Details

Written by Gordon Prentice

Published: 31 May 2015

The Glenway “Lessons Learned” meeting is just over three weeks away (23 June 2015) and I still don’t know where it will be held, who will be invited or what the format will be. Is it going to be publicized? Will questions be solicited in advance? Will the meeting be live streamed? Will it be recorded?

At a meeting of the Committee of the Whole on 2 February 2015, the Town’s Chief Administrative Officer, Bob Shelton, suggested that it would be best if the meeting were held in a “controlled environment”. It seems to me the arrangements, so far, would not disgrace Kim Jung Un.

The great danger is that the meeting on 23 June will be used to establish the “facts” rather than as an opportunity for consideration, reflection, assessment and, ultimately, judgement.

The Town – on the recommendation of senior staff – has appointed a facilitator, Glenn Pothier, to guide discussion. I offered to meet him beforehand if he felt that would be helpful and I have half an hour face-to-face on 3 June 2015. His job is to keep things on track and to stop people skillfully avoiding questions and wasting time by ski-ing off-piste.

It has already taken far too long to get to this position to tolerate further obfuscation. With the passage of time, memories fade. And, as key staff members leave the Town’s employment and move on, its institutional memory dulls.

Over three months ago, I listed some of the questions that are, in my mind, still crying out to be answered.

Again, months ago, the Glenway Preservation Association formally submitted to the Town its own list of questions. Many were addressed head on. But others were not. For example:

Why were no Town staff called as witnesses to support the Town’s position at the OMB Hearing?

Answer: To be addressed at the Lessons Learned meeting.

(You can see the GPA’s questions and the Town’s answers by opening “Documents” in the panel top left and navigating to “Glenway”.)

It would be truly scandalous if we had to wait until 23 June to get answers to the raft of questions that remain outstanding. I hope Bob Shelton will act on his first instinct, and invite members of the public to put their questions to the Town beforehand.

The Glenway saga is, of course, full of bitter ironies.

The Town is now about to consult on a new parkland policy. A report to the Committee of the Whole on 25 May 2015 indicates that taxes may have to go up to pay for land acquisition.

We learn that Newmarket will be short of 45 hectares of open space to provide the green lungs its growing population will need over coming years.

Despite this, in the bizarre world of urban planning, the Glenway developer, Marianneville, successfully persuaded the OMB to re-zone 36.3 hectares of open space to residential in-fill - a stone’s throw from Yonge and Davis which is now slated for the highest density development in the whole of Newmarket.

Go figure.

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Update on 1 June 2015: The Council on-line calendar shows the Glenway Lessons Learned meeting is scheduled for 7pm on Tuesday 23 June 2015 in the Council Chamber, 395 Mulock Drive, Newmarket.

---

Details

Written by Gordon Prentice

Published: 30 May 2015

Back Story: To York Administrative Centre to see the Regional Council decide its submission to the Provincial review of three key plans: the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; the Greenbelt Plan and the Oak Ridges Conservation Plan. This is Phase 1. In the second phase, sometime in the Fall, the Province will propose amendments to the Plans. York’s Chief Planner, Valerie Shuttleworth, is hoping for a six month consultation period. Today we hear from deputations. Then there is an open debate and then the vote on a long list of recommendations drawn up by the Chief Planner. It is a big agenda.

Deputations Galore

Today (28 May) is the deadline for comments and the Council Chamber is packed with deputations and supplicants: the environmentalists, the NIMBYs, the developers and their parasitic agents. The lawyers and planners.

The Regional Chair, Wayne Emmerson, enjoys the limelight. He conducts the Council’s business with a light touch. He opens by warning us not to be misled by the story in the Toronto Star which suggests the region could give in to land hungry developers, allowing them to swallow chunks of the Greenbelt.

As if!

I have a feeling in my bones that today, after months of Trappist silence, Newmarket’s Mayor, Tony Van Bynen, might actually say something.

The sound of silence

The 5 minute deputations come and go, wave after wave. I find myself wondering if they make a difference, before dismissing the notion as quite preposterous!

The councillors sit there, mute. When we get to deputation number 12, Mr Bobby Bhoola, implores them to ask him something. “If you don’t ask questions you are not going to get educated!” His plea falls on deaf ears.

Now I hear Emmerson telling councillors he wants to send something down to Queen’s Park that is “credible”.

Markham’s Regional Councillor, Jack Heath, tells us his heart goes out to those people at Queen’s Park who will have to sift through this mountain of material, looking for gold nuggets.

Valerie Shuttleworth has produced a list of 35 recommendations, printed on lime green paper, to help guide discussions. Alongside these, sits a mass of paperwork from municipalities, landowners, deputations and the like which will also be dumped into the lap of the Province.

Newmarket’s John Taylor wants to know the status of what is being submitted. He enjoys process and making sure that everything is just tickety-boo. Are some submissions getting the Region’s seal of approval? If so, why? He loves this procedural stuff.

Mayor Scarpitti casts a long shadow

Frank Scarpitti, the highest paid Mayor in Ontario, is getting concerned about Taylor’s line of questioning. He starts to paw the ground. Scarpitti wants the Region to specifically endorse positions taken by Markham Council.

Georgina’s Mayor Margaret Quirk does not want the Region to endorse submissions from outside – whether organizations or municipalities. The Region should act as a mail box and just forward the stuff on.

Now we are bouncing around all over the place and she is agreeing with East Gwillimbury’s Virginia Hackson that action has to be taken to crack down on illegal dumping and welcomes the new recommendation 35.

“The Province provide enforcement assistance and/or additional resources to local municipalities to address illegal placement of fill, dumping and outside storage on rural and agricultural lands within the Plan areas.”

I agree. Some of the biggest eyesores can be seen on so-called agricultural land. Rusting tractors and abandoned machinery disfiguring the rural landscape.

Now Richmond Hill’s Vita Spatafora is wondering how they reconcile conflicts between the plans. Shuttleworth points him to Recommendation 30.

“The Province (should) reconcile policies, terminology and mapping within legislation and plans to ensure they align.”

What is agriculture?

Spatafora is now thinking aloud. Hydroponics. Is that agriculture?

Shuttleworth is stumped. “I’m just a city girl.”

He tries again. What about growing medical marijuana?

"I don't know. I'm not a pot head."  (I made that up.)

Now Markham's forensic Jack Heath picks up on a point made by one of the deputants, Karen Baker from Whitchurch-Stouffville, who earlier spoke impressively from the lectern without a note in front of her. She told us farmers’ rights were being slowly and silently eroded. They used to be able to build a retirement house on their farm while selling (or passing) the land on. But that is becoming ever more difficult, if not impossible.

Shuttleworth tells us the Regional Official Plan does not provide for severing the land in this way and since 2005 the policy has tightened significantly. Building houses on Grade 1 agricultural land is probably not a good idea though I have some sympathy with the point made by Karen Baker. Who wouldn’t?

The love-in begins

Now the silver-tongued Mayor of Vaughan, Maurizio Bevilacqua, tells Shuttleworth he cannot think of 35 better recommendations than the ones in front of him now. Looking directly at Valerie Shuttleworth he tells her: “You have done an exceptional job!”

Now Richmond Hill’s Brenda Hogg takes us to recommendation 14.

“The Province consider amending the Greenbelt Plan to permit compatible community uses.”

She tells us she has real trouble with this one. We hear how the Greenbelt and the Oak Ridges Moraine conservation area have done wonderful things for our quality of life. They protect water, agriculture and open space. Allowing additional unspecified uses is, she says, premature.

King Mayor, Steve Pellegrini, worries about possible changes in the way rural communities get their water (ie from the lake, perhaps, in future) and dispose of sewage. He echoes points made by earlier deputations that hooking up small towns to big pipes could open the way to unwanted large scale development. Specifically, he wants any mention of Nobleton removed from the text. Recommendation 20 invites

“The Province (to) revisit policies regarding servicing communities in the Greenbelt and Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Area, in consultation with municipalities and stakeholders.”

Markham can be very demanding

Markham’s Jim Jones is now making the case for the Region to support Markham’s position set out in Attachment 2. He is going on about the significance of the 250 metre contour line that was inaccurately measured years ago. I see lots of furrowed brows.

Now an increasingly forthright Scarpitti is insisting the Region back his municipality on this local issue which involves (so far as I understand it) a property owner whose land apparently went into the Oak Ridges Moraine in error as a result of some kind of surveying mistake years ago.

Now a cheerful Emmerson says: “Val’s under the heat lamp out there.”

Shuttleworth bravely tells Scarpitti Markham’s submission has exactly the same weight as any other submission including York Region’s. (I don’t think so)

Vaughan’s Gino Rosati backs Jones. Now in an unfocussed way he is talking about the high cost of housing.

In a long, rambling contribution, Richmond Hill’s David Barrow says it is important to maintain the integrity of the three plans. Yes. Go on…

Mayor Justin Altmann from Whitchurch-Stouffville seems slightly overwhelmed by the occasion and, in a curiously stilted way, reads out something prepared for him earlier by the people in the Town Hall back home.

Why can’t we build a gigantic Temple in the Greenbelt?

Now the love in continues with Markham’s Joe Li telling Valerie Shuttleworth:

“You are still the best of all the Regional staff!”

This is a good example of the technique commonly known as “softening up”. There is much embarrassed laughter before the smiling Li asks if “compatible uses” in the Greenbelt would include temples or churches covering, with parking, up to 50 acres. He says lots of Chinese people have to travel to Scarborough to get to some gigantic place of worship and it would be convenient having some place closer to home.

Shuttleworth doesn’t want to kick her admirer in the shin. On the matter of “compatibility” she tells him gently:

“We’ve been very general. We were specifically vague. It’s their Plan (the Province). There is an issue and they’ve got to address it.”

Now it is the turn of Vaughan’s regional councilor, Mario Ferri, who tells us how important it is to express our point of view. At this, Tony Van Bynen’s ears prick up. Now Ferri, the innocent abroad, says:

 “This is the exercise of democracy at its best.”

He tells us the more input, the better it is for those who have to make the final decision.

Someone has clearly smacked him on the top of the head with a large wooden mallet. He is seeing things that I don't.

Di Biase thanks everyone for doing what they are paid to do

Now the disgraced Vaughan councilor, Michael Di Biase, is asked by the Chair to wind things up. Di Biase looks at Emmerson and gushes:

“Thanks to you. You provided the leadership. Thank you to the CAO, Mr McGregor. Thank you to Valerie and the staff. Val… You have been so patient, listening to everyone, coming up with great recommendations.”

It is time to vote.

Markham’s Jack Heath is unhappy with recommendation 25:

“The Province develop a process to confirm or correct boundaries associated with the Greenbelt Plan and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan.”

He tells us he is a member of “Councillors for the Greenbelt”. The recommendation is too open ended he wants the words “minor boundary issues” inserted. Seconded by Brenda Hogg, the amendment is lost 10-8.

Pellegrini wants the reference to Nobleton to come out. Everyone looks at Shuttleworth. They lean on her like a crutch. She says it OK. Nobleton is out.

Markham’s Jim Jones is now mumbling about Markham’s Attachment 2.

The effervescent Wayne Emmerson loudly tells Jones to speak up so we can all hear him:

“You can get closer to the microphone because you’ve lost a lot of weight!”

But now the mood darkens.

Taylor tells us he is going to be blunt. He says that to vote on this would require a great deal more knowledge than he has at the moment. He cautions against taking positions on site specific changes of this nature. “I hope we don’t go down this road.”

He says it is not due process. He is strongly opposed.

Don’t mess with me or my friends

I can see Frank Scarpitti bristling. Back in Markham, he is someone you don’t mess with.

Bravely, Aurora’s Mayor Geoffrey Dawe agrees with Taylor.

Georgina’s Margaret Quirk also supports Taylor. She says the summary of the position in Amendment 2 is the Reader’s Digest version. She is more than comfortable with Markham putting in its own submission without the cover of the Region’s endorsement.

I can see the jugular vein pulsating in Scarpitti’s neck. He is very unhappy. He wants the Region simply to re-affirm something it said back in 2010 on the issue.

Now we are into the vote.

Emmerson declares it carried. York Region will support Markham. Eleven in favour. The Chair doesn’t bother asking for Noes.

Whoa!!!!

Now we hear a demand for a recorded vote.

Taylor - No; Van Bynen - No; Georgina’s Danny Wheeler - No; Aurora’s Dawe – No; East Gwillimbury’s Hackson – No; Markham’s Jack Heath – No; Richmond Hill’s Brenda Hogg – No; King’s Steve Pellegrini – No; Georgina’s Margaret Quirk – No; Richmiond Hill’s Vito Spatafora – No.

Whitchurch-Stouffville’s Justin Altman – Yes; Markham’s Nirmala Armstring – Yes; Richmond Hill’s David Barrow – Yes; Vaughan’s Maurizio Bevilacqua – Yes; Vaughan’s Michael Di Biase – Yes; Vaughan’s Mario Ferri – Yes; Markham’s Jim Jones – Yes; Markham’s Joe Li – Yes; Vaughan’s Gino Rosati – Yes; Markham’s Frank Scarpetti – Yes;

“That’s why I get the big money!”

The Chair, Wayne Emmerson, declares a tie.

“You put me on the spot. That’s why I get the big money!”

He says it is unfortunate the south of the Region is aligned against the north. He votes against Markham.

Now there is some to and fro between Scarpitti and others about his proposal to allow the Greenbelt to be expanded in situations where a municipality comes forward with proposals. I am thinking there must be an ulterior motive here, somewhere. Brenda Hogg says there is already a process for expanding the Greenbelt. Wounded by the earlier vote, Scarpitti petulantly wants this one recorded. It carries 20 – 0.

Now we are back to recommendation 25 on the boundaries of the Greenbelt. Taylor wants the Province to review Greenbelt boundaries while making it clear that the Region takes no new position on individual landowner requests.  Shuttleworth doesn’t have any problems with this. Carried.

Di Biase is all at sea

Now a disorientated Michael Di Biase moves an amendment to recommendation 25 (that has just been amended by Taylor). Emmerson points this out to a bewildered Di Biase who, obviously, has completely blanked out the debate that had happened only moments before.

A slowly drowning Di Biase says he wants the Province to consider developing a process which would allow additional compatible uses in the Greenbelt and Oak Ridges Moraine. Everyone is struggling to understand him.

An outraged Heath declares he cannot support anything which would extend Whitebelt into the Greenbelt. “I cannot support this!”

Di Biase cries pitifully: “Ms Shuttleworth, help me!”

She throws him a life-line of sorts. She tells us he wants a review of some uses that are scattered across the moraine. She adds Delphically: “These uses are legal but non-conforming.”

She tells us Di Biase’s proposal will give these landowners a process to make whatever it is they are doing OK.

I am totally mystified. As are others.

Taylor says he can’t support the amendment because he has no idea what kind of uses Di Biase has in mind. It now goes to the vote and is nevertheless carried 11-9.

Yes: Di Biase (Vaughan); Li (Markham); Jones (Markham); Rosati (Vaughan); Scarpitti (Markham); Spatafora (Richmond Hill); Wheeler (Georgina); Altmann (Whitchurch-Stouffville); Barrow (Richmond Hill); Bevilacqua (Vaughan); Ferri (Vaughan).

No: Hogg (Richmond Hill); Pellegrini (King); Quirk (Georgina); Hackson (East Gwillimbury); Heath (Markham); Taylor (Newmarket); Van Bynen (Newmarket); Armstrong (Markham); Dawe (Aurora);

We move on.

Now the Mayor of Whitchurch-Stouffville, the hesitant Justin Altmann, wants to amend recommendation 29 (below) on sunset clauses to exclude strategic employment lands along the 404. Apparently there is an active application there that would get caught up in this.

“The Province consider amending the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act and  Greenbelt Act to include “sunset” clauses.”

Someone wants to extend this to all employment lands along the 400 series of highways. Spatafora says we are exempting too many from the sunset clause. No need to worry. Shuttleworth tells us she only knows of one and this is it.

Van Bynen and Taylor, usually joined at the hip, vote different ways on this. Van Bynen backs Altmann. Taylor doesn’t. The amendment is carried 13-7.

All eyes on Tony Van Bynen

Now, at the tail end of the meeting, Tony Van Bynen has our full attention. It is his moment to shine.

He takes us to Attachment 1 in the big bundle of paperwork– “Local Municipal Issues beyond those articulated at the Regional level.” It says:

“The Province should consider reducing the size of settlement areas to exclude lands undevelopable due to natural features, or currently unserviceable.”

Van Bynen wants lands that are in the moraine that are undevelopable put into the Greenbelt. An exasperated Scarpitti wants to know what it all means.

Instead of explaining what he has in mind – using a concrete example – he timidly withdraws his motion. It is as if he can't be bothered.

I shake my head. He can do better than that.

Emmerson – still jolly after four and more hours in the Chair -  now wraps things up and we all go home.

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

---

 

Details

Written by Gordon Prentice

Published: 27 May 2015

Over a year ago, the then Newmarket councillor, Maddie Di Muccio, used public money to run a half page advertisement in the Era, denouncing the (then) Leader of the Ontario PCs, Tim Hudak. I blogged about it at the time.

Unfortunately, we, the taxpayers, ended up footing the $1,181 bill for this private fued.*

Since losing her Council seat, Di Muccio has been reincarnated as a taxpayers’ champion. She is now President – no less - of the York Region Taxpayers Coalition.

In March, our councillors asked senior staff for advice on whether Di Muccio had broken any rules by using her Newmarket expense account to buy personal legal advice and to place advertisements in the local paper “while seeking the provincial nomination”.

Regrettably, Newmarket’s Director of Financial Services, Mike Mayes, cannot bring himself to state unequivocally that using public money to pay for a partisan political advertisement is wholly inappropriate and quite wrong. It is as plain as a pikestaff the money should be repaid in full, now. You can read Di Muccio's advertisement here.

Instead, Mayes and a bevy of senior Town staff who signed off his report, call for further legal advice given that Di Muccio is no longer a councillor. They also suggest bringing in the Integrity Commissioner. Perhaps.

If President Di Muccio thinks it is OK spending taxpayers’ money on political ads, where will it all end?

What is to stop the Mayor (other than his highly developed sense of self preservation) taking out a half page ad in the Era, denouncing her spendthrift ways with “taxpayers’ dollars”? As we all know, Van Bynen loathes Di Muccio and the feeling is reciprocated.

Instead of all this tortured agonizing by senior staff, it seems to me that President Di Muccio should be sent a bill for the full amount of the advertisement. Keep it short, simple and to the point.

Just like the one I'd get if I didn't pay my taxes.

The Town’s Chief Administrative Officer, the quivering Bob Shelton, should screw his courage to the sticking place and ask Di Muccio voluntarily to cough up the cash and reimburse the taxpayers.

If the President refuses, then, sadly, other more painful remedies will have to be applied.

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Update on 27 May 2015: This afternoon Town staff posted a "follow up report" on yesterday’s report on the expense claims of former councillor Maddie Di Muccio which rather changes things. It now appears that the whole matter is out-of-time and that a complaint has to be filed with the Integrity Commissioner within 6 months of the event complained about. Frank Scarpitti, the highest paid Mayor in Ontario, who clashed with Di Muccio earlier this year, must be spitting feathers. Seems to me the Town should still ask for our money back.

*The sums actually claimed by Maddie Di Muccio included $1,225.19 for the Era advertisement (York Region Media Group) and $1,541 for legal advice (Kinahan Professional Corporation).

---

Details

Written by Gordon Prentice

Published: 27 May 2015

York Region’s Chief Planner, Valerie Shuttleworth, has admitted she overlooked a key proposal from Newmarket regional councillor John Taylor, made in January 2014, to force developers to act on planning approvals they get – or risk having those approvals taken away.

This is a first order issue though, scandalously, it is clearly not on the radar of the Region's top planners.

In a memo to regional councillors dated 21 May 2015, Shuttleworth says the Taylor amendment will be in front of Council tomorrow (28 May) when it meets to finalise its submission to the Province on Bill 73 (which proposes major changes to the Planning and Development Charges Acts).

In the memo Shuttleworth acknowledges the proposed submission “did not address the following 2014 request” that:

“the Province also consider possible legislative changes to the Planning Act that would allow approval authorities to place time limits on zoning approval, similar to those lapsing provisions already available on plans of subdivision”

Although any changes to the legislation would not be retroactive, it would prevent situations arising in future where developers get approval for major projects and then don't act on them for years, if ever. In the meantime, the value of the land soars as a result of the planning approval.

Slessor Square in the heart of Newmarket received planning approval in early 2013 and remains a 4.6 acre patch of dirt. It is now on the market for $15,800,000.

To rub salt into the wound, the developer took Newmarket Council to the OMB for failing to determine the complex application within the specified 180 days - a point made by Ward 4 councillor, Tom Hempen, at Newmarket's Committee of the Whole on 25 May 2015.

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

---