Details

The long awaited Glenway “Lessons Learned” meeting, penciled in for 23 June, could end up being a very damp squib.

The Commissioner for Development and Infrastructure Development, Peter Noehammer told Newmarket councillors last week that the format will be highly constrained with the aim of producing a “respectful dialogue” where any recommendations will be determined “as a group through consensus”.

This format begs a number of questions. How is this group going to be constituted? The Information Report that was posted on the Town’s website indicated that the facilitator, Glenn Pothier, would be inviting members of the Council

 “to meet individually with him to provide any initial thoughts on the subdivision’s processing through the Town and OMB”. 

The Report goes on:

“Glenn will also initiate contact (and make himself available for individual meetings) with key staff involved in the process, members of the Glenway Preservation Association, the developer, and the consultants hired by the Town throughout the entire process.”

Those absent from this list include former councillors Chris Emanuel and Maddie Di Muccio (who suggested a lessons learned meeting in the first place), the consultants engaged by the Glenway Preservation Association, and, crucially, members of the public living in Glenway or, indeed, elsewhere in Newmarket.

Glenway is a Town-wide issue

The GPA has said for years that Glenway is not solely a matter for those living in the neighbourhood – it is a Town-wide issue.

This being the case, surely anyone with a point of view who is interested in the Glenway issue should be part of the process. There is absolutely no reason for separating the sheep from the goats in this way. The whole point of the exercise is to determine what happened and why and to make sure – insofar as this is possible – that nothing like it can happen again. Of course, the passage of time takes its toll. Memories fade. There is no official transcript of what happened at the OMB. But, there is one constant; hundreds of people in Glenway and beyond are going to have their lives turned upside down for years to come.

Reviewing the agenda

It is against that background that Newmarket staff will be asking the facilitator “to review the proposed agenda for the Lessons Learned session”.  Councillors, too, should be asked to review and approve it.

So, what is required?

(1)  The Town should extend an open invitation to all those who have a view on what happened at Glenway to register for the Lessons Learned meeting.

(2)  The Town should ask people to submit questions to the Town’s Chief Administrative Officer, Bob Shelton, in advance. (This was floated as a possible way forward by Bob Shelton himself earlier this year.)

(3)  We should avoid ambushes at the Lessons Learned meeting. The meeting is not about scoring points. Insofar as possible, the facts of what happened and any corresponding explanations should be circulated in advance.

(4)  The Lessons Learned meeting should be streamed and taped.

The Lessons Learned meeting comes at a time when the future of the OMB is itself under scrutiny. Mayor Van Bynen made the reform of the OMB a key priority in his election platform and Glenway is, in many ways, an ideal case study. It is in his patch and happened on his watch and demonstrates how not to make major planning decisions. For these reasons the lessons learned process should be documented and the meeting taped.

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

What was said on 4 May 2015

At the tail end of the agenda of the Committee of the Whole on 4 May 2015, Ward 7 councillor, Christina Bisanz, raised a series of questions about the proposed Glenway Lessons Learned meeting (which appeared under the umbrella item, “Outstanding Matters”). The exchanges are set out below.

Christina Bisanz:  “…What are some of the defined outcomes that we are hoping for? Obviously “lessons learned”, but we had talked about using this process, however it unfolds, to certainly help assess how we got to where we did but also to look at informing our position, or the development of a position, we may take as a Council, on OMB reform.”

Commissioner Noehammer: “We intend to retain the services of Glenn Pothier as a facilitator for that session. He looks like he is available in mid June to conduct that session. We will finalise a date and as part of this session he will be undertaking some interviews with various stakeholders before the session including members of council, members of staff, members of the GPA (Glenway Preservation Association) just to get a broader sense of perspective.  And our discussions with Glenn to date have been very positive in the terms, in the sense, that he has a good understanding what the outcome should be, meaning not only to facilitate a discussion and a respectful dialogue of the various issues by phase of the application leading right up to the OMB decision, but also to come to a consensus as to what the next steps (are) or what to do with the information.”

“And that will be determined as a group through consensus. So I got a very good sense from Glenn - he is very experienced in that regard - and he will lead a very respectful discussion, dialogue, on the whole process with an outcome and as a Group determine what the next steps should be.”

Christina Bisanz: “So, at this point, I’d like to share this with the GPA to advise them this is coming and that there will be an opportunity directly for members of the Executive to provide input.”

Mayor Tony Van Bynen: “If I may, there is one other item we should give thought to and that is feedback on OMB reform and what the timelines are for input relative to that. I was under the impression that might be the end of May and I don’t know whether or not our planning staff are putting together a position paper.”

“I know they will be looking for some information from the Region as well and I think the sooner we have that so we can individually if we wish provide some additional input into that process as well… do we know where that would be at Mr Noehammer?”

Commissioner Noehammer: “Yes Mr Mayor. Staff are bringing forward that comprehensive review of the four Provincial documents for the May 25th meeting of the Committee of the Whole. You are quite right. It does only leave a very short time between when comments have to go back to the Province. But such is the way that this process has panned out in terms of the short time frame that stakeholders have been given.”

“The Region is also going to be reporting through Regional Council on the same matter and so, within a very short time frame, the Regional and Newmarket Councils will have the benefit of staff reports reviewing those documents.”

Mayor Tony Van Bynen: “That’s relative to Places to Grow, Oak Ridges Morraine and the Green Belt. But is there not a separate evaluation of the effectiveness of the Ontario Municipal Board?”

“I’ve kind of lost track of that. I am just wondering, not now, but if you can zip around an email what the timelines are if there’s some prep time that’s needed. I know there are people who want to provide input on OMB reform.”

Commissioner Noehammer: “Certainly I can follow up with that Mr Mayor.”

(These exchanges can be viewed on the video of the Committee of the Whole on 4 May 2015 starting at 3.32)

Details

One way or another electricity is going to play a big part in Ontario politics over the next four years.

The Liberal Government at Queen’s Park is ready to part-privatise Hydro One to help fund the huge spending on transit infrastructure. And York Region is now looking at the future of electricity supply over the next twenty years as demand is projected to increase dramatically.

Here in Newmarket, we are living with the terrible mistake of not burying the hydro lines in Davis Drive even as it is being endlessly dug up, filled in and dug up again. For all the millions spent, Davis Drive will, unfortunately, retain the frontier town look with heavy cables hanging from unsightly hydro poles. The cost of burying hydro in the future will run to tens of millions of dollars.

We get our electricity from Newmarket-Tay Power Distribution, the company that was formed in 2006 with the merger of Newmarket Hydro and Tay Hydro. It is wholly owned by both municipalities.

You can see the presentation Paul Ferguson, the President of Newmarket Hydro Holdings, gave to the Town’s councillors back in February 2015 here. It is at the top of the agenda.

Directors’ Remuneration

The presentation is curiously silent of the question of directors’ remuneration which, from time to time, is a subject for comment in the blogosphere and twitterverse.

Does Tony Van Bynen, for example, accept remuneration for sitting on the Hydro Board even though he is there only by virtue of his position as Mayor of Newmarket? Sitting on the Hydro Board goes with the day job, so to speak.

Directors of Newmarket-Tay Power Distribution Ltd receive an annual retainer of $8,000 plus a per diem of $200 for attending Board of Director or Board Committee meetings. I am told that on average there are six Board and four Committee meetings per year bringing the annual remuneration to $10,000 for a full record of attendance.

Van Bynen waives the extra cash

I suspect Van Bynen waives the $10,000. He would not have made such a song and dance about the Toronto Star’s assessment of his alleged earnings if he was trousering on the side another $10,000.

It is though surprising that a former banker of 30 years standing, a man who lives and breathes figures,  originally claimed he was getting $151,000 – not $182,000 but by the time the Star published its correction his remuneration had drifted up to $159,856.

Unearthing old By-Laws

The authority for the directors’ remuneration can be traced back to a Newmarket by-law in 2000 but getting hold of this is not a straight forward matter. I am also told the remuneration has not been adjusted since that date. This commendable self denial comes at a price. The Bank of Canada inflation calculator tells me that $10,000 in 2000 is worth a $13,322 today.

For the future, surely, the remuneration of the Hydro Board’s directors should be reported to Newmarket councillors every year as a matter of course. It shouldn't be this difficult finding out who gets what.

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

Details

The long delayed "Glenway Lessons Learned" meeting is to be held on Tuesday, 23 June 2015.

It will be led by a Town appointed facilitator, Glenn Pothier.

Former councillors Chris Emanuel and Maddie Di Muccio first called for such a meeting in April 2014 with the formal decision taken by the Town Council on 5 May 2014.

Details of the modalities are still unclear.

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

Details

The threatened part privatization of Hydro One has triggered an avalanche of hostile comment, warning Ontario not to sell the family silver.

In a spirited piece in the Toronto Star earlier this week, Transit Union chief, Bob Kinnear, reminds us:

Transit in York Region north of Toronto is the only fully privatized system in Canada and charges the highest fares — $4 for a single Zone 1 bus ride, a dollar more for Zone 2. It is also the most heavily subsidized in Ontario, with taxpayers kicking in an additional $5 every time a paying passenger boards that bus.

While cash fares are being pegged for the next two years, non-cash fares continue their steady progression upwards.

A book of 10 adult tickets goes up from $33 to $34 on July 1 and up again to $35 in 2016. Similarly a book of 10 student tickets rises from $25 to $26 and up to $27 next year. The full list is shown here.

Tomorrow, York Region’s Committee of the Whole will be receiving its regular report on how many riders the buses are carrying. Councillors will find out why ridership is down in the first quarter of the year.

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

 

Details

To the Newmarket Public Library for their latest IdeaMarket offering:  

“Smartphones, You Tube, Infamy: Video Activism and Social Change”.

Soon after kick-off I realize the sweep of tonight’s topic is way, way too wide with nothing staying in focus for more than a few minutes before discussion is moved on.  We hear about cyber bullying and the damage it can do to a person’s self esteem. Now I am watching a promotional video for a women’s refuge. Next up is a short movie clip from a young woman expressing her feelings through the medium of a silent video. It's a jumble that seems very Art House-ish to me.

There is a panel of six (too many) including Tracy Kibble, the Editor of the Era, Newmarket’s local newspaper which is dumped unsolicited on driveways week in, week out.

She tells us that much of what is out there on the internet cannot be trusted. That’s why local newspapers are needed. They care about the truth and double check the facts. As I am listening to this, I am smiling to myself.

Now she is asked about citizen journalism, blogging and its impact on the mainstream press. She seems curiously unconcerned.

Nwkt Town Hall Watch

She mentions by name, Newmarket Town Hall Watch, brushing them aside disdainfully. They hide behind their anonymity and don’t bother to check their sources, peddling half truths and distortions as fact. (That was the gist of it.)

Now Tracy is talking about how the Era is coping in an age where news travels fast. A tweet can be sent in seconds. She concedes they are never (or rarely) going to be first with breaking news.

Indeed, I learn the Era no longer routinely publishes photographs of accidents and the like. One way or another, these go on the web instantaneously. By the time they appear in the print version they would be old news.

We are told the on-line site chalks up an impressive 500,000 page views per month. I am astonished. Clearly, there is life in the old dog yet, albeit in the digital version.

A Huge Cylindrical Roll of Bumf

In the old days, when people bought the Era, there had to be a certain percentage of news in the content. (I was told it was about 40% but this may be way off the mark.) But now the paper is a freebie there is no minimum requirement for news and editorial. What little there is is submerged under a huge mass of advertising bumf.

As I am listening to Tracy I am wondering how many people would take the Era if they had to pay good money for it. And will it exist in its current form in, say, ten years?

Nowadays, people get their news from a huge variety of sources and newspaper editors, like Tracy Kibble, are no longer the gatekeepers they once were, deciding what should be reported and when. That paradigm died years ago.

Nevertheless, I want local newspapers to survive. They could still fulfill an important function.

But they’ve got to offer more than we are getting now; which is a very thin gruel of local news and comment.

They need to become relevant again.

Here's an idea. The Era should start running stories on local issues that influential people would prefer to see going unreported.

I have a list.

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

  • You are here:  
  • Home