Details

Back Story: The grasping and calculating developer, Marianneville, wants to build 74 Town houses on the site of the former club-house. This is the first in a long series of  applications which will change this quiet residential neighbourhood out of all recognition. They are turning their attention to the adjacent Glenway West lands which will, if they have their way, be developed too.

It is Monday 2 February and the Council Chamber is an oasis of calm as councillors decide how best to handle the continuing hot potato that is Glenway. The atmosphere is very different from the histrionics that marked the last Council term.

We are listening to Christina Bisanz, the recently elected councillor for Ward 7 and former chair of the Glenway Preservation Association (GPA). In a measured and matter-of-fact way, she tells councillors what she expects of them. The Glenway Preservation Association’s briefing meeting to update residents is on 12 February and the community will be looking for specific answers to specific questions.

People want specific details

She lays her cards on the table. She wants to know about any previous discussions the council may have had about buying the Glenway lands. People have concerns about compatibility between what is proposed and what is already there. They want to know about the Glenway West lands. The Committee report that councillors have in front of them is, she says, good so far as it goes but people will be expecting more specific details.

The Mayor, always most comfortable when strapped into a procedural straightjacket, suggests the GPA could send a deputation to appear before the Committee of the Whole as part of the lessons learned exercise. (I don’t think so.)

Regional Councillor John Taylor has his own ideas. He is worried about the number of meetings being proposed and the potential for confusion. He loves process issues and is in his element. He wants a letter to go out to residents setting out the schedule giving people the opportunity to go to the meetings on topics they are interested in.

Facilitated discussion

Taylor also wants to discuss with the community the future of the Glenway West lands. He also wonders aloud about the best format for the “lessons learned” meeting. And he wants a date for it to give people as much notice as possible. He suggests it should be separate from the Committee of the Whole. Maybe a broader facilitated public meeting where residents have an opportunity to participate.

Christina Bisanz, without missing a beat, says it is important to have a facilitated discussion. Clearly, this is crucial to avoid people skilfully avoiding questions and, generally, wasting time by ski-ing off-piste.

The Town’s Chief Administrative Officer, Bob Shelton cautions against asking for too much detail on 12 February. There will inevitably be gaps in the material going to the GPA meeting. The lessons learned meeting will be “more fulsome”.

“My one concern is that the meeting that is scheduled for next week would not have enough complete information. So I could see that as being more administrative but with a bit of an overview. But the “lessons learned” meeting would be one that could be more fulsome…”

Advance notice of questions 

He says it would be useful to know the kind of questions people are posing and these can be addressed in the lessons learned meeting. This is an invitation too good to miss. I am already sharpening my pencil.

Shelton continues:

“Perhaps the GPA meeting could focus on what questions do they want answered in that upcoming format so that we have a clear understanding. And that would be in a more controlled environment, if I can use that word, in terms of whether it is in the Chambers or live streamed for those who cannot attend. But we would have advance (notice of the) questions the GPA are looking to be answered and one I heard referenced is one on property considerations. If we know what these questions are there may be the need to have a closed session with council to look at what has happened chronologically in terms of property issues and get Council direction in terms of where we go from here in that regard.”

Ward 5 councillor, Joe Sponga, supports Christina Bisanz. He is concerned about infill in established neighbourhoods. Would the experience of Glenway have lessons for other infill areas? The Mayor says a lot of work has been done already on infill policy but Glenway is different in scale. He is saying there is no read-across.

Clearly, the Mayor sees Glenway providing ammunition for his treatise on OMB reform. But, inconveniently for His Worship, it wasn’t just the OMB that screwed up. The OMB delivered a decision. It did not get to the truth.

We should all learn the lessons of Glenway says Bob Shelton

Now it’s Bob Shelton again, tip-toeing through the tulips on the “lessons learned” process.

“I am just going to deal with the point that the councillor (Joe Sponga) indicated relative to applying any lessons learned to other developments etc. That is the approach that is used in a continuous improvement environment and so, if there are any lessons that can be learned, and learned by all parties involved in the process, those lessons can be applied to other developments so I think it would be premature until the lessons learned exercise takes place to determine what the lessons are and how they should be applied and where they should be applied. So I suggest that should be a follow-up to a lessons learned exercise.”

The GPA’s Dave Sovran and Brian Gard are seated in the front row of the public gallery and, unexpectedly, after a request by Taylor, they are invited to speak. Brian Gard steps forward with some refreshingly blunt unscripted remarks. His frustration with the whole Glenway debacle is palpable.

Panel Discussion

He says it is not just about timeliness or about process.

“We’d like to discuss everything. Even the $1,000,000.”

Glenway is - and always has been - a Town-wide issue. He wants staff and councillors to be part of a panel discussion, taking questions at next week’s GPA meeting.

Shelton can’t let the reference to Glenway costing the Town $1,000,000 pass without comment. We learn a report is being finalised and should be ready shortly. He says less than $600,000 is related to the “OMB component” of the Glenway costs.

This doesn’t satisfy Dave "I'm ten years older than the Mayor" Kerwin who has a bee in his bonnet about Glenway. He wants to show how the whole episode cost the Town an arm and a leg. He demands that Newmarket staff time is factored in.

Ever the showman, he says this for dramatic effect. He has been on the council since the dawn of time and knows, as much as I do, that planning staff (unfortunately) do not use time sheets, logging the amount of time spent on individual development applications.

Now Kerwin is chirruping on about his lovely home being open to members of the public who want to discuss things. Or they could meet him at the Newmarket Public Library from 9.30am til noon on Saturday. We hear people are dropping in to see him from all over Town. “They are becoming quite popular” he says, modestly.

Road Map

Now Taylor clambers back into the driving seat again.  He wants his letter to be prepared by staff showing milestones… 

“A road map of where we are going.”

This will be useful for those residents of Glenway who have already been to hell and back.

 

Details

To the Newmarket Public Library for their latest IdeaMarket presentation, designed to get people thinking – and re-evaluating their own views.

A panel of five women who work with the victims of sexual assault describe the trauma of it all and how the women affected cope with the ordeal. They go on to tell us, in their own way, what needs to change.

I am here to listen and learn.

With former CBC celebrity, Jian Ghomeshi, up in Court again on 4 February, we launch into a discussion about "consent" and what it means. I learn there is outreach work done in Newmarket High Schools, getting young people to think about consent and how it manifests itself. One woman from the audience says nothing less than “enthusiastic consent” will do. I nod my head in agreement – but immediately realise that even that isn’t enough.

On her own admission, the White House intern, Monica Lewinsky had an enthusiastically consensual relationship with Bill Clinton but it was - no question about it - wholly inappropriate.

This is all difficult territory that has to be navigated with great care.

Rotherham, UK

Now I am listening to a panellist making a glancing reference to the Rotherham sexual abuse case where police apparently believed the abused teenage girls were little better than “sluts”. It was truly shocking. But the comment is not set in context.

The police were culpable but so were many others. A string of high profile cases in Rochdale, Derby, Oxford and elsewhere, linked teenage girls from broken homes with British Pakistani men who preyed on them. People were paralysed by fear they would be branded as racist if they drew attention to that fact. Now it is out in the open and much discussed.

Now we are talking about conviction rates and how too many of the supposedly guilty walk free. I hear one panellist complain that convicting on the standard of “beyond reasonable doubt” is perhaps too onerous and, maybe, the “balance of probabilities” would be better. Hmmm.

Convicting someone on, say, a 51%-49% probability is not my idea of justice but I am too polite to say so. I bite my tongue. We are all very respectful of each other’s opinions.

Sexual Assault and politicians

Now a woman in the audience reminds us of the alleged sexual assaults on two female NDP MPs that dominated the headlines last November. They allege they were sexually assaulted by two Liberal MPs, Massimo Pacetti and Scott Andrews, who both say they did nothing wrong. Justin Trudeau, kicked them out of the Liberal caucus and banned them from running as Liberal candidates in the forthcoming election – unless they are exonerated by an independent investigation, the prospect of which seems to have evaporated. More details are out there in the blogosphere.

The NDP MPs could, of course, report the alleged assaults to the police but they choose not to. And without a formal complaint, the police are powerless to act.

One of the panellists – a police officer from York Region – tells us that any complaint of sexual assault is dealt with sensitively and the anonymity of the complainant is protected.

But that’s true only for so long. If the police decide to prosecute then, clearly, it is all going to come out in Court.

The two NDP MPs don’t want to go down that route.

But if they don’t, the reputations of the two Liberal MPs, already put through the mangle, are destroyed forever.

Discuss.

Update on 3 February 2015: Joan Bryden writes: MPs having difficulty creating legal terms of new harassment policy. Sub- committee's work going nowhere fast as it tries to regulate behaviour.

Update on 5 February 2015: UK Government intervenes in child sexual exploitation scandal in Rotherham.

see also Joint Committee on Human Rights (UK Parliament) Violence against women and girls.

Update on 20 March 2015: Justin Trudeau: "I consider the matter closed."

 

Details

Property taxes are there for a purpose. They raise money for cash strapped municipalities but they should also encourage the efficient use of land and property.

Isn’t it time we taxed more heavily properties left vacant for ages?

Empty properties blight neighbourhoods and have an impact on adjacent businesses.

The Clock Tower on Main Street South is as deathly quiet as the funeral home diagonally opposite. Perhaps even more so.

Just round the corner on Park Avenue lies the King George School, built in 1912-13 and designated under the Ontario Heritage Act. I see the occasional light on now and again. Is it fully occupied? I don’t think so. Does the owner get any kind of rebate on taxes payable? No idea. That’s confidential.

I think it’s time for councillors to revisit the whole issue of empty property taxes and vacancy rebates.

The Town should not be subsidising people who choose to keep their properties empty long-term.

 

Details

Later today, Newmarket councillors will be getting a presentation from the Town’s legal people on the ins-and-outs of the municipality buying and selling land and property. It all comes under the rubric of “strategic property”.

I am left wondering, yet again, if the Town of Newmarket ever considered buying the Glenway lands? Was there any discussion at all at Mulock Drive about whether the Town should acquire these lands? Did the Mayor ever contemplate the Town buying the Glenway lands? Maybe the question will arise in some form in the closed part of the meeting today.

We have it on the authority of the longest serving councillor in Canada, Dave Kerwin, that, a few years ago, “we had the opportunity of purchasing the land and we didn’t.”

This could mean (a) the seller made a direct approach to the Town or (b) the Town approached the seller or (c) the Town was simply aware that the golf course lands were on the market.

In any event, in her written decision on Glenway, issued on 18 November 2014, the OMB adjudicator, Susan Schiller, observed:

“In early 2010, the Town initiated studies as part of Official Plan Amendment 10, the Urban Centres Secondary Plan. The evidence before the Board is that by the time these studies were initiated the Town was well aware that the subject lands were no longer in active use as a golf club and golf course and were available for development.”

“There is no evidence before the Board that the Town took any steps to acquire these lands for public open space and public park purposes.”

We know the Town put out some feelers about the Glenway West lands last year. But we are still in the dark about the so-called “subject lands” – the land that is about to be built over.

Some may say this is all water under the bridge. Dave Kerwin has already made his position crystal clear:

“The sooner we move forward with this, the sooner we put the last four years behind us…  I just feel we should move on at this time and not exacerbate the situation and bring up old issues that we’ve already dealt with.”

The problem with this beguilingly simple approach is that a lot of issues have not been dealt with and, if they are not addressed, there is little chance of learning lessons for the future.

I always thought the Town’s planners and legal people were constantly scanning the horizon; on the look out for land and property that might be needed to fulfil the Town’s policy commitments.

But if elected and unelected officials had no discussions whatsoever with the Mayor (or, indeed, other councillors) about the possibility of acquiring the Glenway lands then why not say so?

Regional Councillor John Taylor set out his own thinking on the disclosure of information on 29 September 2014:

"Every Municipality has confidential memos and confidential reports. This is an absolute necessary tool, protecting the interests of residents in our communities. We have often conversations or negotiations or litigation or decisions that sharing them publicly would harm the residents’ interests in a financial way and in other ways.”

“…but in-camera discussions go through a process and most of them eventually, if not all of them, eventually, come out of camera. You go through a process that takes time and staff review it and they report back to us how to bring it out in its entirety or partially and at what stage.”

“At the end of the day there will still be matters that we simply cannot and will not disclose because it is not in the best interests of residents and I think it is very important that we discuss that and people understand that principle and that there are elected officials willing to stand by that principle.”

Fair enough. But information should not be withheld simply because it may cause embarrassment. At some point, people will want to know if the Town considered buying the Glenway lands and, if not, why not?

A “Glenway Process Report” will be coming up to the Committee of the Whole on 2 February 2015.

The Glenway Preservation Association is holding a community meeting on Thursday 12 February 2014 at 7pm at Crosslands Church where local people will be briefed on latest developments.

 

Details

To Mulock Drive for the site plan meeting on Glenway.

The developer, Marianneville, is unveiling plans to build 74 townhouse units on the site of the former golf club house. This is a taster of what is to come.

The new councillor for Ward 7, Christina Bisanz, complains that details were only made available last week and she wants the public to have a look at what is being put forward. She also wants details of the number of development blocks that will come up for site plan review.

This block and another east of Eagle Street are coming forward first because, says the woman from Marianneville, they are the easiest blocks to service and will cause the least amount of disruption. Another six blocks or so will follow.

Regional Councillor John Taylor asks about the phasing of the development. He wants the global picture and a sense of the timelines. We hear that the phasing is dependent on servicing allocations – hooking up to water and sewage.

Richard Zelinka, Marianneville’s planner, stresses that the townhouse development will not impact on the rest of Glenway - before telling us mature trees will be dug up from elsewhere in the old golf course and transplanted into the new development.

It is all very civilised and measured with everyone on their best behaviour.

But now a curmudgeonly Dave Kerwin dismisses Christina Bisanz’s call for public involvement before any decision is made. “The sooner we move forward the better” he says. “I’d hate to see this project delayed.”

He repeats himself a few times, saying we should move on.

And then he says casually: “We had the opportunity of purchasing the land and we didn’t.” 

Hmmmm.

I’d like to know when the former golf course lands were offered to the Town to buy. And for how much? Did the Town’s planners flag this up in a report to councillors? Did they recommend purchase? If not, why not? If the councillors decided not to buy, what were the reasons? Were all the councillors involved in the decision?

This information is likely to be in the public domain in some form, somewhere, but, in the way of these things, it is probably beautifully camouflaged.  In any event, I don’t recall seeing it. But that’s not to say it is not there. It’s likely I’ve just forgotten.

Anyway… these questions will probably surface at the “Glenway: Lessons Learned” meeting that has been promised by the Town.

All this is still, of course, highly relevant. By the Town’s own figures, the north west quadrant of Newmarket (which, of course, includes Glenway) will be short of 17.6 hectares of neighbourhood parkland at build-out – a shortfall far greater than any other part of town.

In the vote, Kerwin is supported by Jane Twinney, who is at his elbow and is easily influenced, but he has little support elsewhere.

John Taylor, Tom Hempen, Kelly Brome-Plumley and the Mayor all speak in support of Christina Bisanz’s position. Joe Sponga is absent.

Kerwin presses it to a vote knowing he will lose and then, eccentrically, seconds the successful motion to defer a decision pending a PIC (public information centre).

Strange behaviour. But these days, for Dave, it's par for the course.

 

  • You are here:  
  • Home