not I have the right to state an opinion.
Yes I do.
I received the solicitor/client advice from George Rust D'Eye written in December 2007. It wasn't presented to Council until May 6th 2008. It was circulated at the beginning and scooped up at the end of a meeting. No time to notice small details like a discrepancy in dates.
That was the schemozzle about the "leak" of the closed door decision to refuse to sell land to York Region to establish new headquarters for York Region Police Headquarters in Aurora.
The decision was made in September 2007. Hit the headlines in November. A slow leak I guess.
Thirty-one months later, the decision has yet to be reported out by Council to the public. Had there been no news report, the public would still not know they did that.
Some documents are missing from the mass. Opinions from two separate lawyers on the matter of phone logs being monitored," privacy being invaded", egregious wrongdoing by person known. Turned out not to be wrong at all. Legal fees paid by the town for that witch-hunt are still not known. No documents were ever seen by anyone except the Mayor.
Obviously... they will not be in my files.
There is the former to the former clerk's record of an interview he and the Mayor conducted with candidate Nitkin of Ethicscan for the position of Integrity Commissioner.
Mr.Nitkin's contract is in the pile. Signed eight months after he was retained. The Code of Conduct is there. Material from the single workshop he was allowed to conduct. Unattended by two Councillors and the Mayor.
During the workshop, Mr.Nitkin revealed there had been a meeting with "a committee".
But no committee had been appointed by Council.
His first decision is mine to behold. And share.
After that, there were a flurry of e-mails and nothing more.
There's former CAO John Rogers' first contract of employment. The Town's Procurement Policy. The Memorandum of Settlement . The Town's Recruitment Policy.
There's an up-to-date copy of the Municipal Act, which is something of a bible for municipal councillors. It helps to understand the purpose of regulations and how they have been interpreted and enacted for nigh on fifty years
Closed doors meetings are allowed to protect the municipality's interest.The privacy intended to be protected is not political.It is personal.
There is no such thing as political privacy. All that must be open and transparent.
Aurora's Procedure Bylaw, the longest in Christendom. Bourinot's Rules Order. Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules. Several landmark rulings by eminent judges, over the centuries, on the authority of a councillor or alderman to speak her mind frankly and freely, without fear or favour and to call a spade a spade in the course of her duties.
The exercise has been wearing and I'm not done yet. But it has been entirely necessary and satisfying.
Without resources to stand her ground in the face of adversarial jackanapes, a Councillor could find herself harried.... from pillar to post.
Sunday, 14 March 2010
True Value Hardware
Many people comment that the attraction of Mike Evan's store is it's old-fashioned character.
Whatever odd thing you may be looking for, Mike Evans has it. Furthermore he knows where it is.
He came there in the seventies. Home Hardware was upset. But they moved out to where they could grow and forthwith grew like gang-busters.
The Aurora Banner was in Mike's location in the seventies. They constructed the barn board facade . For old-time ambiance.Like in a western movie.
Many retailers move from downtown to where they can expand because of success downtown. Unhappily, they take their shoppers with them.
Malls were built north and south of us in the sixties and seventies because our growth was frozen. We were not growing a market.
There was an exodus of shoppers with Hillcrest. Then retailers went with the advent of Upper Canada Mall. Yet we didn't have the same experience as downtown Richmond Hill.
Stores there were vacated and stayed empty. Litter gathered in the doorways and blew about in a swirl. Empty windows were screened with yellowing newsprint and coated with grime.
Our stores rented quickly to service providers and were well maintained. .
Newmarket's downtown was pretty run down for a while. Now it's looking prettier than it ever
did. Standing at the top of the hill, looking down, the street scape is a picture postcard. They have the advantage of having a real Main Street and not a Highway to the North Pole running through the middle of their town.
There is a concern though. Merchants are worried about town plans to replace shoppers' parking with a park. Some are closing up shop.
On the other hand, Richmond Hill also has Yonge for their main street.. The same traffic and parking problems as Aurora Yet Richmond Hill's downtown came back to itself. A building like the one we rejected has been constructed on Yonge Street. They also have many high rise apartments at the north end of town.
Mike Evans came out to support the Centre Street application every time.
Indoor malls have their problems as well. . They are lovely and amenable and attract many visitors. But rents are steep to cover all the amenities. Visitors are not necessarily shoppers.
New businesses don't start up in malls. Old shops present the best opportunities for new enterprise.
A town can quickly grow a reputation for being hostile to business.
Taking hundreds of dollars for an application for a sign variance and refusing to accept
staff advice that it's O.K. to grant it, is no way to win friends and influence people.
There are some things the municipality cannot control. We certainly can't advise retailers how to run their business. But we can examine how we run our own and make sure we do nothing to discourage others from joining our enterprise.
Businesses are a municipality's partners in more ways than one.
Merchants generally don't do what Mike Evans does on a regular basis. He shows up at meetings and gives Council a piece of his mind.
If business is not doing well and the odds are against them and they think they're not getting a fair shake from the people who should be conscious of their problems, business generally just ups stakes and moves.
I'm not sure that's what's happening in our downtown.
Mike thinks it is and I'm afraid it might be.
We've missed a lot of chances to make a difference and we have created new problems.
Whatever odd thing you may be looking for, Mike Evans has it. Furthermore he knows where it is.
He came there in the seventies. Home Hardware was upset. But they moved out to where they could grow and forthwith grew like gang-busters.
The Aurora Banner was in Mike's location in the seventies. They constructed the barn board facade . For old-time ambiance.Like in a western movie.
Many retailers move from downtown to where they can expand because of success downtown. Unhappily, they take their shoppers with them.
Malls were built north and south of us in the sixties and seventies because our growth was frozen. We were not growing a market.
There was an exodus of shoppers with Hillcrest. Then retailers went with the advent of Upper Canada Mall. Yet we didn't have the same experience as downtown Richmond Hill.
Stores there were vacated and stayed empty. Litter gathered in the doorways and blew about in a swirl. Empty windows were screened with yellowing newsprint and coated with grime.
Our stores rented quickly to service providers and were well maintained. .
Newmarket's downtown was pretty run down for a while. Now it's looking prettier than it ever
did. Standing at the top of the hill, looking down, the street scape is a picture postcard. They have the advantage of having a real Main Street and not a Highway to the North Pole running through the middle of their town.
There is a concern though. Merchants are worried about town plans to replace shoppers' parking with a park. Some are closing up shop.
On the other hand, Richmond Hill also has Yonge for their main street.. The same traffic and parking problems as Aurora Yet Richmond Hill's downtown came back to itself. A building like the one we rejected has been constructed on Yonge Street. They also have many high rise apartments at the north end of town.
Mike Evans came out to support the Centre Street application every time.
Indoor malls have their problems as well. . They are lovely and amenable and attract many visitors. But rents are steep to cover all the amenities. Visitors are not necessarily shoppers.
New businesses don't start up in malls. Old shops present the best opportunities for new enterprise.
A town can quickly grow a reputation for being hostile to business.
Taking hundreds of dollars for an application for a sign variance and refusing to accept
staff advice that it's O.K. to grant it, is no way to win friends and influence people.
There are some things the municipality cannot control. We certainly can't advise retailers how to run their business. But we can examine how we run our own and make sure we do nothing to discourage others from joining our enterprise.
Businesses are a municipality's partners in more ways than one.
Merchants generally don't do what Mike Evans does on a regular basis. He shows up at meetings and gives Council a piece of his mind.
If business is not doing well and the odds are against them and they think they're not getting a fair shake from the people who should be conscious of their problems, business generally just ups stakes and moves.
I'm not sure that's what's happening in our downtown.
Mike thinks it is and I'm afraid it might be.
We've missed a lot of chances to make a difference and we have created new problems.
Saturday, 13 March 2010
A Council Visit
Michael Evans is a consistent follower of downtown business affairs. He made a presentation to Council last Tuesday about continued exodus of business from the historic core.
Michael operates a Hardware Store. When he came to town, we had one hardware store and a small population. Wilson's Hardware Store had survived the advent of Canadian Tire and morphed into Home Hardware.
Michael's store has survived against the odds. He continues to participate in discussions which impact on his and other business.
In the past six years, we have had no less than three full scale proposals for a particularly blighted site in a terribly visible location immediately north of Wellington and Yonge, our main intersection.
Centre is the town's oldest street. Older than Wellington.Older than the current alignment of Yonge. The plans were for the North Corner, east of Yonge. Most of the site has been vacant and strewn with rubbish for quarter of a century.A relatively modern single storey building on the corner is abandoned and crumbling ...literally.
It seems the property changes hand with each unsuccessful attempt to develop. As land becomes scarcer, value keeps rising.
Repeated public planning meetings have been held. After months of work by the town's planners and the owners architects, the tedium of listening to the same details over and over is mind-deadening. I can't imagine how it feels for town staff to be working diligently on the site plan, knowing it's likely going nowhere.
Neighbouring residents attend meetings faithfully and provide input. The ever increasing blight undoubtedly offends them most. They are anxious to see renewal.
The last plan met with their approval.
All for nought.
It was referred to the Heritage Citizen Advisory Committee. They commented the historic core height bylaw calls for five storeys therefore the building's height should be reduced.
The height was five storeys at Yonge and stepped back and up from the front and side to accommodate extra suites and sufficient parking.
The design can be seen on Yonge Street in Richmond Hill. It was featured in the business section of the Globe and Mail on January 12th,2010.
A person even peripherally involved is aware of the relationship between economic viability and bankruptcy. We have seen developers go bankrupt.I think our policies and procedures contribute to bankruptcy.They certainly contribute to the cost of building. The condo suites in the Richmond Hill building are $400,000. apiece.
As a public business, dependent on the success of private business, private bankruptcies are not to our advantage. Nor are vacant blighted sites on our main street. Ask any town treasurer.
Still we are content to see the downtown become ever more blighted in order for non-elected, non-accountable advisory citizens to dictate that height of a building in 2010 should be made to conform to a streetscape that's a hundred and sixty years old.
We are required to provide tax rebates for empty stores in our downtown , while spending hundreds of thousands on consultants to yammer interminably at workshops attended by the same few, about airy-fairy impractical ideas that place not a stone upon a stone in renewal of the beloved historic core.
Talk about Nero and His Fiddle.
In the face of Michael's discontent, Mayor Morris spiritedly defended council's policies. Hundreds of thousands of dollars more were spent by this council, as opposed to others, on consultants studying the down town and that was evidence of strong commitment to downtown well-being, the Mayor claims.
Michael did not speak of the three unsuccessful applications for apartment development on the blighted site at the corner of Centre and Yonge. Though he attended all the meetings and urged approval.
The Mayor didn't claim the shift of the Farmers Market from downtown to the town park with convenience of a free band shell for entertainment, hydro and washrooms, has continued to bring business into the downtown core, as initially argued.
Just as well.Since that obviously has not happened.
This conversation will not change during the rest of the term.
Michael operates a Hardware Store. When he came to town, we had one hardware store and a small population. Wilson's Hardware Store had survived the advent of Canadian Tire and morphed into Home Hardware.
Michael's store has survived against the odds. He continues to participate in discussions which impact on his and other business.
In the past six years, we have had no less than three full scale proposals for a particularly blighted site in a terribly visible location immediately north of Wellington and Yonge, our main intersection.
Centre is the town's oldest street. Older than Wellington.Older than the current alignment of Yonge. The plans were for the North Corner, east of Yonge. Most of the site has been vacant and strewn with rubbish for quarter of a century.A relatively modern single storey building on the corner is abandoned and crumbling ...literally.
It seems the property changes hand with each unsuccessful attempt to develop. As land becomes scarcer, value keeps rising.
Repeated public planning meetings have been held. After months of work by the town's planners and the owners architects, the tedium of listening to the same details over and over is mind-deadening. I can't imagine how it feels for town staff to be working diligently on the site plan, knowing it's likely going nowhere.
Neighbouring residents attend meetings faithfully and provide input. The ever increasing blight undoubtedly offends them most. They are anxious to see renewal.
The last plan met with their approval.
All for nought.
It was referred to the Heritage Citizen Advisory Committee. They commented the historic core height bylaw calls for five storeys therefore the building's height should be reduced.
The height was five storeys at Yonge and stepped back and up from the front and side to accommodate extra suites and sufficient parking.
The design can be seen on Yonge Street in Richmond Hill. It was featured in the business section of the Globe and Mail on January 12th,2010.
A person even peripherally involved is aware of the relationship between economic viability and bankruptcy. We have seen developers go bankrupt.I think our policies and procedures contribute to bankruptcy.They certainly contribute to the cost of building. The condo suites in the Richmond Hill building are $400,000. apiece.
As a public business, dependent on the success of private business, private bankruptcies are not to our advantage. Nor are vacant blighted sites on our main street. Ask any town treasurer.
Still we are content to see the downtown become ever more blighted in order for non-elected, non-accountable advisory citizens to dictate that height of a building in 2010 should be made to conform to a streetscape that's a hundred and sixty years old.
We are required to provide tax rebates for empty stores in our downtown , while spending hundreds of thousands on consultants to yammer interminably at workshops attended by the same few, about airy-fairy impractical ideas that place not a stone upon a stone in renewal of the beloved historic core.
Talk about Nero and His Fiddle.
In the face of Michael's discontent, Mayor Morris spiritedly defended council's policies. Hundreds of thousands of dollars more were spent by this council, as opposed to others, on consultants studying the down town and that was evidence of strong commitment to downtown well-being, the Mayor claims.
Michael did not speak of the three unsuccessful applications for apartment development on the blighted site at the corner of Centre and Yonge. Though he attended all the meetings and urged approval.
The Mayor didn't claim the shift of the Farmers Market from downtown to the town park with convenience of a free band shell for entertainment, hydro and washrooms, has continued to bring business into the downtown core, as initially argued.
Just as well.Since that obviously has not happened.
This conversation will not change during the rest of the term.
It Is A Puzzlement
I always anticipate the perspective I present in this blog will not be well-received by Mayor Morris, Councillor MacEachern and their loyal followers.
I am convinced, they are convinced, their decisions are without flaw. I also think they are confident of the people's confidence. Why else would they do what they do.....over and over ?
My intrigue lies in their reaction to an opposite and often solitary view.
A definite disconnect exists between us about the meaning of politics
For me, it's about glorying in the freedom to take a position and proclaim it, whenever and wherever the opportunity arises. And about stimulating interest in public affairs with an alternate perspective.
From their reaction, it 's evident the Mormac regime does not appreciate my modest efforts to "follow my bliss". That's a quote from the late Joseph Campbell, a modern philosopher and a renowned author on world religions.
It's a given, if I write something unfavourable, a reaction will follow. But not open and direct and never in the form of reasoned argument.
A small child could advise them, being nice to me, would make it difficult for me to do what I do best.
I chose to be nice at the beginning of the term. I gave it the good old college try. Over the years I acquired some skills in that direction. I even tried humour to lighten the atmosphere.
After eight months I realised those particular talents were inadequate to the task. I surrendered to my less jovial but I confess more natural characteristics. Everybody has them. Some are just more easily disciplined than others.
So, it's a given, the terrible twins leave no stone unturned to curtail my efforts.
They do have power. They take as much pleasure in that as I do in freedom.
I leave it to readers to imagine how the power might be used or abused.
While certain of limits to my freedom, they are equally sure there's no limit to their power.
They keep on trying.
It's yet another level of dis-connect.
I am convinced, they are convinced, their decisions are without flaw. I also think they are confident of the people's confidence. Why else would they do what they do.....over and over ?
My intrigue lies in their reaction to an opposite and often solitary view.
A definite disconnect exists between us about the meaning of politics
For me, it's about glorying in the freedom to take a position and proclaim it, whenever and wherever the opportunity arises. And about stimulating interest in public affairs with an alternate perspective.
From their reaction, it 's evident the Mormac regime does not appreciate my modest efforts to "follow my bliss". That's a quote from the late Joseph Campbell, a modern philosopher and a renowned author on world religions.
It's a given, if I write something unfavourable, a reaction will follow. But not open and direct and never in the form of reasoned argument.
A small child could advise them, being nice to me, would make it difficult for me to do what I do best.
I chose to be nice at the beginning of the term. I gave it the good old college try. Over the years I acquired some skills in that direction. I even tried humour to lighten the atmosphere.
After eight months I realised those particular talents were inadequate to the task. I surrendered to my less jovial but I confess more natural characteristics. Everybody has them. Some are just more easily disciplined than others.
So, it's a given, the terrible twins leave no stone unturned to curtail my efforts.
They do have power. They take as much pleasure in that as I do in freedom.
I leave it to readers to imagine how the power might be used or abused.
While certain of limits to my freedom, they are equally sure there's no limit to their power.
They keep on trying.
It's yet another level of dis-connect.
Friday, 12 March 2010
Reading Week
I have this huge stack of pink paper. Actually, more than one. It's all confidential stuff. I need to sort out what to keep and what to shred. It means I have to read it...all of it.
It's a huge undertaking. But now I have a filing cabinet. I can maintain a system. Eh!
The last document I read was a memorandum from Shelley Pohjola, former town solicitor. It was directed to Councillor MacEachern. There were many pages, Case law from several aspects of the question was cited. It was an impressive body of work. Undoubtedly involved hours of staff time to research and write.
It had a covering memo from Lucille King, our former town clerk .in response to a directive from Councillor Mac Eachern to add e-mails of mine to a Council Agenda.
It is the Clerk's job to compile the agenda with matters of town business requiring Council's attention within the hours publicly proclaimed for dealing with town business.
The Mayor and Councillor MacEachern had been in the habit of directing staff to add e-mails of mine to the public agenda. Bob Panizza, former to former town clerk ,would happily oblige. He was marking off the days to his retirement,
The objective was never clear. I don't regret stuff that I write.The e-mails would be placed at the end of the agenda. Meetings seldom ended by the hour of adjournment I had not given permission for my comments to be a subject of discussion. I would leave before that happened.
The women would sneer and jeer that I didn't have the courage to stay.
When Lucille King joined the administration, I drew her attention to the confidentiality clause at the end of my e-mails. I pointed out, publication was prohibited without my consent. I do not give consent.
Ms King informed the Councillor her direction to include an e-mail of mine on the agenda would not be accommodated. She attached Ms Pohjola's memorandum.
Shelley's memorandum was on file. Councillor Mac Eachern knew that. It was directed to her, no doubt in response to a demand the advice be provided in writing. It was fulsome Obviously many hours of staff time were devoted to the task; without direction from council by way of resolution.
The Town's Procedure Bylaw and Code of Conduct state succinctly; no councillor shall give direction to town staff
It is an abuse of authority.
It's a huge undertaking. But now I have a filing cabinet. I can maintain a system. Eh!
The last document I read was a memorandum from Shelley Pohjola, former town solicitor. It was directed to Councillor MacEachern. There were many pages, Case law from several aspects of the question was cited. It was an impressive body of work. Undoubtedly involved hours of staff time to research and write.
It had a covering memo from Lucille King, our former town clerk .in response to a directive from Councillor Mac Eachern to add e-mails of mine to a Council Agenda.
It is the Clerk's job to compile the agenda with matters of town business requiring Council's attention within the hours publicly proclaimed for dealing with town business.
The Mayor and Councillor MacEachern had been in the habit of directing staff to add e-mails of mine to the public agenda. Bob Panizza, former to former town clerk ,would happily oblige. He was marking off the days to his retirement,
The objective was never clear. I don't regret stuff that I write.The e-mails would be placed at the end of the agenda. Meetings seldom ended by the hour of adjournment I had not given permission for my comments to be a subject of discussion. I would leave before that happened.
The women would sneer and jeer that I didn't have the courage to stay.
When Lucille King joined the administration, I drew her attention to the confidentiality clause at the end of my e-mails. I pointed out, publication was prohibited without my consent. I do not give consent.
Ms King informed the Councillor her direction to include an e-mail of mine on the agenda would not be accommodated. She attached Ms Pohjola's memorandum.
Shelley's memorandum was on file. Councillor Mac Eachern knew that. It was directed to her, no doubt in response to a demand the advice be provided in writing. It was fulsome Obviously many hours of staff time were devoted to the task; without direction from council by way of resolution.
The Town's Procedure Bylaw and Code of Conduct state succinctly; no councillor shall give direction to town staff
It is an abuse of authority.
Thursday, 11 March 2010
Another Reader Asks
Where else can a non-elected person communicate with solicitors retained by the town?
Well nowhere that I know. In fact, I have never known of council members being free to communicate with solicitors outside of conferences with council and receiving written reports.
I did a survey of York municipalities to determine which Mayors retain solicitors for any purpose, let alone settling political scores.
The answer is...none.
Second question.... What are staff doing?
The best they can .... under extremely difficult circumstances.
The Mayor has complete control over five members of council. That's a majority. That's what's needed to allow this stuff to happen. Sue Walmer helped get them all elected. They can't be allowed to forget that.
They were never allowed to discover the principle of their collective authority. They don't even understand when it's being disrespected.
On Tuesday evening, Council went behind closed doors for a performance review of John Leach.
a completely professional municipal clerk of twenty-five years experience. He has been with the town less than three months.
Purpose of the closed session was stated on the agenda .
An employment probation period in Aurora is six months. I have never heard of a performance review after less than three.
I did not attend. I understand it was what I thought it was.
Mr. Leach is the second clerk to join us since Bob Panizza retired in November 2008. We didn't have one for four months.
Lucille King who had signed a five year contract, submitted three week's notice the day she provided me, as she had to, with the decision of the Integrity Commissioner on the much publicised complaint against me by six members of council.
The Integrity Commissioner was fired within days but not before his decision was made public.
The Solicitor, with all of eight months town service and no experience as clerk, was acting clerk for the time between, while managing his own job as well.
You really have to have a sense of the pivotal role of the clerk in the town's business to understand how utterly ludicrous that was.
Like I said, staff do the best they can under the exigencies of the situation.
Well nowhere that I know. In fact, I have never known of council members being free to communicate with solicitors outside of conferences with council and receiving written reports.
I did a survey of York municipalities to determine which Mayors retain solicitors for any purpose, let alone settling political scores.
The answer is...none.
Second question.... What are staff doing?
The best they can .... under extremely difficult circumstances.
The Mayor has complete control over five members of council. That's a majority. That's what's needed to allow this stuff to happen. Sue Walmer helped get them all elected. They can't be allowed to forget that.
They were never allowed to discover the principle of their collective authority. They don't even understand when it's being disrespected.
On Tuesday evening, Council went behind closed doors for a performance review of John Leach.
a completely professional municipal clerk of twenty-five years experience. He has been with the town less than three months.
Purpose of the closed session was stated on the agenda .
An employment probation period in Aurora is six months. I have never heard of a performance review after less than three.
I did not attend. I understand it was what I thought it was.
Mr. Leach is the second clerk to join us since Bob Panizza retired in November 2008. We didn't have one for four months.
Lucille King who had signed a five year contract, submitted three week's notice the day she provided me, as she had to, with the decision of the Integrity Commissioner on the much publicised complaint against me by six members of council.
The Integrity Commissioner was fired within days but not before his decision was made public.
The Solicitor, with all of eight months town service and no experience as clerk, was acting clerk for the time between, while managing his own job as well.
You really have to have a sense of the pivotal role of the clerk in the town's business to understand how utterly ludicrous that was.
Like I said, staff do the best they can under the exigencies of the situation.
A Reader Asks
Would Council do the same to the Public School Board?
Well Bless your heart, Yes. York's public school board has certainly come in for its share of criticism and harrassment. When re-location of Dr. Williams High School was contemplated, arguments against were the opposite of arguments against the location of the Catholic High School on Wellington Street.
Susan Walmer's organisation skills immediately reared into orbit. An instant rally was planned. Space at the Town Hall was requested . Ms Walmer lost patience entirely with Chief Administrative officer John Rogers and castigated him by e-mail for tardiness in providing a date for Chamber availability.
Ms Walmer is very confident of her authoritative role in the town's affairs. E-mailing external solicitors at taxpayers cost is also apparently within her purview.
The main argument about the benefits of Williams staying in its current location was the importance of the student and teacher population to the neighbourhood economy. Councillor Gaertner was chief spokesperson for that argument. As she was for the argument against locating the Catholic school on Wellington Street because it was not an economic advantage.
The councillor's inability to understand relatively familiar and simple matters is frequently stated by herself. But she is a favourite spokesperson for the Mayor. The Councillor is always willing to enlist in the on-going cause of righteousness when there's an enemy to be vanquished.
If one contemplates the number of times that's happened in the last three and a half years, one might conclude, no other public or private agency or individual is competent to manage affairs better than the Mormac regime can manage them for them.
Ontario Hydro , CNN , Ontario Municipal Board, Ministry of Environment, Divisional Court, Separate School Board, Public School Board, Canadian Tire, York Transit, Aurora Library Board, Aurora Cable T.V. Town Administration,The Auroran. Not to mention highly paid consultants and a succession of lawyers who have come and gone.
The list of lesser lights who fade in the glow of Mormac brilliance continues apace.
I have heard on the grape vine ,the Town's new Integrity Commissioner has slipped into the town hall after hours for a private conference with our Chief Magistrate.
Well Bless your heart, Yes. York's public school board has certainly come in for its share of criticism and harrassment. When re-location of Dr. Williams High School was contemplated, arguments against were the opposite of arguments against the location of the Catholic High School on Wellington Street.
Susan Walmer's organisation skills immediately reared into orbit. An instant rally was planned. Space at the Town Hall was requested . Ms Walmer lost patience entirely with Chief Administrative officer John Rogers and castigated him by e-mail for tardiness in providing a date for Chamber availability.
Ms Walmer is very confident of her authoritative role in the town's affairs. E-mailing external solicitors at taxpayers cost is also apparently within her purview.
The main argument about the benefits of Williams staying in its current location was the importance of the student and teacher population to the neighbourhood economy. Councillor Gaertner was chief spokesperson for that argument. As she was for the argument against locating the Catholic school on Wellington Street because it was not an economic advantage.
The councillor's inability to understand relatively familiar and simple matters is frequently stated by herself. But she is a favourite spokesperson for the Mayor. The Councillor is always willing to enlist in the on-going cause of righteousness when there's an enemy to be vanquished.
If one contemplates the number of times that's happened in the last three and a half years, one might conclude, no other public or private agency or individual is competent to manage affairs better than the Mormac regime can manage them for them.
Ontario Hydro , CNN , Ontario Municipal Board, Ministry of Environment, Divisional Court, Separate School Board, Public School Board, Canadian Tire, York Transit, Aurora Library Board, Aurora Cable T.V. Town Administration,The Auroran. Not to mention highly paid consultants and a succession of lawyers who have come and gone.
The list of lesser lights who fade in the glow of Mormac brilliance continues apace.
I have heard on the grape vine ,the Town's new Integrity Commissioner has slipped into the town hall after hours for a private conference with our Chief Magistrate.
Wednesday, 10 March 2010
Closed Door Session Number ????????
We were behind closed doors again last night. To receive advice on "litigation" with the nefarious rascals who are the York Catholic District School Board.
The Board assembled land in a run-down area of Wellington Street and built a beautiful new high school.
Not without a fight with the Mormac regime.
When it came to site plan approval stage, Mormac decided it wasn't going to happen.
"Schools don't pay taxes. It would be too great a burden on the taxpayers. Where will the students come from? How do we know there are enough students to justify the need? There wouldn't be any jobs to speak of and they would be using employment lands".
It took parent deputations from every separate elementary school in Aurora and Father Don Maclean to argue there was indeed a need.
Councillor Wilson indicated he saw the need and the number of teachers would represent "employment" The vote shifted.
If it hadn't, a public agency with the mandate to provide services to families in the community would have had to file an appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board against another public agency with a mandate to provide services to the same families .
Work on the site would have ground to a halt. Finances and plans would have been tied up for years. The decision would have been taken out of the hands of the municipality. Lawyers would have had to be hired by both parties, hundreds of thousands of dollars would have been spent on legal fees All of it coming out of the same taxpayers' pockets.
None of it spent to build a stone upon a stone.
It would have been a bloody disgrace.
It was avoided.
The site plan was approved.The permit application was filed.
But all was not well. The Town informed the Board of the Cash In Lieu of Park fee of $413,553.95
Again the trustee approached Council and asked to be exempted from the fee.
The Board has a record of co-operation in sharing their facilities with the town. Land was offered instead of fees. The land was contiguous with town owned lands.
It was no go. The town wanted cash .
Mark you.... in 2008 the Cash in Lieu of Parks Reserve was flush with eleven million dollars. In 2009, it grew to twelve million smackeroos.
Throughout the term, this council has rejected staff advice on the need to purchase land for parks.
A consultant study that cost $53,222 , recommended land be acquired for recreation purposes
was tossed out and re-written in favour of a " land acquisition strategy"
Still we hold out for the pound of flesh from the York Catholic District School Board for cash to buy land which we are on record as having no intention of buying.
What is that?
No Cash In Lieu was paid by the Province when they took up employment lands to build free parking for commuters.
Additional employment lands have been declared surplus by the Town and sold to the Province for still more parking for commuters. No cash in Lieu of Parks will be collected.
No jobs whatsoever provided.
School boards are exempted from paying development charges.
Cash in Lieu for parks is an alternative to Development Charges.
Other York municipalities exempt school boards from Cash in Lieu of Parks fees .
The Board assembled land in a run-down area of Wellington Street and built a beautiful new high school.
Not without a fight with the Mormac regime.
When it came to site plan approval stage, Mormac decided it wasn't going to happen.
"Schools don't pay taxes. It would be too great a burden on the taxpayers. Where will the students come from? How do we know there are enough students to justify the need? There wouldn't be any jobs to speak of and they would be using employment lands".
It took parent deputations from every separate elementary school in Aurora and Father Don Maclean to argue there was indeed a need.
Councillor Wilson indicated he saw the need and the number of teachers would represent "employment" The vote shifted.
If it hadn't, a public agency with the mandate to provide services to families in the community would have had to file an appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board against another public agency with a mandate to provide services to the same families .
Work on the site would have ground to a halt. Finances and plans would have been tied up for years. The decision would have been taken out of the hands of the municipality. Lawyers would have had to be hired by both parties, hundreds of thousands of dollars would have been spent on legal fees All of it coming out of the same taxpayers' pockets.
None of it spent to build a stone upon a stone.
It would have been a bloody disgrace.
It was avoided.
The site plan was approved.The permit application was filed.
But all was not well. The Town informed the Board of the Cash In Lieu of Park fee of $413,553.95
Again the trustee approached Council and asked to be exempted from the fee.
The Board has a record of co-operation in sharing their facilities with the town. Land was offered instead of fees. The land was contiguous with town owned lands.
It was no go. The town wanted cash .
Mark you.... in 2008 the Cash in Lieu of Parks Reserve was flush with eleven million dollars. In 2009, it grew to twelve million smackeroos.
Throughout the term, this council has rejected staff advice on the need to purchase land for parks.
A consultant study that cost $53,222 , recommended land be acquired for recreation purposes
was tossed out and re-written in favour of a " land acquisition strategy"
Still we hold out for the pound of flesh from the York Catholic District School Board for cash to buy land which we are on record as having no intention of buying.
What is that?
No Cash In Lieu was paid by the Province when they took up employment lands to build free parking for commuters.
Additional employment lands have been declared surplus by the Town and sold to the Province for still more parking for commuters. No cash in Lieu of Parks will be collected.
No jobs whatsoever provided.
School boards are exempted from paying development charges.
Cash in Lieu for parks is an alternative to Development Charges.
Other York municipalities exempt school boards from Cash in Lieu of Parks fees .
Tuesday, 9 March 2010
March 2, 2010
The night we made the fifth decision to spend more money on a futile attempt to change the law. Almost two years exactly since the first decision was made to embark on this extravagant folly.
A special Council Meeting was scheduled last Tuesday. Councillor Granger was in the chair for the CinC.
We rose to recess into closed session. Where we listened as always, mostly to the Mayor. We emerged into public session to listen to Sue Walmer, the Mayor's friend and campaign manager. We received five e-mails for the record . Went back into closed session to consider them and the comments of the delegate . Only we didn't. Then emerged once more..
We adopted a resolution giving the solicitor direction to argue against paying any part of Westhill's legal costs. A second resolution was passed which couldn't be stated . It was confidential, don't you know.
Then the Mayor, from the Chair, called for a recorded vote on the confirming bylaw.
Susan Walmer coming to Council was like old times.
When Ms Morris needed assistance for Council to be beaten into line, Ms Walmer came forward with followers.
Once again Ms Walmer was on hand to severely admonish Council to keep the fight going for a Joint Board Hearing against the Westhill Development. Though Councillor MacEachern has denied it in the past, her comments left no doubt the object was to stop the development.
The rallying call had gone out. Five e-mails were received. Three, from neighbours who had already decided further effort was futile and not worth spending more of their money
Three or four people accompanied Ms Walmer to the meeting. They had nothing to say.
Roger Clowater. candidate for Mayor, who supports the Mayor, was there.
The Mayor's husband and best friend were in attendance. When the Mayor feels it will be a high point ,they are there to witness her triumph.
Councillor Bob McRoberts had the floor to speak against continuing the legal action. He referred to legal costs as part of his logic.
On a point of order,Councillor MacEachern interrupted to state his comments were "misleading and inappropriate" Twice. The Mayor supported the points of order and added her argument,
Councillor McRoberts had spoken directly to the issue.
According to the rules; "When a member has the floor, he shall be allowed to speak without interruption"
Councillor MacEachern and the Mayor were resolved the cost of the fifth attempt to obtain a Joint Board Hearing would not be public.
They were both out of order both times.
The problem is...with four sycophants on the council ...who don't know an ankle from a hole in the ground when it comes to order, any attempt to obtain order is destined to failure. Like batting in a room full of cotton batting.
It had proved difficult to obtain figures from Mr. Beaman during the closed door session.. The Mayor intervenes continually during his answers.
Councillor McRoberts however stayed focused, made notes and became quite clear in his understanding .
It wasn't a good night for Ms. Walmer either. In the past, her organising skills have been quite exceptional. The poor response to her rallying cry for e-mails in support and attendance at the meeting was explained by a " lack of time".
Pity! the Mayor had a speech ready. It turned out to be a bit of a fizzle.
However, Councillor Granger created his own drama in the Town Hall Lobby after the meeting. It must have been a sight.
The Councillor, is a large man in many but not every way. The new and very competent reporter for the Auroran is not at all dense or immense
Seems Granger provided a perfect illustration of his true personality . Mr. Morris joined in the fray with verbal abuse for The Auroran, for "bringing down" the Council.
The Mayor rushed out from the Council Chamber and wrapped an arm around the reporter.to protect him from the bad guys.
I'm so glad I missed that.
A special Council Meeting was scheduled last Tuesday. Councillor Granger was in the chair for the CinC.
We rose to recess into closed session. Where we listened as always, mostly to the Mayor. We emerged into public session to listen to Sue Walmer, the Mayor's friend and campaign manager. We received five e-mails for the record . Went back into closed session to consider them and the comments of the delegate . Only we didn't. Then emerged once more..
We adopted a resolution giving the solicitor direction to argue against paying any part of Westhill's legal costs. A second resolution was passed which couldn't be stated . It was confidential, don't you know.
Then the Mayor, from the Chair, called for a recorded vote on the confirming bylaw.
Susan Walmer coming to Council was like old times.
When Ms Morris needed assistance for Council to be beaten into line, Ms Walmer came forward with followers.
Once again Ms Walmer was on hand to severely admonish Council to keep the fight going for a Joint Board Hearing against the Westhill Development. Though Councillor MacEachern has denied it in the past, her comments left no doubt the object was to stop the development.
The rallying call had gone out. Five e-mails were received. Three, from neighbours who had already decided further effort was futile and not worth spending more of their money
Three or four people accompanied Ms Walmer to the meeting. They had nothing to say.
Roger Clowater. candidate for Mayor, who supports the Mayor, was there.
The Mayor's husband and best friend were in attendance. When the Mayor feels it will be a high point ,they are there to witness her triumph.
Councillor Bob McRoberts had the floor to speak against continuing the legal action. He referred to legal costs as part of his logic.
On a point of order,Councillor MacEachern interrupted to state his comments were "misleading and inappropriate" Twice. The Mayor supported the points of order and added her argument,
Councillor McRoberts had spoken directly to the issue.
According to the rules; "When a member has the floor, he shall be allowed to speak without interruption"
Councillor MacEachern and the Mayor were resolved the cost of the fifth attempt to obtain a Joint Board Hearing would not be public.
They were both out of order both times.
The problem is...with four sycophants on the council ...who don't know an ankle from a hole in the ground when it comes to order, any attempt to obtain order is destined to failure. Like batting in a room full of cotton batting.
It had proved difficult to obtain figures from Mr. Beaman during the closed door session.. The Mayor intervenes continually during his answers.
Councillor McRoberts however stayed focused, made notes and became quite clear in his understanding .
It wasn't a good night for Ms. Walmer either. In the past, her organising skills have been quite exceptional. The poor response to her rallying cry for e-mails in support and attendance at the meeting was explained by a " lack of time".
Pity! the Mayor had a speech ready. It turned out to be a bit of a fizzle.
However, Councillor Granger created his own drama in the Town Hall Lobby after the meeting. It must have been a sight.
The Councillor, is a large man in many but not every way. The new and very competent reporter for the Auroran is not at all dense or immense
Seems Granger provided a perfect illustration of his true personality . Mr. Morris joined in the fray with verbal abuse for The Auroran, for "bringing down" the Council.
The Mayor rushed out from the Council Chamber and wrapped an arm around the reporter.to protect him from the bad guys.
I'm so glad I missed that.
Monday, 8 March 2010
A Couple of Days Away
Ottawa Friday for my nephew Neil's funeral. We stayed with the family for a visit. Made the acquaintance of two fine young great-nephews who grew up when I wasn't looking I was able to tell them a few things they would never have known about great-great-great grandparents who came to Scotland from Ireland in the mid-nineteenth century. I felt good about that.
After, we went to Cobden, White Water Rafting country , home of Neil's brother, Patrick and wife Patti, parents of Derek and Shane, great-nephews mentioned above.
My son Martin and wife Marnie and daughter Theresa and I had a fine evening re-cementing family connections. Renewing a commitment to life.
We had breakfast together and drove home on Saturday through Algonquin Park on a glorious day throughout.
A little puddle on my driveway was frozen at six in the evening ,which meant we had enjoyed two extremely pleasant Spring days four or five hundred miles north. They were not quite as nice here
We saw a lot of beautiful country, many small places, all with an air of well-being about them.
After, we went to Cobden, White Water Rafting country , home of Neil's brother, Patrick and wife Patti, parents of Derek and Shane, great-nephews mentioned above.
My son Martin and wife Marnie and daughter Theresa and I had a fine evening re-cementing family connections. Renewing a commitment to life.
We had breakfast together and drove home on Saturday through Algonquin Park on a glorious day throughout.
A little puddle on my driveway was frozen at six in the evening ,which meant we had enjoyed two extremely pleasant Spring days four or five hundred miles north. They were not quite as nice here
We saw a lot of beautiful country, many small places, all with an air of well-being about them.
One Last Try
I spent three hours this morning on a post. It was in response to Chris Watts attempt to understand my position.
He has not heard me state opposition to the Westhill Development application so he has assumed that means I support the development proposal.
Three hours is about average for an initial draft. I throw everything in as it comes to mind.
My task then is to reduce, refine and render it intelligible.
I often devote five contiguous hours to the task. Today my son Stephen called to say he was bringing his father for us to have lunch together.
Intending to save what I had written I clicked. Instead I published the post. It wasn't ready. I deleted it as soon as I realised my mistake. Three hours of work wiped out. Sorry Chris, I'm not doing it again.
The problem is, my experience goes back too far. How does one condense almost fifty years of knowledge into a manageable bite. .
It ain't easy.
But let me say this again. The Westhill Development site plan application will not be decided by the town.
The Ontario Municipal Board is seized with the issue.
I am in favour of consistent, orderly management of the town's affairs within the law.
I am in favour of using our resources to marshall the best argument, supported with the best evidence, to ensure the OMB decision reflects the best that can be made in the interest of the town.
I do not support spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in repeated and futile attempts to re-write the law so that I can project myself as a phony-baloney champion of baffle- gab.
That is easy. Look who is doing it.
He has not heard me state opposition to the Westhill Development application so he has assumed that means I support the development proposal.
Three hours is about average for an initial draft. I throw everything in as it comes to mind.
My task then is to reduce, refine and render it intelligible.
I often devote five contiguous hours to the task. Today my son Stephen called to say he was bringing his father for us to have lunch together.
Intending to save what I had written I clicked. Instead I published the post. It wasn't ready. I deleted it as soon as I realised my mistake. Three hours of work wiped out. Sorry Chris, I'm not doing it again.
The problem is, my experience goes back too far. How does one condense almost fifty years of knowledge into a manageable bite. .
It ain't easy.
But let me say this again. The Westhill Development site plan application will not be decided by the town.
The Ontario Municipal Board is seized with the issue.
I am in favour of consistent, orderly management of the town's affairs within the law.
I am in favour of using our resources to marshall the best argument, supported with the best evidence, to ensure the OMB decision reflects the best that can be made in the interest of the town.
I do not support spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in repeated and futile attempts to re-write the law so that I can project myself as a phony-baloney champion of baffle- gab.
That is easy. Look who is doing it.
Thursday, 4 March 2010
Another Answer Needed
The Westhill Development application includes a golf course and 75 condominiums. The original designation for the land was estate residential .
The definition lies in the word estate. They are lots with an average of 2.5 acres. They have their own wells and septic tanks.
The current proposal creates a group of seventy five residential units served by a single well and a common sewage treatment facility. Effluent from the system would be sprayed on the golf course.
The region and the town have an interest the impact of those systems . How reliable would they be? If they failed would the municipality have an obligation to leap frog town services out to serve the condo owners. They would be tax-payers. Who else should they turn to?
Spraying the effluent on the land is not a new idea. We had a tertiary treatment system in Aurora for fifty years. We released the effluent into tannery creek. So that's not new either.
But the town needed to be certain before it could agree to the proposal. Many other agencies had already signed off on the proposal. It does not relieve us of the responsibility to be sure it will not create serious problems for the municipality down the road.
I will not be playing golf on that course. I will not be in the market for a condominium in the range of $750ks .
However, if Westhill is able to satisfy the OMB and the town's interests are protected that represents a tidy chunk of change coming into town coffers.
I think any Aurora homeowner who finds property taxes a burden, should not be averse to whatever means presents of lessening the load.
A golf course and seventy-five luxury condominiums out there on Leslie Street will not offend me.
Pshaw! How delicate do we need to be?
The definition lies in the word estate. They are lots with an average of 2.5 acres. They have their own wells and septic tanks.
The current proposal creates a group of seventy five residential units served by a single well and a common sewage treatment facility. Effluent from the system would be sprayed on the golf course.
The region and the town have an interest the impact of those systems . How reliable would they be? If they failed would the municipality have an obligation to leap frog town services out to serve the condo owners. They would be tax-payers. Who else should they turn to?
Spraying the effluent on the land is not a new idea. We had a tertiary treatment system in Aurora for fifty years. We released the effluent into tannery creek. So that's not new either.
But the town needed to be certain before it could agree to the proposal. Many other agencies had already signed off on the proposal. It does not relieve us of the responsibility to be sure it will not create serious problems for the municipality down the road.
I will not be playing golf on that course. I will not be in the market for a condominium in the range of $750ks .
However, if Westhill is able to satisfy the OMB and the town's interests are protected that represents a tidy chunk of change coming into town coffers.
I think any Aurora homeowner who finds property taxes a burden, should not be averse to whatever means presents of lessening the load.
A golf course and seventy-five luxury condominiums out there on Leslie Street will not offend me.
Pshaw! How delicate do we need to be?
Regrets
Two comments received are severely critical of the Mayor. I agree with the sentiments completely
but discretion dictates against posting them .
Nothing hinders me from relaying accurate accounts of what takes place in the public's business behind the scenes. Except those areas where public and private interest must be protected.
But as a councillor a level of respect and decorum is expected. If I post the comments, I become responsible for them.
I appreciate the sentiments and the support. Keep them coming
but discretion dictates against posting them .
Nothing hinders me from relaying accurate accounts of what takes place in the public's business behind the scenes. Except those areas where public and private interest must be protected.
But as a councillor a level of respect and decorum is expected. If I post the comments, I become responsible for them.
I appreciate the sentiments and the support. Keep them coming
Some of it Always Sticks
when you throw mud. Chris Watts states I am pushing for the Westhill Development proposal.
I am against an Ontario Municipal Board Hearing.
That's a serious accusation against a municipal politician. There are always people willing to believe the worst and others to encourage. It's not hard to destroy a reputation.
Whatever defence one might offer inevitably sounds like an excuse.
I can't believe Chris understands the seriousness of his accusation.
I can only point to the post he linked and challenge him to highlight the words that show my opposition to an Ontario Municipal Board Hearing and wholehearted support for Westhill's application.
The purpose of the Ontario Municipal Board can always bear repeating..
The OMB is set up for the benefit of property owners. Anyone who owns a house should appreciate the protection it offers.
I once heard an OMB chairman explain to an opponent;"property owners have rights. People can do whatever they like with their property so long as it doesn't interfere with a neighbour's right to enjoy theirs"
An appeal being heard was against a subdivision proposed to be built on land close to a standing tower water reservoir on Yonge Street in Newmarket.
The chairman added ; "I wouldn't buy a house under a water reservoir but people will make that choice. They have rights too."
The Ontario Municipal Board is about property rights. Everybody's property.
Westhill Development owns the land . The land has development status. The owner has rights. One right is for a decision to be made by the municipality on a proposal within a limited period.
It has been difficult to pin down when this specific site application was made. It appears to have been in the nineties. The time limit placed by the Province on a municipality to make a decision is a matter of months.
When an appeal is made to the OMB, the decision is taken out of the hands of the municipality . We become a party to the hearing. The only influence we have is to successfully persuade the OMB of the seriousness of our concerns and the Board's decision will address them.
Neighbours have rights. They become a party to the hearing. They also have the burden of proving their concerns and they will be addressed in the decision.
The developer is party to the hearing. They have the burden of proving the proposal will not adversely affect the neighbours enjoyment of their property. If the issue is water. Water will be the focus of the hearing.
Neighbours requested the OMB for a Joint Board Hearing, It means the hearing panel will include an environmental expert
The OMB refused. The refusal was appealed to the Divisional Court. Evidence was presented that the OMB did not have the jurisdiction to order a Joint Board Hearing.
The Divisional Court referred back to the OMB to rule on the jurisdictional matter.
The Board did and again refused the Joint Board Hearing.
That was three unsuccessful attempts to win a Joint Board Hearing.
The neighbours decided to spend no more money on pursuit of a Joint Board.
The Town sent legal counsel in support to each of the proceedings. It cost us $135ks public dollars to defend private interest.
Had we not spent that money, the decision would have been the same.
The Town then picked up the ball and appealed the second refusal by the OMB.
The appeal lost. The decision remained the same. Cost went up to $200ks.
The town has now decided to ask for leave to appeal the decision of the Divisional Court to a
Superior Court.
The council vote was six in favour three against. More public money is to be spent.
Still the Ontario Municipal Board Hearing lies ahead.
The Hearing will likely take two weeks. Legal Counsel and a team of experts will present our arguments. Costs are estimated at $200ks for a two week hearing.
If a Joint Board is obtained the hearing will last six weeks. Cost will triple.
It just occurred to me . Estimates cited are legal costs. It's not clear expert witness fees are included.
Councillor Collins Mrakas tells me they can be as high as $15ks.a piece How many are needed I do not know.
At the Public Planning Meeting, in March 2008 , Westhill had a phalanx of experts. We would likely have to match their arguments one for one.
The town's interest lies in ensuring the development will not create negative impact on the environment insofar as our jurisdiction applies.
My support is for the town to undertake her due diligence and pay whatever it costs to protect the public interest.
I can defend that.
I cannot defend spending a quarter of a million dollars of hard-earned tax dollars to protect private interest and duplicating costs already bourne by the private interest with absolutely nothing gained.
Zero, Zilch, Nil and Nada! Amen my friend, Chris.
What do you have to say to that!
I am against an Ontario Municipal Board Hearing.
That's a serious accusation against a municipal politician. There are always people willing to believe the worst and others to encourage. It's not hard to destroy a reputation.
Whatever defence one might offer inevitably sounds like an excuse.
I can't believe Chris understands the seriousness of his accusation.
I can only point to the post he linked and challenge him to highlight the words that show my opposition to an Ontario Municipal Board Hearing and wholehearted support for Westhill's application.
The purpose of the Ontario Municipal Board can always bear repeating..
The OMB is set up for the benefit of property owners. Anyone who owns a house should appreciate the protection it offers.
I once heard an OMB chairman explain to an opponent;"property owners have rights. People can do whatever they like with their property so long as it doesn't interfere with a neighbour's right to enjoy theirs"
An appeal being heard was against a subdivision proposed to be built on land close to a standing tower water reservoir on Yonge Street in Newmarket.
The chairman added ; "I wouldn't buy a house under a water reservoir but people will make that choice. They have rights too."
The Ontario Municipal Board is about property rights. Everybody's property.
Westhill Development owns the land . The land has development status. The owner has rights. One right is for a decision to be made by the municipality on a proposal within a limited period.
It has been difficult to pin down when this specific site application was made. It appears to have been in the nineties. The time limit placed by the Province on a municipality to make a decision is a matter of months.
When an appeal is made to the OMB, the decision is taken out of the hands of the municipality . We become a party to the hearing. The only influence we have is to successfully persuade the OMB of the seriousness of our concerns and the Board's decision will address them.
Neighbours have rights. They become a party to the hearing. They also have the burden of proving their concerns and they will be addressed in the decision.
The developer is party to the hearing. They have the burden of proving the proposal will not adversely affect the neighbours enjoyment of their property. If the issue is water. Water will be the focus of the hearing.
Neighbours requested the OMB for a Joint Board Hearing, It means the hearing panel will include an environmental expert
The OMB refused. The refusal was appealed to the Divisional Court. Evidence was presented that the OMB did not have the jurisdiction to order a Joint Board Hearing.
The Divisional Court referred back to the OMB to rule on the jurisdictional matter.
The Board did and again refused the Joint Board Hearing.
That was three unsuccessful attempts to win a Joint Board Hearing.
The neighbours decided to spend no more money on pursuit of a Joint Board.
The Town sent legal counsel in support to each of the proceedings. It cost us $135ks public dollars to defend private interest.
Had we not spent that money, the decision would have been the same.
The Town then picked up the ball and appealed the second refusal by the OMB.
The appeal lost. The decision remained the same. Cost went up to $200ks.
The town has now decided to ask for leave to appeal the decision of the Divisional Court to a
Superior Court.
The council vote was six in favour three against. More public money is to be spent.
Still the Ontario Municipal Board Hearing lies ahead.
The Hearing will likely take two weeks. Legal Counsel and a team of experts will present our arguments. Costs are estimated at $200ks for a two week hearing.
If a Joint Board is obtained the hearing will last six weeks. Cost will triple.
It just occurred to me . Estimates cited are legal costs. It's not clear expert witness fees are included.
Councillor Collins Mrakas tells me they can be as high as $15ks.a piece How many are needed I do not know.
At the Public Planning Meeting, in March 2008 , Westhill had a phalanx of experts. We would likely have to match their arguments one for one.
The town's interest lies in ensuring the development will not create negative impact on the environment insofar as our jurisdiction applies.
My support is for the town to undertake her due diligence and pay whatever it costs to protect the public interest.
I can defend that.
I cannot defend spending a quarter of a million dollars of hard-earned tax dollars to protect private interest and duplicating costs already bourne by the private interest with absolutely nothing gained.
Zero, Zilch, Nil and Nada! Amen my friend, Chris.
What do you have to say to that!
Wednesday, 3 March 2010
About Water
There's a discussion going on around me about water. Both respondents appear to have substantial facts at their finger tips. I will not repeat.
There is a mis-perception however. Municipalities do not permit development to outstrip availability of hard services.
My God, you have no idea how much it costs you to keep these things under control.
Aurora has been on a strict allocation of units for years. . However many are allocated, that's how many permits can be issued. Developers wait in line. They fund the infrastructure.
The question of storage capacity is clearly not understood. It costs millions to build capacity. Millions more for treatment to keep it safe and clean.
Building sufficient capacity to allow people to pour expensively treated water on lawns to keep them artificially green in a heat wave and let it run down driveways into the sewers and keep treating when it is no longer required for use the rest of the year is insane.
If gas at over a dollar a litreis not enough to keep people from idling their carsma premium on water to stop them from wasting it, wont work either.
It doesn't take genius to realize water use was being re-cycling long before that expression became part of the lingo.We take it from the ground, use it , treat it and return it from whence it came, into streams, rivers and lakes.
Lake Simcoe is in better shape to-day than it has in years. The main problem to-day is nutrient run-off from farmers' fields. Even laundry detergent is not the problem it once was.
We spend millions on storm water ponds to remove sediments from road and roof run-off before it reaches the waterways.
The late Garfield Wright, former Reeve of East Gwillimbury told a story once.
He received a call from an irate home-owner. No water was coming from his taps.
Garfield asked him to go down to his basement. Helped him to identify an object. Asked if it was making any noise .
No, it wasn't. Well check your fuse. He did. A fuse was blown. It was replaced . And Voila! he had water.
The former city dweller purchased a home in the country with no understanding of the unlikelihood of city services. His water pump had blown a fuse and he had to make a fool of himself to learn the basics about life in the country.
How is it in this day and age, when taxes are exorbitant, so many people assume no-one in charge understands the connection between water supply, sewage treatment and development.
If it wasn't costing millions of your hard-earned tax dollars to take care of the priorities, it might be funny.
But if you own a property and you would influence others, you need to know that living in a little town high in the hills, on the headwaters of Lake Simcoe and Lake Ontario in the most richly resourced country is the best place in the world to raise your children and know that your grandchildren's legacy is safe.
We are taking water, carbon dated thousands of years old, from deep in the cold recesses of an aquifer regularly monitored without sign of supply being diminished.
Our distribution system is linked to the Town of Newmarket
All you needed was to ask.
You're welcome.
There is a mis-perception however. Municipalities do not permit development to outstrip availability of hard services.
My God, you have no idea how much it costs you to keep these things under control.
Aurora has been on a strict allocation of units for years. . However many are allocated, that's how many permits can be issued. Developers wait in line. They fund the infrastructure.
The question of storage capacity is clearly not understood. It costs millions to build capacity. Millions more for treatment to keep it safe and clean.
Building sufficient capacity to allow people to pour expensively treated water on lawns to keep them artificially green in a heat wave and let it run down driveways into the sewers and keep treating when it is no longer required for use the rest of the year is insane.
If gas at over a dollar a litreis not enough to keep people from idling their carsma premium on water to stop them from wasting it, wont work either.
It doesn't take genius to realize water use was being re-cycling long before that expression became part of the lingo.We take it from the ground, use it , treat it and return it from whence it came, into streams, rivers and lakes.
Lake Simcoe is in better shape to-day than it has in years. The main problem to-day is nutrient run-off from farmers' fields. Even laundry detergent is not the problem it once was.
We spend millions on storm water ponds to remove sediments from road and roof run-off before it reaches the waterways.
The late Garfield Wright, former Reeve of East Gwillimbury told a story once.
He received a call from an irate home-owner. No water was coming from his taps.
Garfield asked him to go down to his basement. Helped him to identify an object. Asked if it was making any noise .
No, it wasn't. Well check your fuse. He did. A fuse was blown. It was replaced . And Voila! he had water.
The former city dweller purchased a home in the country with no understanding of the unlikelihood of city services. His water pump had blown a fuse and he had to make a fool of himself to learn the basics about life in the country.
How is it in this day and age, when taxes are exorbitant, so many people assume no-one in charge understands the connection between water supply, sewage treatment and development.
If it wasn't costing millions of your hard-earned tax dollars to take care of the priorities, it might be funny.
But if you own a property and you would influence others, you need to know that living in a little town high in the hills, on the headwaters of Lake Simcoe and Lake Ontario in the most richly resourced country is the best place in the world to raise your children and know that your grandchildren's legacy is safe.
We are taking water, carbon dated thousands of years old, from deep in the cold recesses of an aquifer regularly monitored without sign of supply being diminished.
Our distribution system is linked to the Town of Newmarket
All you needed was to ask.
You're welcome.
Another Chapter.
I asked Bob Panizza, clerk before last and before current clerk, more than once, whose responsibility is it to decide, when a closed door issue is entitled to confidentiality. He would look at me with his Cigar Store Indian expression and answer;
"That's a good question, Evelyn"
I am familiar with that non-answer.
He wouldn't hesitate however to interject, if council discussion behind closed doors strayed from the issue stated on the agendas as the purpose of the meeting.
At the beginning of this term, Bob had only two years left to serve before he could retire with a full pension.
I figured he had a calendar in his desk drawer which he marked off every night before he left the office.
We are on our second clerk since he left.
I had to decide for myself which items required confidentiality in order to protect the town's interest or privacy of an individual.
George Rust D'Eye when he reported to Council after he was retained to "investigate a leak"
from a closed meeting didn't think I had that authority. He didn't investigate a leak either.
Mr. Rust D'Eye was a solicitor in Toronto's legal department for years. He was very confident of his own authority.
So, from time to time I have had to gird myself for a potential battle of principle.
To-day is one of those times; last night the Mayor invited a lawyer who is not retained by council. into our closed door meeting. He sat alongside a lawyer who is.
His opinion was sought.
From my perspective it was neither welcome nor accepted.
It was clearly intended to influence proceedings. I believe it did.
A resolution passed later in the open meeting, with intent not stated, was to my mind an opportunity for something to be done with "confidentiality" to which it was not entitled.
The solicitor, Mr. Rod Northey has recently been retained by the opposing residents of the Westhill Development application. He has repeatedly sought approval for a Joint Board Hearing
Each time he has failed.
These facts are a matter of public record.
The residents have decided they will go no further and pay no more.
There is no secret about that.
In a previous "confidential" memo, Council were advised of means whereby the town could
compensate opposing residents for costs of their legal battle. Or take over the fight complete with services of the lawyer and his team of experts.
I objected to that being discussed behind closed doors.
The idea was not pursued.
Apparently it has not been abandoned either.
"That's a good question, Evelyn"
I am familiar with that non-answer.
He wouldn't hesitate however to interject, if council discussion behind closed doors strayed from the issue stated on the agendas as the purpose of the meeting.
At the beginning of this term, Bob had only two years left to serve before he could retire with a full pension.
I figured he had a calendar in his desk drawer which he marked off every night before he left the office.
We are on our second clerk since he left.
I had to decide for myself which items required confidentiality in order to protect the town's interest or privacy of an individual.
George Rust D'Eye when he reported to Council after he was retained to "investigate a leak"
from a closed meeting didn't think I had that authority. He didn't investigate a leak either.
Mr. Rust D'Eye was a solicitor in Toronto's legal department for years. He was very confident of his own authority.
So, from time to time I have had to gird myself for a potential battle of principle.
To-day is one of those times; last night the Mayor invited a lawyer who is not retained by council. into our closed door meeting. He sat alongside a lawyer who is.
His opinion was sought.
From my perspective it was neither welcome nor accepted.
It was clearly intended to influence proceedings. I believe it did.
A resolution passed later in the open meeting, with intent not stated, was to my mind an opportunity for something to be done with "confidentiality" to which it was not entitled.
The solicitor, Mr. Rod Northey has recently been retained by the opposing residents of the Westhill Development application. He has repeatedly sought approval for a Joint Board Hearing
Each time he has failed.
These facts are a matter of public record.
The residents have decided they will go no further and pay no more.
There is no secret about that.
In a previous "confidential" memo, Council were advised of means whereby the town could
compensate opposing residents for costs of their legal battle. Or take over the fight complete with services of the lawyer and his team of experts.
I objected to that being discussed behind closed doors.
The idea was not pursued.
Apparently it has not been abandoned either.
Un Bon Mot
I have never watched Silence of the Lambs. Horror movies are not my idea of entertainment
I see a clip often when surfing channels. Anthony Hopkins and Jodie Foster, eyes locked, through the bars of a cell. The malevolence in his cold flat grey eyes as he talks about eating someones liver is sufficient to affirm my resolve I'm never going to watch that movie.
Last night, The Mayor fell into step beside me between the back room and the Council Chamber.
"I am the Mayor" she declared in less than cordial tones. .
"Not for long" I answered without a pause.
"What do you know" she said.
"As much as you" I responded
She turned and looked deep into my eyes and said. "I am having fun"
"That's good" I said. "Make the most of it"
Conversation is rare between the Mayor and myself. If it happens it's unexpected.and unsolicited.
Comments are usually apropos of nothing that went before or came after
In politics one learns to expect the unexpected. It's only after you have the time to wonder:
"What was that about?"
In this situation the next thought invariably is:
What must it be like to be a town employee and trapped in the town hall with that woman ?
I see a clip often when surfing channels. Anthony Hopkins and Jodie Foster, eyes locked, through the bars of a cell. The malevolence in his cold flat grey eyes as he talks about eating someones liver is sufficient to affirm my resolve I'm never going to watch that movie.
Last night, The Mayor fell into step beside me between the back room and the Council Chamber.
"I am the Mayor" she declared in less than cordial tones. .
"Not for long" I answered without a pause.
"What do you know" she said.
"As much as you" I responded
She turned and looked deep into my eyes and said. "I am having fun"
"That's good" I said. "Make the most of it"
Conversation is rare between the Mayor and myself. If it happens it's unexpected.and unsolicited.
Comments are usually apropos of nothing that went before or came after
In politics one learns to expect the unexpected. It's only after you have the time to wonder:
"What was that about?"
In this situation the next thought invariably is:
What must it be like to be a town employee and trapped in the town hall with that woman ?
Ring Around O' Rosey
It was an evening like no other.
It started at 5.30p.m. Council convened from open session into closed session to receive solicitor/client advice on the question of the Westhill Development Application , the last denial of a Joint Board Hearing and next steps.
It was an appeal to the Divisional Court, of a decision of the Ontario Municipal Board, to deny for the second time a request for a Joint Board Hearing.
It was denied.
Lat night, we were meeting with the solicitor to decide what to do next. Although the Mayor had already been quoted in the press that "My colleagues and I are appealing the decision"
The Mayor said last night the quote was incorrect.
But that's what we did alright.
The vote was six to three.
It may have been the most straightforward thing that happened last night.
By now everyone must know the exceptions to the rules that allow for public meetings to be closed to the public.
We did receive solicitor/client advice. Heavily steered as usual by the presiding member.
On the Mayor's invitation, a second solicitor joined us at the table. Not retained by the town to give advice. We got it anyway. Again steered by the Mayor. All the while throwing away lines about items from close door sessions not being discussed in public
The question arises; is advice received from a solicitor, who is not the town's solicitor, subject to confidentiality of a solicitor/client relationship.
I don't think so.
The solicitor is named Northey. He has represented neighbours of the Westhill
Development proposal, in several failed attempts to obtain a Joint Board Hearing on the Westhill application.
We were informed, though it was not our business, he had worked pro bono in the last failed appeal to the Divisional Court because the neighbours decided after the third failed effort they were not going to spend any more money.
The Town proceeded in the fourth failed attempt to get a Joint Board Hearing. Though council authority was not given that I re-call.
Last night was convoluted. We had two closed sessions.Three open. Between them we received a delegation from Ms. Walmer urging the town take up the cause and go forward with yet another appeal.
Four or five e-mails were received urging council, on behalf of the residents of Aurora, to go forward with still another appeal.
In a somewhat tortuous process, the clerk was directed by the Mayor to include the e-mails on the record of the second closed door meeting . Or the first. I am no longer sure which.
It was never clear.They were never discussed .
Finally, out of the second closed door meeting and in the third open meeting, came the decision noted earlier to appeal against the decision to deny the appeal against the OMB. denial of the fourth effort to obtain a joint board hearing.
There was also a second resolution to approve a decision which was not articulated.
Over several hours, a variety of matters were discussed behind closed doors. I was by no means sure which formed the resolution. It had to be unarticulated because it was a secret don't you know.
The last motion of a formal meeting is the confirming bylaw; the means whereby all is made whole and complete.
The Mayor, from the chair, called for a recorded vote .
My solitary vote is recorded against.
It started at 5.30p.m. Council convened from open session into closed session to receive solicitor/client advice on the question of the Westhill Development Application , the last denial of a Joint Board Hearing and next steps.
It was an appeal to the Divisional Court, of a decision of the Ontario Municipal Board, to deny for the second time a request for a Joint Board Hearing.
It was denied.
Lat night, we were meeting with the solicitor to decide what to do next. Although the Mayor had already been quoted in the press that "My colleagues and I are appealing the decision"
The Mayor said last night the quote was incorrect.
But that's what we did alright.
The vote was six to three.
It may have been the most straightforward thing that happened last night.
By now everyone must know the exceptions to the rules that allow for public meetings to be closed to the public.
We did receive solicitor/client advice. Heavily steered as usual by the presiding member.
On the Mayor's invitation, a second solicitor joined us at the table. Not retained by the town to give advice. We got it anyway. Again steered by the Mayor. All the while throwing away lines about items from close door sessions not being discussed in public
The question arises; is advice received from a solicitor, who is not the town's solicitor, subject to confidentiality of a solicitor/client relationship.
I don't think so.
The solicitor is named Northey. He has represented neighbours of the Westhill
Development proposal, in several failed attempts to obtain a Joint Board Hearing on the Westhill application.
We were informed, though it was not our business, he had worked pro bono in the last failed appeal to the Divisional Court because the neighbours decided after the third failed effort they were not going to spend any more money.
The Town proceeded in the fourth failed attempt to get a Joint Board Hearing. Though council authority was not given that I re-call.
Last night was convoluted. We had two closed sessions.Three open. Between them we received a delegation from Ms. Walmer urging the town take up the cause and go forward with yet another appeal.
Four or five e-mails were received urging council, on behalf of the residents of Aurora, to go forward with still another appeal.
In a somewhat tortuous process, the clerk was directed by the Mayor to include the e-mails on the record of the second closed door meeting . Or the first. I am no longer sure which.
It was never clear.They were never discussed .
Finally, out of the second closed door meeting and in the third open meeting, came the decision noted earlier to appeal against the decision to deny the appeal against the OMB. denial of the fourth effort to obtain a joint board hearing.
There was also a second resolution to approve a decision which was not articulated.
Over several hours, a variety of matters were discussed behind closed doors. I was by no means sure which formed the resolution. It had to be unarticulated because it was a secret don't you know.
The last motion of a formal meeting is the confirming bylaw; the means whereby all is made whole and complete.
The Mayor, from the chair, called for a recorded vote .
My solitary vote is recorded against.
Tuesday, 2 March 2010
The Westhill Argument Continues To Go Nowhere.
Almost two years have passed. Legal consultations galore and a neighbour and opponent to the Westhill Development is still not fully informed.
Four failures to obtain approval for a Consolidated Board Hearing. Hundreds of thousands of dollars later and still there is no clear understanding .
Property- owners dependent on private wells always have reason for concern . Supply can never be taken for granted. A dry summer can affect a well. . Drilling for a new supply may need repeated efforts to find potable water. Being high on a hill can aggravate the problem.
Residents have every right to demand absolute assurance, whatever is proposed on neighbouring land will not impact their water supply.
But challenging the right to develop is a lost cause.
In a letter to the editor this week, the Westhill neighbour makes several comments unsupported by facts. It's not surprising.
Councillor MacEachern repeatedly claims the town's water supply is limited. Mayor Morris lets the councillor do all the talking in public. People hear it. Don't question it. It plays to their fears
Heat wave water restrictions get linked to a shortage of water.
They are not. We now even have access to Lake Ontario water.
Restrictions are linked to water storage capacity.
For ten months of the year, twelve in a wet summer, we have more than adequate storage.
In a heat wave, when too many people use copious amounts of clean, pure, expensively treated water, to keep grass growing and green when nature dictates it should be brown and dormant; when they wash their most treasured possession in the driveway and drop the hose to let the water run off to the storm sewer in the road; we have water restrictions.
We do not , nor should we ever need to build sufficient water storage for extravagant, irresponsible, wanton waste of a precious resource during a heat wave.
But that's all about the municipal water supply.
Country dwellers dependent on their own well need no advice from townies about the need to conserve water.
The Westhill neighbour's understanding of a land use designation is also not fully informed.
However much one might wish it to be so, land with legal designation for development did not lose that right with passage of the Oak Ridges Moraine Act or the turn of the century.
The Oak Ridges Moraine Act includes development designations. Only the nature of the development is changed. Lands which did not have a designation prior to passage of the Act, don't have it now and will unlikely get it in the foreseeable future.
The Province did not choose, as they did in Richmond Hill, to buy designated land in Aurora to remove it from the market.. How much they spent to acquire land with services already in the ground , no doubt contributed to the current deficit requiring higher taxes for all of us.
In March 2008, in preparation for a Municipal Board Hearing into the town's failure to make a decision,Aurora's staff recommended approval in principle of the Westhill development, subject to outstanding matters being satisfactorily resolved.
It was not "natural" as the resident states in her letter, for the Town to oppose the developer's appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board.
It was not even sensible.Especially in the face of the Region's pass , Environment's Ministry's certification and the Toronto Conservation Authority's favourable comments on the proposal.
Whatever influence the town has to ensure concerns are addressed at a Board hearing, rests in our power to persuade the Board they are valid and not purely politically motivated.
Appealing an O.M.B. decision twice , and then thrice to a Divisional Court at collective cost of a million dollars is not persuasive.
An argument based on an Act which had not been proclaimed, is hardly conducive to convince the Board of the strength of our arguments. Only hard evidence will accomplish that.
The Ontario Municipal Board is charged with making the decision. Repeated failure to change that fact has produced nothing but delay of the inevitable hearing.
Meanwhile, the real argument has yet to commence.
If the water supply is in question, the same cannot be said for financial resources, public and private, being spread about the land without as much as an organic advantage.
Four failures to obtain approval for a Consolidated Board Hearing. Hundreds of thousands of dollars later and still there is no clear understanding .
Property- owners dependent on private wells always have reason for concern . Supply can never be taken for granted. A dry summer can affect a well. . Drilling for a new supply may need repeated efforts to find potable water. Being high on a hill can aggravate the problem.
Residents have every right to demand absolute assurance, whatever is proposed on neighbouring land will not impact their water supply.
But challenging the right to develop is a lost cause.
In a letter to the editor this week, the Westhill neighbour makes several comments unsupported by facts. It's not surprising.
Councillor MacEachern repeatedly claims the town's water supply is limited. Mayor Morris lets the councillor do all the talking in public. People hear it. Don't question it. It plays to their fears
Heat wave water restrictions get linked to a shortage of water.
They are not. We now even have access to Lake Ontario water.
Restrictions are linked to water storage capacity.
For ten months of the year, twelve in a wet summer, we have more than adequate storage.
In a heat wave, when too many people use copious amounts of clean, pure, expensively treated water, to keep grass growing and green when nature dictates it should be brown and dormant; when they wash their most treasured possession in the driveway and drop the hose to let the water run off to the storm sewer in the road; we have water restrictions.
We do not , nor should we ever need to build sufficient water storage for extravagant, irresponsible, wanton waste of a precious resource during a heat wave.
But that's all about the municipal water supply.
Country dwellers dependent on their own well need no advice from townies about the need to conserve water.
The Westhill neighbour's understanding of a land use designation is also not fully informed.
However much one might wish it to be so, land with legal designation for development did not lose that right with passage of the Oak Ridges Moraine Act or the turn of the century.
The Oak Ridges Moraine Act includes development designations. Only the nature of the development is changed. Lands which did not have a designation prior to passage of the Act, don't have it now and will unlikely get it in the foreseeable future.
The Province did not choose, as they did in Richmond Hill, to buy designated land in Aurora to remove it from the market.. How much they spent to acquire land with services already in the ground , no doubt contributed to the current deficit requiring higher taxes for all of us.
In March 2008, in preparation for a Municipal Board Hearing into the town's failure to make a decision,Aurora's staff recommended approval in principle of the Westhill development, subject to outstanding matters being satisfactorily resolved.
It was not "natural" as the resident states in her letter, for the Town to oppose the developer's appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board.
It was not even sensible.Especially in the face of the Region's pass , Environment's Ministry's certification and the Toronto Conservation Authority's favourable comments on the proposal.
Whatever influence the town has to ensure concerns are addressed at a Board hearing, rests in our power to persuade the Board they are valid and not purely politically motivated.
Appealing an O.M.B. decision twice , and then thrice to a Divisional Court at collective cost of a million dollars is not persuasive.
An argument based on an Act which had not been proclaimed, is hardly conducive to convince the Board of the strength of our arguments. Only hard evidence will accomplish that.
The Ontario Municipal Board is charged with making the decision. Repeated failure to change that fact has produced nothing but delay of the inevitable hearing.
Meanwhile, the real argument has yet to commence.
If the water supply is in question, the same cannot be said for financial resources, public and private, being spread about the land without as much as an organic advantage.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
