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.
Tuesday, 9 March 2010
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.
Monday, 1 March 2010
Oh How Things Change
At the time York Region was established, thirty-eight years ago, little had changed in York County for over a hundred years. There were fourteen municipalities. The Province planned to reduce the number to five.
Aurora and Newmarket were shown on the map as a single urban node. We successfully argued . We had a Volunteer Fire Brigade. People ran their own sports organisations . .We had a limited transit operation. Garbage collection was contracted and fees were collected. Administration was five people.
We had several boards and commissions . Planning Board was legislated out. We had the option of disbanding the Recreation Commission and Arena Management Board .
We were given authority to reduce the membership of council.
I was inclined to keep the Arena Management Board and the Recreation Commission if I remember correctly. But I moved we reduce the number of Councillors.
The Community did not agree. We had delegations to Council objecting . We did disband the Arena Management Board and Recreation Commission.
This term we have created more separate bodies than we ever had before.
The Historical Society, with fifty-nine members, presented a business plan and received a budget. They elect their own executive and don't answer to council as to how the money is spent.
The Arboretum has a budget allocation of $100ks plus $20Ks left over from last year. They spend tax dollars without accountability.
July 1st Parade is organised under Sher St.Kitts , with a paid assistant and a budget of $15Ks.to spend at will and town staff attached to do their bidding.
The Farmers' Market has a budget of $10Ks , a manager of their choice , unlimited free access to facilities town residents and taxpayers have to pay for and town staff to do the physical work involved in erecting a market every week.
I heard on the grape vine their annual meeting was "bizarre" The Chair declared the executive wanted to retain their seats and that's what happened. A constitution written by Councillor Stephen Granger was adopted, sight unseen.
The Heritage and Culture Centre has a board, a staff and a budget, . They pay nothing for maintenance of the facility, . Total annual budget cost to the tax payer is half a million dollars.
The Environmental Advisory Committee has a budget and authority to spend on stuff like "contributions" to outside organisations whose activities are not exactly clear.
Far and away the majority of the people spending hundreds of thousands of tax dollars have never been elected and are not accountable.
We still have a nine member council. The administration grew this year by over thirty people, costing hundreds of thousands of dollars. A Treasurer was appointed over coffee in a doughnut shop and somebody else wrote the terms of reference for a job he was appointed to within a week.
Aurora and Newmarket were shown on the map as a single urban node. We successfully argued . We had a Volunteer Fire Brigade. People ran their own sports organisations . .We had a limited transit operation. Garbage collection was contracted and fees were collected. Administration was five people.
We had several boards and commissions . Planning Board was legislated out. We had the option of disbanding the Recreation Commission and Arena Management Board .
We were given authority to reduce the membership of council.
I was inclined to keep the Arena Management Board and the Recreation Commission if I remember correctly. But I moved we reduce the number of Councillors.
The Community did not agree. We had delegations to Council objecting . We did disband the Arena Management Board and Recreation Commission.
This term we have created more separate bodies than we ever had before.
The Historical Society, with fifty-nine members, presented a business plan and received a budget. They elect their own executive and don't answer to council as to how the money is spent.
The Arboretum has a budget allocation of $100ks plus $20Ks left over from last year. They spend tax dollars without accountability.
July 1st Parade is organised under Sher St.Kitts , with a paid assistant and a budget of $15Ks.to spend at will and town staff attached to do their bidding.
The Farmers' Market has a budget of $10Ks , a manager of their choice , unlimited free access to facilities town residents and taxpayers have to pay for and town staff to do the physical work involved in erecting a market every week.
I heard on the grape vine their annual meeting was "bizarre" The Chair declared the executive wanted to retain their seats and that's what happened. A constitution written by Councillor Stephen Granger was adopted, sight unseen.
The Heritage and Culture Centre has a board, a staff and a budget, . They pay nothing for maintenance of the facility, . Total annual budget cost to the tax payer is half a million dollars.
The Environmental Advisory Committee has a budget and authority to spend on stuff like "contributions" to outside organisations whose activities are not exactly clear.
Far and away the majority of the people spending hundreds of thousands of tax dollars have never been elected and are not accountable.
We still have a nine member council. The administration grew this year by over thirty people, costing hundreds of thousands of dollars. A Treasurer was appointed over coffee in a doughnut shop and somebody else wrote the terms of reference for a job he was appointed to within a week.
Unsolicited
I've received three lengthy e-mails from a person, claiming to represent an organisation with a mission to encourage people to participate in politics.
Nothing in the first inspired me. The second was threatening. The third was more of the same.
They were all wordy. But the second was most revealing. I was informed my name would be posted on Facebook, to inform people of my response or lack thereof.
It was quite succinct.
This morning I was informed Roger Clowater had attended the gathering and several others indicated the inclement weather had prevented their attendance.
The next event is a rally in the Newmarket Town Square complete with candles, sparklers and music,poetry and a look at people who are really involved.
I won't be there . Nor do I thank them for the "invitation".
Many Germans probably felt obliged to join the Nazi Party with "invitations" like that.
We don't usually see those kinds of techniques here until elections are underway.
Representatives of the police, firefighters and the Green Party send out questionnaires. The questions indicate the answers required. We are informed the response will be rated and membership will be informed which candidate is most friendly to their interest and deserving of support.
It's something else Professor Robert McDiarmid of York University didn't find when compiling figures to prove inordinate influences in municipal elections.
In the 2003 election, an unknown party in Aurora used a huge white recreation vehicle with banners on either side, naming people to vote for and others not to.
It made the rounds a couple of week-ends before the election and on election day.
Unlike modern day terrorists, nobody ever took responsibility for that particular high level act of democratic participation.
We had never seen the likes of it in Aurora politics before. I think it was a sign of things to come.
Not good things
Nothing in the first inspired me. The second was threatening. The third was more of the same.
They were all wordy. But the second was most revealing. I was informed my name would be posted on Facebook, to inform people of my response or lack thereof.
It was quite succinct.
This morning I was informed Roger Clowater had attended the gathering and several others indicated the inclement weather had prevented their attendance.
The next event is a rally in the Newmarket Town Square complete with candles, sparklers and music,poetry and a look at people who are really involved.
I won't be there . Nor do I thank them for the "invitation".
Many Germans probably felt obliged to join the Nazi Party with "invitations" like that.
We don't usually see those kinds of techniques here until elections are underway.
Representatives of the police, firefighters and the Green Party send out questionnaires. The questions indicate the answers required. We are informed the response will be rated and membership will be informed which candidate is most friendly to their interest and deserving of support.
It's something else Professor Robert McDiarmid of York University didn't find when compiling figures to prove inordinate influences in municipal elections.
In the 2003 election, an unknown party in Aurora used a huge white recreation vehicle with banners on either side, naming people to vote for and others not to.
It made the rounds a couple of week-ends before the election and on election day.
Unlike modern day terrorists, nobody ever took responsibility for that particular high level act of democratic participation.
We had never seen the likes of it in Aurora politics before. I think it was a sign of things to come.
Not good things
Saturday, 27 February 2010
Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter
Yesterday, every member of council received a lengthy e-mail from a resident in a particular area. The neighbourhood park is used for soccer practices, games and tournaments every year.
Available parking is on an arterial collector road. Hundreds of cars converge for the games. The situation is hazardous. Neighbours dread the start of the season. Every year they draw council's attention to the problem and hope someone will hear before something terrible happens.
The e-mail referred to a news story about town plans to accommodate sport needs in a community park. It expressed the hope the new plans will resolve the problem they have been enduring for years with increasing anxiety.
The plans do not. They do the opposite. Consultants hired by the town established the needs. They proposed solutions. They recommended we not sell lands we own, until we have identified the existence of other lands to meet the needs.
Timing is critical. In 2007, first year of this term, staff recommended purchase of a suitable parcel which they were aware might be going on the market.
The recommendation was rejected.
Funds taken from town business for purchase of land have grown to $12 million.A million dollars added in the last year.
We hoard it while land disappears and prices soar.
We are currently selling property purchased for recreational purposes eight years ago which may prove to be the last land available within the town's boundaries.
We spent $53,222 on the consultant study to analyse needs , provide practical and feasible means to meet them and resolve current problems.
We haven't put it on a shelf to gather dust. We tossed it and replaced it with a plagiarized version recommending more studies at quadruple the cost rather than action to meet the needs.
In other words. we spent $53,222 , wasted three years, accomplished nothing and will accomplish nothing in the next years.
There's a clause in the Town's Code of Conduct which purports to prohibit me from making that statement.
It requires me to provide the rationale for council's decision and their "attitude" .
Damned if I understand their rationale. I can only guess the attitude.If I attempted to put either into words that would be criticising a majority decision.
Lord Have mercy.
Available parking is on an arterial collector road. Hundreds of cars converge for the games. The situation is hazardous. Neighbours dread the start of the season. Every year they draw council's attention to the problem and hope someone will hear before something terrible happens.
The e-mail referred to a news story about town plans to accommodate sport needs in a community park. It expressed the hope the new plans will resolve the problem they have been enduring for years with increasing anxiety.
The plans do not. They do the opposite. Consultants hired by the town established the needs. They proposed solutions. They recommended we not sell lands we own, until we have identified the existence of other lands to meet the needs.
Timing is critical. In 2007, first year of this term, staff recommended purchase of a suitable parcel which they were aware might be going on the market.
The recommendation was rejected.
Funds taken from town business for purchase of land have grown to $12 million.A million dollars added in the last year.
We hoard it while land disappears and prices soar.
We are currently selling property purchased for recreational purposes eight years ago which may prove to be the last land available within the town's boundaries.
We spent $53,222 on the consultant study to analyse needs , provide practical and feasible means to meet them and resolve current problems.
We haven't put it on a shelf to gather dust. We tossed it and replaced it with a plagiarized version recommending more studies at quadruple the cost rather than action to meet the needs.
In other words. we spent $53,222 , wasted three years, accomplished nothing and will accomplish nothing in the next years.
There's a clause in the Town's Code of Conduct which purports to prohibit me from making that statement.
It requires me to provide the rationale for council's decision and their "attitude" .
Damned if I understand their rationale. I can only guess the attitude.If I attempted to put either into words that would be criticising a majority decision.
Lord Have mercy.
Friday, 26 February 2010
Skullduggery and Intrigue, Council Style.
Once again, the facts are in. The story can be told.
It's not clever. It's not subtle. It's not even exciting. Just par for the course.
On Tuesday evening, neighbours to the baseball diamond under construction, who do not like to look at poles, delegated to council.
Their complaint was about a newly installed pole in line of vision from their dining room window. Leisure Services Director had recommended re-locating the pole at a cost of $7,100. over and above the $100,000 cost to install the lights
The recommendation was not well received. It appeared Council would unanimously vote to deny.
Then the Mayor gave in-depth analysis of the situation. The subsequent resolution was to defer to the Chief Administrative Officer.
The Director informed the residents.. They knew he had followed through on his commitment to re-locate the pole. They knew the decision had been deferred to the CAO. They were told the matter would not be discussed at Council that evening.
But they came loaded for bear with complaints about how a baseball diamond could be so far advanced in construction on land abutting their own,while they had no knowledge it was even contemplated.
The public debate about whether or not there should be a baseball diamond had passed beneath their line of vision.
The litany was against the Director about how such a thing could happen without their being formally notified..
Since the decision to re-locate the offending pole had not been rejected, it had been "referred", I wondered why the residents had come to council at that moment in time with a written presentation . So I asked.
I had to state the facts twice. Why, when the director had agreed to recommend re-locating the pole, had informed them he would do so, had followed through on his commitment and afterwards told them the issue had been referred to the Chief Administrative Officer and would not be discussed that evening; why were they there?
I did not ask why the Director, who had been so accommodating to their wishes was being berated for perceived failures. The scheme was familiar and easily recognizable.
I wanted to establish, who had intervened between a non- decision of council and what precipitated an angry and accusatory presentation about a staff member who had been so obliging, to his own disadvantage I might add.
My meaning was finally taken. The delegate threw her arm towards the chair and said "Phyllis called"
It is established, the resident and the Mayor are close friends.
Despite weeks of community outrage, outcry and controversy about the need and cost of a baseball diamond.
Despite eight months of earth moving ; cutting down hills and filling in valleys, to the tune of $400.000
Despite the location was not staff choice{ It was Evalina's) and there was no other possible configuration for the lights.
Despite all of that plus the fact, unlike land use and zoning changes, there is no requirement to formally notify residents of park development.
And despite a close friendship with the Mayor. and apparently, Councillor MacEachern, they still had no idea what was afoot, until they looked out of their dining room window one day and saw a pole.
But never mind. Friend, Mentor and Mayor Phyllis, rides to the rescue once again.
The (Woodsman)Chief Administrator will have received his instructions. The Leisure Services Director will be once again discredited and that will be the reason to spend yet another $7,100.
to re-locate the pole on top of $100.000 spent already for baseball lighting .
Council will once again meekly acquiesce.
Villains, real and perceived, will be vanquished .
Everyone will live happily ever after.
Lilliput style.
It's not clever. It's not subtle. It's not even exciting. Just par for the course.
On Tuesday evening, neighbours to the baseball diamond under construction, who do not like to look at poles, delegated to council.
Their complaint was about a newly installed pole in line of vision from their dining room window. Leisure Services Director had recommended re-locating the pole at a cost of $7,100. over and above the $100,000 cost to install the lights
The recommendation was not well received. It appeared Council would unanimously vote to deny.
Then the Mayor gave in-depth analysis of the situation. The subsequent resolution was to defer to the Chief Administrative Officer.
The Director informed the residents.. They knew he had followed through on his commitment to re-locate the pole. They knew the decision had been deferred to the CAO. They were told the matter would not be discussed at Council that evening.
But they came loaded for bear with complaints about how a baseball diamond could be so far advanced in construction on land abutting their own,while they had no knowledge it was even contemplated.
The public debate about whether or not there should be a baseball diamond had passed beneath their line of vision.
The litany was against the Director about how such a thing could happen without their being formally notified..
Since the decision to re-locate the offending pole had not been rejected, it had been "referred", I wondered why the residents had come to council at that moment in time with a written presentation . So I asked.
I had to state the facts twice. Why, when the director had agreed to recommend re-locating the pole, had informed them he would do so, had followed through on his commitment and afterwards told them the issue had been referred to the Chief Administrative Officer and would not be discussed that evening; why were they there?
I did not ask why the Director, who had been so accommodating to their wishes was being berated for perceived failures. The scheme was familiar and easily recognizable.
I wanted to establish, who had intervened between a non- decision of council and what precipitated an angry and accusatory presentation about a staff member who had been so obliging, to his own disadvantage I might add.
My meaning was finally taken. The delegate threw her arm towards the chair and said "Phyllis called"
It is established, the resident and the Mayor are close friends.
Despite weeks of community outrage, outcry and controversy about the need and cost of a baseball diamond.
Despite eight months of earth moving ; cutting down hills and filling in valleys, to the tune of $400.000
Despite the location was not staff choice{ It was Evalina's) and there was no other possible configuration for the lights.
Despite all of that plus the fact, unlike land use and zoning changes, there is no requirement to formally notify residents of park development.
And despite a close friendship with the Mayor. and apparently, Councillor MacEachern, they still had no idea what was afoot, until they looked out of their dining room window one day and saw a pole.
But never mind. Friend, Mentor and Mayor Phyllis, rides to the rescue once again.
The (Woodsman)Chief Administrator will have received his instructions. The Leisure Services Director will be once again discredited and that will be the reason to spend yet another $7,100.
to re-locate the pole on top of $100.000 spent already for baseball lighting .
Council will once again meekly acquiesce.
Villains, real and perceived, will be vanquished .
Everyone will live happily ever after.
Lilliput style.
Wednesday, 24 February 2010
Gulliver's Travels...Alice...Watership Down
I was too young when Gulliver's Travels was an English lesson. I never understood why satire was useful The lesson had barely touched the edge.
I googled Gulliver this morning. Discovered he was an eighteenth century writer in a high wig.
A quote under his portrait read;
"I write to inform , not amuse you"
There was more. I took from it, that people in those times were not free to offer critical observations.
I knew Shakespeare was a political commentator of his day but I didn't learn that in school either.
I'm sure the nuns would not have thought much of David Letterman,Stephen Colbert or John Stewart.
The stories above came to mind while I was stirring porridge. The morning after a Council meeting is always contemplative. If I couldn't write and had no readers, I'm not sure I would stay the course.
Sometimes I wonder, how much is too much. At what point does the figuratively unbelievable become literally unbelievable.
The major item on last night's agenda, was the duplicate Master Parks and Leisure Services Plan. $53,222. were expended for a professional study. It was squirrelled away and worked upon out of sight to re-emerge in a different form.
For example, a recommendation to acquire land for established needs became a study to develop a" strategy for land acquisition"
The need for a gymnasium/youth facility became another study to determine what youth needs are.
Weasel words.
Later in the meeting I had an opportunity to dig a little deeper.
The Director of Finance was asked to elaborate on the status of various development charge reserve accounts.
Apparently the Storm Volley ball group had stated a particular figure in a written presentation and ,I think, queried its whereabouts.
The Chief Financial Officer was perturbed about the source of misinformation. Councillor Gaertner had the same apprehension. The Leisure Services Director was directed to investigate.
Presumably to uncover a culprit.
The Cash in Lieu of Parkland in the table of figures was clear. It had grown by one million to twelve million in a year.
I sought enlightenment
In 2007, we needed to buy land . A baseball diamond had risen to a priority. We owned nothing large enough to accommodate such a facility.Staff knew of suitable land on the market. $2million was included in the budget to acquire it.
It was removed by council. Councillor MacEachern expressed the opinion the money was better in the bank earning interest.
In 2008, the same circumstance repeated. Again the recommendation was rejected. As of 2010 no land has yet been acquired. Instead, we are in the process of selling land originally purchased for recreation.
"In your capacity as financial advisor to the council"I asked "what are the merits of keeping $12 million, collected for the purchase of land, in the bank, while land becomes scarcer and more expensive?"
"We need a Land Acquisition Strategy rather than random, sporadic purchase" said the Chief Financial Officer.
I googled Gulliver this morning. Discovered he was an eighteenth century writer in a high wig.
A quote under his portrait read;
"I write to inform , not amuse you"
There was more. I took from it, that people in those times were not free to offer critical observations.
I knew Shakespeare was a political commentator of his day but I didn't learn that in school either.
I'm sure the nuns would not have thought much of David Letterman,Stephen Colbert or John Stewart.
The stories above came to mind while I was stirring porridge. The morning after a Council meeting is always contemplative. If I couldn't write and had no readers, I'm not sure I would stay the course.
Sometimes I wonder, how much is too much. At what point does the figuratively unbelievable become literally unbelievable.
The major item on last night's agenda, was the duplicate Master Parks and Leisure Services Plan. $53,222. were expended for a professional study. It was squirrelled away and worked upon out of sight to re-emerge in a different form.
For example, a recommendation to acquire land for established needs became a study to develop a" strategy for land acquisition"
The need for a gymnasium/youth facility became another study to determine what youth needs are.
Weasel words.
Later in the meeting I had an opportunity to dig a little deeper.
The Director of Finance was asked to elaborate on the status of various development charge reserve accounts.
Apparently the Storm Volley ball group had stated a particular figure in a written presentation and ,I think, queried its whereabouts.
The Chief Financial Officer was perturbed about the source of misinformation. Councillor Gaertner had the same apprehension. The Leisure Services Director was directed to investigate.
Presumably to uncover a culprit.
The Cash in Lieu of Parkland in the table of figures was clear. It had grown by one million to twelve million in a year.
I sought enlightenment
In 2007, we needed to buy land . A baseball diamond had risen to a priority. We owned nothing large enough to accommodate such a facility.Staff knew of suitable land on the market. $2million was included in the budget to acquire it.
It was removed by council. Councillor MacEachern expressed the opinion the money was better in the bank earning interest.
In 2008, the same circumstance repeated. Again the recommendation was rejected. As of 2010 no land has yet been acquired. Instead, we are in the process of selling land originally purchased for recreation.
"In your capacity as financial advisor to the council"I asked "what are the merits of keeping $12 million, collected for the purchase of land, in the bank, while land becomes scarcer and more expensive?"
"We need a Land Acquisition Strategy rather than random, sporadic purchase" said the Chief Financial Officer.
Tuesday, 23 February 2010
New Information
It's surprising what gets uncovered when questions are asked. I received a spread sheet on regional councillors' salaries and benefits. But not on conference expenditures. Also disclosed was remuneration for members of South Lake Simcoe Conservation Authority.
Councillor MacEachern receives $480 a year.There's something funny about this.. A regional councillor sitting on a board, is not entitled to be paid in addition to the regional salary. I believe our regional councillor should be the board member. Councillor MacEachern was appointed by Mayor Morris.
Yesterday, I received information without solicitation. During the nineties, the Province increased conservation authority over lands in the flood plain. At the same time, they down-loaded the cost of the expanded operation to the municipalities.
The program is funded out of regional coffers.
I did not know that.
This is a biggy.
The innformation came from a Land Use Council situated in Sunderland, Ontario. Slightly to the north-east of us.Their concern is about the "disconnect" between conservation authorities and the municipalities they"serve"
Now, there's the problem . I have been labouring under the misunderstanding they were being governed and funded by the province. I thought the Province was paying almost all the cost and keeping tabs on their activities. Seems they are no longer.
If they are not and we (me) are not ....who is?
I mentioned a while ago about the Chairman of the Conservation being in Australia for a conference to receive some rinky-dink award. The Chairman is a Councillor in East Gwillimbury. Last week I learned the Chair's salary is $60,000. a year.
If our regional rep should be the conservation member. So should East Gwillimbury's regional rep.There should be no salary of $60,000 or $480.paid to anybody.
Susan Walmer is no longer Chair of the Environmental Committee. But she is a member and involved in other environmental activities. As well as being Chair of the Oak Ridges Moraine Trust. All of which takes on quite a different complexion with the new information .Ms Walmer came to Council during budget discussion with a recommendation for a "Management Plan" at town expense for lands we neither own nor control.
We budgeted for three of those. One in Sheppard's Bush ,one for the Ann Bartley Smith lands and one for lands on the eastern edge of town transferred to the Oak Ridges Moraine Trust of which Susan Walmer is Chair.
Ms Walmer has an office in a house on Sheppard's Bush. The question of rent is unknown at this time. Does Ms. Walmer collect remuneration. Is the job volunteer or what?
Those houses used to be privately rented out.
No more.
Why bother if the municipality is paying the freight? We provide all external maintenance. And pay in taxes for whatever other costs there are.
The Land Use Council is alarmed by the activities of the Conservation Authorities; the
affect on the tax rate; land values and mortgages.
Seems maybe nobody is watching the store.
Councillor MacEachern receives $480 a year.There's something funny about this.. A regional councillor sitting on a board, is not entitled to be paid in addition to the regional salary. I believe our regional councillor should be the board member. Councillor MacEachern was appointed by Mayor Morris.
Yesterday, I received information without solicitation. During the nineties, the Province increased conservation authority over lands in the flood plain. At the same time, they down-loaded the cost of the expanded operation to the municipalities.
The program is funded out of regional coffers.
I did not know that.
This is a biggy.
The innformation came from a Land Use Council situated in Sunderland, Ontario. Slightly to the north-east of us.Their concern is about the "disconnect" between conservation authorities and the municipalities they"serve"
Now, there's the problem . I have been labouring under the misunderstanding they were being governed and funded by the province. I thought the Province was paying almost all the cost and keeping tabs on their activities. Seems they are no longer.
If they are not and we (me) are not ....who is?
I mentioned a while ago about the Chairman of the Conservation being in Australia for a conference to receive some rinky-dink award. The Chairman is a Councillor in East Gwillimbury. Last week I learned the Chair's salary is $60,000. a year.
If our regional rep should be the conservation member. So should East Gwillimbury's regional rep.There should be no salary of $60,000 or $480.paid to anybody.
Susan Walmer is no longer Chair of the Environmental Committee. But she is a member and involved in other environmental activities. As well as being Chair of the Oak Ridges Moraine Trust. All of which takes on quite a different complexion with the new information .Ms Walmer came to Council during budget discussion with a recommendation for a "Management Plan" at town expense for lands we neither own nor control.
We budgeted for three of those. One in Sheppard's Bush ,one for the Ann Bartley Smith lands and one for lands on the eastern edge of town transferred to the Oak Ridges Moraine Trust of which Susan Walmer is Chair.
Ms Walmer has an office in a house on Sheppard's Bush. The question of rent is unknown at this time. Does Ms. Walmer collect remuneration. Is the job volunteer or what?
Those houses used to be privately rented out.
No more.
Why bother if the municipality is paying the freight? We provide all external maintenance. And pay in taxes for whatever other costs there are.
The Land Use Council is alarmed by the activities of the Conservation Authorities; the
affect on the tax rate; land values and mortgages.
Seems maybe nobody is watching the store.
Monday, 22 February 2010
About Legal Costs
Legal costs are a matter of public record. The public have a right to know how taxes are being spent.
In the Mormac regime, despite legitimate efforts , the information has not been pried from their hot, sweaty, tightly clenched fists.
So, in the absence of exact accounting, we turn to our own devices to fathom the mystery.
Mr. Beaman gave us the figure of $135.000 up to and including the third appeal procedure. The fourth failed exercise would add another $45,000. It was the cost despite not having to present any kind of an argument.There were also evenings in attendance on Council.
I have seen fifty-five minute telephone conferences with the Mayor and e-mails from Susan Walmer on invoices.
I think $200.000. is a conservative estimate for the Joint Board fiasco.
We have an Ontario Municipal Board Hearing ahead of us. Mr. Beaman has previously estimated costs at $150,000. for a Hearing of two weeks. Mormac are still pursuing that which has been refused four times. Time estimated for a Joint Board Hearing, if granted, is seven weeks.
A conservative estimate for seven weeks would be $500,000.
Last year, the town's budget included a $100.000 reserve for the legal services. By the end of the year it was depleted. Primary activity centred around lawyer John Mascarin.
Former clerk Bob Panizza brought him on the scene. They had worked together in the Town of Markham. Mascarin worked in the municipality's legal department. Panizza brought him on board to answer the question about whether Provincial regulations trump the Municipal Procedure Bylaw on the question of a by-election.
Panizza didn't need a lawyer for that question. He knew the answer. Nevertheless, Mascarin was on hand the night of the decision to refuse the by-election. He occupied pride of place on the staff side of the Council table. He assisted the Mayor in steering the decision to its pre-determined conclusion.
He was involved in the "investigation" of payment authorization for the re-design and re-construct of a fault in the Stronach Centre ceiling and the shameful Inquisition type tribunal conducted behind closed doors.
He was retained and assigned to examine, analyse, recommend publication of a report on written and verbal utterances of an elected representative for the purpose of packaging an iron-clad complaint to an Integrity Commissioner. Which failed.
I estimate, in the absence of exact figures, pretty well all of the $100,000 legal reserve was paid to Mr. Mascarin for the multiple and variety of services noted above.
A reserve is for a rainy day. Anticipated costs do not appear in a reserve. It is intended to cover the unexpected. Services randomly decided upon by Mayor and Council could not be forecast or included in the town's legal services department budget.
How could a town's legal department plan for action against an elected representative? A member of the body which provides judicious oversight of their operation ?
The entire reserve was expended. The funds to pay Mascarin could have come from no other account.
That's why I figure John Mascarin's legal services cost us nigh on a $100,000.
In the Mormac regime, despite legitimate efforts , the information has not been pried from their hot, sweaty, tightly clenched fists.
So, in the absence of exact accounting, we turn to our own devices to fathom the mystery.
Mr. Beaman gave us the figure of $135.000 up to and including the third appeal procedure. The fourth failed exercise would add another $45,000. It was the cost despite not having to present any kind of an argument.There were also evenings in attendance on Council.
I have seen fifty-five minute telephone conferences with the Mayor and e-mails from Susan Walmer on invoices.
I think $200.000. is a conservative estimate for the Joint Board fiasco.
We have an Ontario Municipal Board Hearing ahead of us. Mr. Beaman has previously estimated costs at $150,000. for a Hearing of two weeks. Mormac are still pursuing that which has been refused four times. Time estimated for a Joint Board Hearing, if granted, is seven weeks.
A conservative estimate for seven weeks would be $500,000.
Last year, the town's budget included a $100.000 reserve for the legal services. By the end of the year it was depleted. Primary activity centred around lawyer John Mascarin.
Former clerk Bob Panizza brought him on the scene. They had worked together in the Town of Markham. Mascarin worked in the municipality's legal department. Panizza brought him on board to answer the question about whether Provincial regulations trump the Municipal Procedure Bylaw on the question of a by-election.
Panizza didn't need a lawyer for that question. He knew the answer. Nevertheless, Mascarin was on hand the night of the decision to refuse the by-election. He occupied pride of place on the staff side of the Council table. He assisted the Mayor in steering the decision to its pre-determined conclusion.
He was involved in the "investigation" of payment authorization for the re-design and re-construct of a fault in the Stronach Centre ceiling and the shameful Inquisition type tribunal conducted behind closed doors.
He was retained and assigned to examine, analyse, recommend publication of a report on written and verbal utterances of an elected representative for the purpose of packaging an iron-clad complaint to an Integrity Commissioner. Which failed.
I estimate, in the absence of exact figures, pretty well all of the $100,000 legal reserve was paid to Mr. Mascarin for the multiple and variety of services noted above.
A reserve is for a rainy day. Anticipated costs do not appear in a reserve. It is intended to cover the unexpected. Services randomly decided upon by Mayor and Council could not be forecast or included in the town's legal services department budget.
How could a town's legal department plan for action against an elected representative? A member of the body which provides judicious oversight of their operation ?
The entire reserve was expended. The funds to pay Mascarin could have come from no other account.
That's why I figure John Mascarin's legal services cost us nigh on a $100,000.
The Mayor Has Spoken
In the local newspaper, the Mayor is quoted that "she and her colleagues have since ordered their counsel to launch another appeal" in the Westhill development application.
Thereby lies a tale.
I have told how the fourth lost decision appeared as an addendum to the agenda at the last council meeting. Provided for information, it allowed also for the addition of a closed door meeting to receive further solicitor/client advice.
There was no prior indication that solicitor/client advice was necessary at this stage of the cockamamie, fourth time failed exercise. But that's how things are manipulated in the Mormac regime.
Initially the meeting was a non-stop flow of talk from the Mayor. Input was eventually invited from the solicitor.
Finally permitted to speak, councillors turned the discussion in a different direction at which point, the solicitor was asked to leave the room.
It has occurred to me since, the publicly stated purpose of the meeting left the room at the same time as the solicitor.
During the few minutes of his absence and after invited intervention from other than the solicitor, direction changed again.
All of which leads to this morning's delicious dilemma.
I know of no clause in the Municipal Act, the Procedure Bylaw, Code of Ethics, Code of Conduct
or any other instrument of ensuring purity in politics, which requires me to be complicit in broadcasting a tale which is not factual throughout the community
Though the decision to launch another appeal was relayed to the proponent's solicitor, the day before the closed session of council. And the quote from the Mayor came prior to Council reporting out from the closed session and could be considered a "leak"
Mayor Morris' "colleagues did not agree to launch another appeal" on behalf of "citizens in need"
It was not the intention of the majority.
When the decision is reported out, as directed, and ratified by Council ,then it will be known whether the majority will allow themselves once again to have been manipulated by Mayor Morris and associated handlers.
.
Thereby lies a tale.
I have told how the fourth lost decision appeared as an addendum to the agenda at the last council meeting. Provided for information, it allowed also for the addition of a closed door meeting to receive further solicitor/client advice.
There was no prior indication that solicitor/client advice was necessary at this stage of the cockamamie, fourth time failed exercise. But that's how things are manipulated in the Mormac regime.
Initially the meeting was a non-stop flow of talk from the Mayor. Input was eventually invited from the solicitor.
Finally permitted to speak, councillors turned the discussion in a different direction at which point, the solicitor was asked to leave the room.
It has occurred to me since, the publicly stated purpose of the meeting left the room at the same time as the solicitor.
During the few minutes of his absence and after invited intervention from other than the solicitor, direction changed again.
All of which leads to this morning's delicious dilemma.
I know of no clause in the Municipal Act, the Procedure Bylaw, Code of Ethics, Code of Conduct
or any other instrument of ensuring purity in politics, which requires me to be complicit in broadcasting a tale which is not factual throughout the community
Though the decision to launch another appeal was relayed to the proponent's solicitor, the day before the closed session of council. And the quote from the Mayor came prior to Council reporting out from the closed session and could be considered a "leak"
Mayor Morris' "colleagues did not agree to launch another appeal" on behalf of "citizens in need"
It was not the intention of the majority.
When the decision is reported out, as directed, and ratified by Council ,then it will be known whether the majority will allow themselves once again to have been manipulated by Mayor Morris and associated handlers.
.
Sunday, 21 February 2010
In Effigy
Leisure Services Advisory Committee held something of an effigy lynching party in absentia last Thursday evening.
The Mayor sent party food and refreshments in appreciation of the committee's effort to produce a duplicate plan in contradiction of the original and celebrate the success of their endeavour.
Under discussion was my letter to the editor on the choice of two Master Parks and Recreation plans. One being a final draft, stamped all over with the author's identity, completing ten months of professional work obtaining community input, compiling statistical data and arriving at specific conclusions therefrom.
The second, a completely non-professional effort, bearing no author's name, using the consultant's compilation of community input and factual statistical data and contriving different conclusions
$53,222 worth of public investment. blatantly and deliberately sabotaged for political purposes
with non-elected members of an advisory committee being jerked on strings in the hands of completely visible puppet masters.
At the party, non- elected members were encouraged one by one, to proclaim their indignation at the ignorance and audacity of an elected representive of the people to provied critical comment.
Sher St. Kitts was also on hand to introduce her "assistant" paid for with town funds, to do the work connected with the July 1st Parade. The town has provided $15,000. to Miss St Kitts to pay for the event. $2,000 was earmarked to remunerate said assistant.
At the beginning of the term, annual seed money from town coffers for the July 1st parade was
$1,500. Prior to 2009, a fund-raiser complete with silent auction was held at the Aurora Legion to provide the real financial support for the entirely volunteer effort.
In 2009 however funds raised only covered the cost of the event.No actual accounting was made. The event was alternately described as having been an "awareness" party.
Scant weeks later, On July 21st 2009, the Mayor held another little appreciation gathering complete with cake honouring Ms. St. Kitts and her amazing accomplishment.
The Mayor sent party food and refreshments in appreciation of the committee's effort to produce a duplicate plan in contradiction of the original and celebrate the success of their endeavour.
Under discussion was my letter to the editor on the choice of two Master Parks and Recreation plans. One being a final draft, stamped all over with the author's identity, completing ten months of professional work obtaining community input, compiling statistical data and arriving at specific conclusions therefrom.
The second, a completely non-professional effort, bearing no author's name, using the consultant's compilation of community input and factual statistical data and contriving different conclusions
$53,222 worth of public investment. blatantly and deliberately sabotaged for political purposes
with non-elected members of an advisory committee being jerked on strings in the hands of completely visible puppet masters.
At the party, non- elected members were encouraged one by one, to proclaim their indignation at the ignorance and audacity of an elected representive of the people to provied critical comment.
Sher St. Kitts was also on hand to introduce her "assistant" paid for with town funds, to do the work connected with the July 1st Parade. The town has provided $15,000. to Miss St Kitts to pay for the event. $2,000 was earmarked to remunerate said assistant.
At the beginning of the term, annual seed money from town coffers for the July 1st parade was
$1,500. Prior to 2009, a fund-raiser complete with silent auction was held at the Aurora Legion to provide the real financial support for the entirely volunteer effort.
In 2009 however funds raised only covered the cost of the event.No actual accounting was made. The event was alternately described as having been an "awareness" party.
Scant weeks later, On July 21st 2009, the Mayor held another little appreciation gathering complete with cake honouring Ms. St. Kitts and her amazing accomplishment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
