As experience continues to show, news in Newmarket doesn't happen randomly very often. There is usually an agenda behind every item of news.
Weeks ago, I picked up on a twitter conversation started by Councillor Jane Twinney about affordable housing. Regional Councillor Taylor also tweeted about the subject in what was meant to appear unrelated to the Ward 3 councillor's discussion. I wrote a couple of blogs about the subject and I drew a connection between Twinney and Taylor and the man who was hired by John Taylor's father to run Habitat for Humanity, Ward 1 Councillor Vegh. Taking exception to what I wrote, Vegh denied any connection whatsoever but he dodged questions from a Newmarket resident on whether he supported more rentals in Newmarket. I don't know if Vegh is indeed part of cohort scheming to build rental stacked townhouses on Queen Street, but his name keeps getting mentioned in their company such as in this article here: http://www.yorkregion.com/news-story/3241869-housing-solution-simple-how-part-is-problem/
If you read through the story, you will see towards the end of the article, quotes from Jane Wedlock who works with the United Way. Google her and you will find a number of news articles mentioning her and Joan Stonehocker. Who is Ms. Stonehocker? She was elected Chair of the Newmarket Public Library Board a couple of weeks ago. Which members of Council are also members of the NPL Board that voted to elect Ms. Stonehocker? John Taylor and Tom Vegh (along with Tom Hempen). So it is a small world after all (or at least Era Reporter Sean Pearce has a very small rolodex of people to call for interviews). I am surprised Sean Pearce didn't provide balance in his article by including comments from residents who oppose Taylor's schemes. The article is written like an advertorial which I am certain suits the Regional Councillor to a tee
As I mentioned previously, I have no problems with do-gooders like Taylor and Vegh (and their allies Hempen and Twinney) trying to change the world and end poverty. I do have a problem when they focus on bringing all of York Region's problems to Newmarket. We are a large region with over 1.1 million residents. It shouldn't rest on the 85,000 residents of Newmarket to shoulder the entire burden of solving the poverty issue. If they want to campaign, I recommend they take up their cause with the Councils of Vaughan, Markham, Richmond Hill, King, Stouffville, East Gwillimbury and Aurora. Newmarket and Georgina have already done their fair share.
Changing gears but still on the topic of seemingly unconnected events -
I finally got a chance to watch this week's council meeting all the way through.
There was an exchange towards the end of the meeting when Regional Councillor Taylor asked a question about this letter printed in the Era on May 15: http://www.yorkregion.com/opinion-story/2876771-no-one-accountable-when-things-go-awry/
The department head responded capably but predictably and it seemed all so routine until he added one little tidbit of information that wasn't asked for -- that the contract with Green for Life was due to expire soon. When he mentioned that, it piqued my interest.
It is an interesting comment for the department head to make because it connects us to this news story: http://www.yorkregion.com/news-story/3239355-newmarket-unveils-totem-trail-markers/
Emterra gave the Town of Newmarket $50,000 towards the cost of these trail markers. Emterra is in the waste disposal business but it doesn't do any business with the Town of Newmarket. We are supposed to believe that Emterra made a donation out of the goodness of their own hearts to a community that the company doesn't service.
The story gets interesting when you discover that Emterra formerly had a facility in Newmarket. In fact, it was a facility that often made the news, such as this story here in the Toronto Star http://www.thestar.com/news/investigations/2009/10/01/city_dumps_green_bin_operator.html and it was a hot topic in the Era circa 2008. At that time, Emterra was known as Halton Recycling. Over the years, the Town of Newmarket doggedly pursued Halton Recycling about the smells emanating from their Harry Walker facility until Halton Recycling was forced to shut down the facility permanently. In 2012, the Town and Halton Recycling came to some sort of resolution including re-zoning the property which I believe is currently on the market.
So what is the motivation behind the $50,000 donation to the Town of Newmarket? Was it a 'thank you' for a generous resolution to the Harry Walker problem? Could it be a marker on the table for when the Green for Life contract goes out to tender? I don't know the answer but I can tell you from where I sit, the stench from Halton Recycling is far from over.
Lastly, before I put my tin foil hat and conspiracy theories away for the day, I am going to draw your attention to a fellow Newmarket blogger's recent post - http://shrinkslessorsquare.ca/blog/100-just-say-no . I don't always agree with his point of view but I do enjoy reading his editorials. I am not sure if the writer attended the public meeting unveiling the Clock Tower plans. If he did, I don't know if he would have made a connection between the Forrest Group developer and Newmarket Mayor Tony Van Bynen? This meeting featured the Mayor's surrogate prominently. (This surrogate was so ostentatiously supportive of the developer that it made this observer quite uncomfortable). I believe I am reading the tea leaves correctly and there can be no doubt that the Mayor is backing the Forrest Group's planned transformation of historic Main Street.
Thursday 30 May 2013
Wednesday 29 May 2013
Gambling on a Casino Without Ante'ing Up
The problem with the structure of York Region is that certain municipalities make decisions, such as the Cities of Markham and Vaughan on affordable housing, and other municipalities are left with doing all the heavy lifting. That is why you get imbalances like with Georgina and Newmarket having the majority of York public housing units in the Region.
The City of Vaughan made yet another such decision with deciding in favour of a casino which potentially will pay Vaughan upwards of $50 million in taxes and hosting fees. That's great money for Vaughan but what about York Region?
Casinos bring many social evils to a community - poverty, addiction, drugs, organized crime, and prostitution to name a few. These social problems soak up a significant amount of public money in resources in terms of housing, policing, social work and the legal system to name a few. In York Region, these costs are generally borne by the York Regional Government with contributions made by taxpayers in all municipalities.
In a nutshell, Vaughan gambles on a casino. If they win, Vaughan gets to keep all the dough. If they lose, all the York Region municipality residents get a share of the costs.
If Vaughan wants the casino, then it will be up to the other municipalities to ensure that Vaughan pays a sizable levy to York Regional coffers to keep the costs of battling the social problems associated with a casino balanced and fair.
Therefore, before the Province and the OLG entertains a bid from Vaughan, it will be Queens Park's responsibility to ensure that Vaughan invests in social housing within its own borders, that cost structures related to policing, social work and the legal system are shouldered by the municipality that is receiving the monetary reward for being the host. To do otherwise is simply gambling without ante'ing up.
One final comment on the casino.
I have heard a number of rumours about certain individuals who intend to be involved in Newmarket elections that are currently contracted (or sub contracted) to do lobbying related work with either MGM, Onex, Oxford, Sands or Caesars (one of which would likely operate a Vaughan casino). For instance, Toronto Life magazine has reported that former Rob Ford campaign manager, Nick Kouvalis is working with the MGM bid. Kouvalis is known to have significant ties in the Newmarket area. I will challenge these individuals to be transparent about their involvement particularly if they intend to put their name on a ballot in a 2014 municipal or a subsequent provincial or federal election. The voters have a right to know if you are working to bring poverty, drugs, prostitution, organized crime and other social ills into our community.
The City of Vaughan made yet another such decision with deciding in favour of a casino which potentially will pay Vaughan upwards of $50 million in taxes and hosting fees. That's great money for Vaughan but what about York Region?
Casinos bring many social evils to a community - poverty, addiction, drugs, organized crime, and prostitution to name a few. These social problems soak up a significant amount of public money in resources in terms of housing, policing, social work and the legal system to name a few. In York Region, these costs are generally borne by the York Regional Government with contributions made by taxpayers in all municipalities.
In a nutshell, Vaughan gambles on a casino. If they win, Vaughan gets to keep all the dough. If they lose, all the York Region municipality residents get a share of the costs.
If Vaughan wants the casino, then it will be up to the other municipalities to ensure that Vaughan pays a sizable levy to York Regional coffers to keep the costs of battling the social problems associated with a casino balanced and fair.
Therefore, before the Province and the OLG entertains a bid from Vaughan, it will be Queens Park's responsibility to ensure that Vaughan invests in social housing within its own borders, that cost structures related to policing, social work and the legal system are shouldered by the municipality that is receiving the monetary reward for being the host. To do otherwise is simply gambling without ante'ing up.
One final comment on the casino.
I have heard a number of rumours about certain individuals who intend to be involved in Newmarket elections that are currently contracted (or sub contracted) to do lobbying related work with either MGM, Onex, Oxford, Sands or Caesars (one of which would likely operate a Vaughan casino). For instance, Toronto Life magazine has reported that former Rob Ford campaign manager, Nick Kouvalis is working with the MGM bid. Kouvalis is known to have significant ties in the Newmarket area. I will challenge these individuals to be transparent about their involvement particularly if they intend to put their name on a ballot in a 2014 municipal or a subsequent provincial or federal election. The voters have a right to know if you are working to bring poverty, drugs, prostitution, organized crime and other social ills into our community.
Tuesday 28 May 2013
Amalgamation to save money and improve services
There has been talk about efficiencies gained by amalgamating fire departments in York Region. I have written previously that this is a fool's folly. We have already seen that the creation of Central York Fire Services resulted in the tax hike all Newmarket property owners received in 2012. Merging Fire Departments means higher taxes.
Yet there is an amalgamation that is indeed worthy of investigation and has proven successful elsewhere. That is the amalgamation of municipal libraries into a central York Region library system.
When the City of Toronto merged from the former cities of Scarborough, North York, Toronto, Etobicoke, York and East York, the result was an astounding success. Not only did the new City of Toronto get one of the North America's largest and most efficient library systems, amalgamation also resulted in the elimination of approximately 200 positions. The eliminated positions were redundancies that were costing taxpayers dearly and according to the Toronto Star, these were backroom, non-value added roles.
In addition to the merger, the Toronto Public Library system has been flirting with outsourcing which again improves efficiencies and bolsters the bottom line. In fact, according to a 2011 report from the American Library Association published in the American Library Magazine, there is significant financial upside to go with full scale private management service of our public library system. Many U.S. cities, facing tough budget decisions, have opted to go this route and have had significant success.
What is the advantage to a municipality like Newmarket to consider amalgamation?
1) Financial - The money allocated in 2013 to operate the Newmarket Public Library is $3.1 million. Of that amount, $161,000 gets spent on acquiring books, another $20,000 on reference materials, and $13,000 on magazines. These numbers pale in comparison to the $500,000 spent on management salaries. It is at this level where we are bound to find redundancies where we can save taxpayers almost 15% each year. That is significant money that can be reinvested back into the system to improve services and materials as well as allow the library to be open 7 days per week.
2) Better Access to Materials and Services - With amalgamation, the amount of materials in circulation will grow exponentially. Students will be able to access materials that aren't available to them presently. Library programs can be expanded and enhanced because of the wider network York Region would allow.
3) Attract a University - With over one million residents, it is unbelievable that York Region does not have a university located here. Why do our children need to leave home to travel for post secondary education while smaller communities in Ontario have local universities and colleges on their doorsteps? An amalgamated library system can be very attractive for post secondary students and researchers as it would provide materials needed to pursue higher education (like the City of Toronto Public Library system provides). If a college or university is in the Economic development plan for the Town of Newmarket, then the Mayor and Regional Councillor need to get behind enhancing the services that appeal to post secondary institutions.
This one is really a no-brainer in my opinion (which is likely why my idea will have the loft of a lead balloon, This gang on Newmarket Council has a tough time with common sense ideas). Rather than waste every one's time with studying amalgamation of fire departments which is a lose-lose scenario, why not get behind a winner like amalgamating the public libraries of York Region?
Yet there is an amalgamation that is indeed worthy of investigation and has proven successful elsewhere. That is the amalgamation of municipal libraries into a central York Region library system.
When the City of Toronto merged from the former cities of Scarborough, North York, Toronto, Etobicoke, York and East York, the result was an astounding success. Not only did the new City of Toronto get one of the North America's largest and most efficient library systems, amalgamation also resulted in the elimination of approximately 200 positions. The eliminated positions were redundancies that were costing taxpayers dearly and according to the Toronto Star, these were backroom, non-value added roles.
In addition to the merger, the Toronto Public Library system has been flirting with outsourcing which again improves efficiencies and bolsters the bottom line. In fact, according to a 2011 report from the American Library Association published in the American Library Magazine, there is significant financial upside to go with full scale private management service of our public library system. Many U.S. cities, facing tough budget decisions, have opted to go this route and have had significant success.
What is the advantage to a municipality like Newmarket to consider amalgamation?
1) Financial - The money allocated in 2013 to operate the Newmarket Public Library is $3.1 million. Of that amount, $161,000 gets spent on acquiring books, another $20,000 on reference materials, and $13,000 on magazines. These numbers pale in comparison to the $500,000 spent on management salaries. It is at this level where we are bound to find redundancies where we can save taxpayers almost 15% each year. That is significant money that can be reinvested back into the system to improve services and materials as well as allow the library to be open 7 days per week.
2) Better Access to Materials and Services - With amalgamation, the amount of materials in circulation will grow exponentially. Students will be able to access materials that aren't available to them presently. Library programs can be expanded and enhanced because of the wider network York Region would allow.
3) Attract a University - With over one million residents, it is unbelievable that York Region does not have a university located here. Why do our children need to leave home to travel for post secondary education while smaller communities in Ontario have local universities and colleges on their doorsteps? An amalgamated library system can be very attractive for post secondary students and researchers as it would provide materials needed to pursue higher education (like the City of Toronto Public Library system provides). If a college or university is in the Economic development plan for the Town of Newmarket, then the Mayor and Regional Councillor need to get behind enhancing the services that appeal to post secondary institutions.
This one is really a no-brainer in my opinion (which is likely why my idea will have the loft of a lead balloon, This gang on Newmarket Council has a tough time with common sense ideas). Rather than waste every one's time with studying amalgamation of fire departments which is a lose-lose scenario, why not get behind a winner like amalgamating the public libraries of York Region?
Tuesday 21 May 2013
Positive Signals from Councillor Twinney
A lot of people were excited with Jane Twinney's 2010 election. She ran on a platform to open up government and make it more accessible to residents. Voters were clear with their mandate. Victor Woodhouse did many great things around the community including his involvement with Inn from the Cold but he did not communicate with residents well. As Councillor, Jane Twinney was supposed to change all of that.
Her campaign promises zeroed in on the very things Ward 3 voters were concerned about. She promised:
1) Regular newsletters and ward meetings
2) Posting her voting record at Council
3) Opening her books on how she managed her expense account
4) Maintain and update her blog
Prior to her election, Jane Twinney did an excellent job showing residents that she was capable of living up to these promises. The Era newspaper even wrote a very favourable article about her use of social media.
Since being elected, Councillor Twinney has fallen well short of expectations.
- The ward meetings were taken over by the Taylor/ Van Bynen terrible duo who were invited as guests to speak to her constituents whereas Councillor Twinney should have been speaking for herself.
- She posted voting results for 2011 (33 in all) but only 6 times in 2012 and in 2013, just 1 time. We know she attends the meeting but she gives the impression that she doesn't care to live up to this promise.
- Her expense account information is exactly the same as what gets posted by the Town of Newmarket. She doesn't provide any further details, such as copies of receipts, or an explanation of why she felt this spending was required.
- She hasn't blogged since November 2011. I checked the Era website and searched on her name and could only find one article that quotes her.
All of the above items has lead me write Councillor Twinney off as just another member of the Taylor/ Van Bynen alliance. In fact, previously I have been critical of her such as in this blog I wrote in February 2012: http://www.newmarkettownhallwatch.blogspot.ca/2012/02/review-of-councillor-twinney-in-2011.html (where I link to a video showing Councillor Twinney parroting for Regional Councillor Taylor).
All of this sounds pretty damning so why am I claiming to see positive signals from Councillor Twinney?
She has done two subtle things in the past month which leads me to believe she is coming around.
1) She commented that she favours developing Glenway Golf and Country Club. That takes courage of conviction as it is a clear departure from Emanuel; Taylor; Van Bynen. I know it was just one tweet but it is a sliver of sunlight that hopefully brings the Town back to the negotiating table with the developer instead of the counterproductive OMB headbutting contest being lead by Councillor Emanuel and the Taylor/ Van Bynen twosome.
2) And this is very subtle but I am hopeful that I have interpreted this correctly: on the agenda for today's (May 21st) meeting is an item about the Newmarket Environmental Advisory Committee. It seems that this committee has its nose out of joint about Councillor Emanuel's recent attempt to catalog the trees situated on private property to prevent anyone from cutting down a tree without a permit. The wording of the agenda item is paraphrased as: the Chair of NEAC and the NEAC Council representative (who happens to be Councillor Twinney) met with staff to improve effectiveness and enhance interactions with Council. In other words, they are upset with Emanuel's intrusion onto their turf, and are willing to take measures to prevent that from happening again.
So much for Emanuel's narrative that he is a well-liked and respected by his colleagues.
On both these issues, Councillor Twinney has shown the intestinal fortitude to throw Councillor Emanuel in particular under the proverbial bus. It could be a signal that she is hearing from her supporters that Emanuel's reputation is beyond toxic that she is trying to distance herself from him, but regardless of her motivations, it is nice to see her finally breaking free from the Taylor/ Van Bynen vortex and standing on her own two feet.
Hopefully this will be the start of a brand new Councillor Jane Twinney. It took her a few years to get her going but it finally appears that she will live up to the promise voters believed in.
Her campaign promises zeroed in on the very things Ward 3 voters were concerned about. She promised:
1) Regular newsletters and ward meetings
2) Posting her voting record at Council
3) Opening her books on how she managed her expense account
4) Maintain and update her blog
Prior to her election, Jane Twinney did an excellent job showing residents that she was capable of living up to these promises. The Era newspaper even wrote a very favourable article about her use of social media.
Since being elected, Councillor Twinney has fallen well short of expectations.
- The ward meetings were taken over by the Taylor/ Van Bynen terrible duo who were invited as guests to speak to her constituents whereas Councillor Twinney should have been speaking for herself.
- She posted voting results for 2011 (33 in all) but only 6 times in 2012 and in 2013, just 1 time. We know she attends the meeting but she gives the impression that she doesn't care to live up to this promise.
- Her expense account information is exactly the same as what gets posted by the Town of Newmarket. She doesn't provide any further details, such as copies of receipts, or an explanation of why she felt this spending was required.
- She hasn't blogged since November 2011. I checked the Era website and searched on her name and could only find one article that quotes her.
All of the above items has lead me write Councillor Twinney off as just another member of the Taylor/ Van Bynen alliance. In fact, previously I have been critical of her such as in this blog I wrote in February 2012: http://www.newmarkettownhallwatch.blogspot.ca/2012/02/review-of-councillor-twinney-in-2011.html (where I link to a video showing Councillor Twinney parroting for Regional Councillor Taylor).
All of this sounds pretty damning so why am I claiming to see positive signals from Councillor Twinney?
She has done two subtle things in the past month which leads me to believe she is coming around.
1) She commented that she favours developing Glenway Golf and Country Club. That takes courage of conviction as it is a clear departure from Emanuel; Taylor; Van Bynen. I know it was just one tweet but it is a sliver of sunlight that hopefully brings the Town back to the negotiating table with the developer instead of the counterproductive OMB headbutting contest being lead by Councillor Emanuel and the Taylor/ Van Bynen twosome.
2) And this is very subtle but I am hopeful that I have interpreted this correctly: on the agenda for today's (May 21st) meeting is an item about the Newmarket Environmental Advisory Committee. It seems that this committee has its nose out of joint about Councillor Emanuel's recent attempt to catalog the trees situated on private property to prevent anyone from cutting down a tree without a permit. The wording of the agenda item is paraphrased as: the Chair of NEAC and the NEAC Council representative (who happens to be Councillor Twinney) met with staff to improve effectiveness and enhance interactions with Council. In other words, they are upset with Emanuel's intrusion onto their turf, and are willing to take measures to prevent that from happening again.
So much for Emanuel's narrative that he is a well-liked and respected by his colleagues.
On both these issues, Councillor Twinney has shown the intestinal fortitude to throw Councillor Emanuel in particular under the proverbial bus. It could be a signal that she is hearing from her supporters that Emanuel's reputation is beyond toxic that she is trying to distance herself from him, but regardless of her motivations, it is nice to see her finally breaking free from the Taylor/ Van Bynen vortex and standing on her own two feet.
Hopefully this will be the start of a brand new Councillor Jane Twinney. It took her a few years to get her going but it finally appears that she will live up to the promise voters believed in.
A remarkable display of integrity
By all accounts, Nigel Wright is an extraordinary person. He gave up a high income position on Bay St. to accept the call to public service in the position of Chief of Staff. In this role, his performance was exemplary. In fact, the only negative thing I read about his tenure at the PMO was that he did not engage in politics. His actions were governed by what he felt was best for Canada.
And yet, Nigel Wright is human. Human beings make mistakes. What separates a person of high integrity from the rest is the willingness to be held accountable for making a mistake. Nigel Wright accepted the consequences. He appropriately resigned his position and has endured all the media attention with respect and humility. He is not leaving public office in disgrace because he has maintained the standards of what Canadians expect from the Chief of Staff and has left with his integrity intact.
In the summer of 2011, Newmarket Councillor Chris Emanuel attended a VIP reception at the Pickle Barrel Restaurant in Newmarket. He was videotaped introducing himself as Councillor Chris Emanuel which I believe shows clearly that he understood his participation at this function as a "work related" event and not something he did on his private time.
While at the reception, Emmanuel drank excessively. Concerned employees of the Pickle Barrel attempted to ensure that he got home safely and asked him to take a cab. The Councillor lied to the employees when he advised that he had a designated driver. He didn't and he drove. The legal blood alcohol limit in Canada is 80 milligrams. Councillor Emanuel was confirmed as 190 milligrams which is 2.34 times the legal limit. He caused tens of thousands in damages. These are the cold hard facts.
Despite calls from the Era and one of his Council colleague to resigned, Emanuel steadfastedly refused.
Since his conviction, Emanuel has never used his position as a public official to speak out against drinking and driving. He has never volunteered to help out at Operation Red Nose or with MADD or with any other anti-drinking and driving initiative. As far was we can tell, he has never used his experience to help encourage others from making the same mistakes he has made.
But Emanuel does do something. He regularly speaks to school children on the topic of civics.
What does "civics" mean? Civics is the concept that all citizens should be active and involved in their democracy. Civics mean we all have a duty to serve the community at large. We obey the law - not because we might get caught - but because obeying the law is the right thing to do. When we refer to civics we often tag along the word responsibility - as in, "It was her civic responsibility to vote in the municipal election."
Given either Nigel Wright or Chris Emanuel, who understands civics better? Who would you prefer to speak to children on this topic? I think the answer is obvious.
Just a final word on leadership. Prime Minister Harper displayed tremendous leadership this weekend and today in his no-nonsense message. He accepted that his Chief of Staff made a mistake and he dealt with it in the manner one expects from a leader.
By comparison, Mayor Van Bynen is not a leader. He failed us on the Emanuel scandal in the most spectacular way possible showing that he isn't fit to be Mayor. Lacking the principles to demand his Council ally measure up to the base standards of conduct that the community expects from his office, Van Bynen has demonstrated that he doesn't have what it takes to wear the chains of the Mayor.
Newmarket is ranked 10th in Canada. As one of the top communities in the country, we demand to have the best. At Council, that means people of honour who are committed to putting the needs of the community ahead of their own political aspirations. By failing the integrity test, as citizens we have the civic responsibility to put things right. Both Emanuel and Van Bynen should be tossed from office the next time we go to the polls.
And yet, Nigel Wright is human. Human beings make mistakes. What separates a person of high integrity from the rest is the willingness to be held accountable for making a mistake. Nigel Wright accepted the consequences. He appropriately resigned his position and has endured all the media attention with respect and humility. He is not leaving public office in disgrace because he has maintained the standards of what Canadians expect from the Chief of Staff and has left with his integrity intact.
In the summer of 2011, Newmarket Councillor Chris Emanuel attended a VIP reception at the Pickle Barrel Restaurant in Newmarket. He was videotaped introducing himself as Councillor Chris Emanuel which I believe shows clearly that he understood his participation at this function as a "work related" event and not something he did on his private time.
While at the reception, Emmanuel drank excessively. Concerned employees of the Pickle Barrel attempted to ensure that he got home safely and asked him to take a cab. The Councillor lied to the employees when he advised that he had a designated driver. He didn't and he drove. The legal blood alcohol limit in Canada is 80 milligrams. Councillor Emanuel was confirmed as 190 milligrams which is 2.34 times the legal limit. He caused tens of thousands in damages. These are the cold hard facts.
Despite calls from the Era and one of his Council colleague to resigned, Emanuel steadfastedly refused.
Since his conviction, Emanuel has never used his position as a public official to speak out against drinking and driving. He has never volunteered to help out at Operation Red Nose or with MADD or with any other anti-drinking and driving initiative. As far was we can tell, he has never used his experience to help encourage others from making the same mistakes he has made.
But Emanuel does do something. He regularly speaks to school children on the topic of civics.
What does "civics" mean? Civics is the concept that all citizens should be active and involved in their democracy. Civics mean we all have a duty to serve the community at large. We obey the law - not because we might get caught - but because obeying the law is the right thing to do. When we refer to civics we often tag along the word responsibility - as in, "It was her civic responsibility to vote in the municipal election."
Given either Nigel Wright or Chris Emanuel, who understands civics better? Who would you prefer to speak to children on this topic? I think the answer is obvious.
Just a final word on leadership. Prime Minister Harper displayed tremendous leadership this weekend and today in his no-nonsense message. He accepted that his Chief of Staff made a mistake and he dealt with it in the manner one expects from a leader.
By comparison, Mayor Van Bynen is not a leader. He failed us on the Emanuel scandal in the most spectacular way possible showing that he isn't fit to be Mayor. Lacking the principles to demand his Council ally measure up to the base standards of conduct that the community expects from his office, Van Bynen has demonstrated that he doesn't have what it takes to wear the chains of the Mayor.
Newmarket is ranked 10th in Canada. As one of the top communities in the country, we demand to have the best. At Council, that means people of honour who are committed to putting the needs of the community ahead of their own political aspirations. By failing the integrity test, as citizens we have the civic responsibility to put things right. Both Emanuel and Van Bynen should be tossed from office the next time we go to the polls.
Friday 17 May 2013
A comment on the account of Glenway Meeting 13-5-13
I wasn't available to attend the May 13th meeting at the Ray Twinney Complex so I am relying on another blogger, albeit someone who writes with an entirely skewed perspective, to provide an account (see here for the original commentary: http://www.shrinkslessorsquare.com/blog/96-glenway-residents-prepare-for-battle. I am not relying on the Era's version of this meeting because that article did not report the news in the same detail as the blogger.
There are a number of things I find completely disturbing:
1) The blog reports on comments from David Sovran (Vice Chair of the Glenway Preservation Association). In these comments, Mr. Sovran describes the process before the Council committee of the whole meeting on Tuesday, May 21 where he plans to speak on behalf of his membership. He then makes reference to Council convening to meet behind closed doors to discuss a report from staff. The question on every one's mind should be, why closed door?
The reasons that a Council can legally convene to a secret, closed door meeting are on this Ontario government web site. http://www.ombudsman.on.ca/Files/sitemedia/Documents/Resources/sunshinelaw-en.pdf I encourage everyone to read this document thoroughly but especially the residents of Glenway who don't deserve to be frozen out of the process.
We should not be surprised that this Council wants to shut the public out. It serves the politicians' benefit (and not the public) when only a handful of people know about the discussions and decisions taking place. I am sure some of these fat cats are laughing at the cleverness of telling the public they support them but knowing that closed door secret meetings shield them from accountability. If you have any doubt whats-so-ever that our local elected representatives are not entirely committed to being completely transparent with the Glenway community, refer to this blog here: http://maddiedimuccio.webs.com/apps/blog/show/8999505-my-resolution-for-transparency-on-the-newmarket-glenway-issue-lost
How differently might things have gone had Council supported this motion and included residents from Glenway in the application review process? How ironic that the Councillor whom the Shrink Slessor Square blogger deigns to reference as 'persona non grata' and 'acidic', was the only one who wanted to actually involve Glenway residents in this process? If the appointed leaders of the Glenway fight consider her to be persona non grata then they likely have shut out the only elected official actually working for them and opened the door wide open to those Council members about whom everyone is worried about. As Mr. Sovran is quoted in the blog: "We know developers have strong relationships with politicians.” In other words, perhaps the wolves in sheep's clothing are in charge of the Town of Newmarket's OMB defense?
(Please note: For the sake of my own credibility, I have stated my own opinion on Glenway previously. I personally disagree with Councillor Di Muccio's position on Glenway. My own opinion seems to fall in line with Councillor Twinney who has spoken in favour of developing Glenway).
2) According to the blogger there was a suggestion from the floor to hire a private investigator to gather information on possible "corrupt dealings". I empathize with the blogger when he expected that remark to be greeted with laughter. He suggests that he was stunned when there was only pondering instead. That, my friends, speaks volumes. While there may only whispers and vague hints that certain prominent individuals are suspected to be too close with certain developers, next year we get an election and in Newmarket the vote will be a referendum asking if the municipal government needs to be swept clean. In the mean time, let us welcome the Shrink Slessor Square blogger to the realities of the Van Bynen/ Taylor gruesome two-some's regime.
3) Questions about money raised and subsequently not being answered should send shivers through the Glenway Preservation Association membership. As the blogger asks, why the need for secrecy? I have written previously that I felt there was a little too much coziness between the leadership of the Glenway Preservation Association and certain members of Council. I don't think this close relationship has helped their cause. In fact, prior experience would indicate this has made the association less influential than what it might have been. Glenway Preservation Association members only need to consider to the weak position that the Shrink Slessor Square group had with Council and notice the similarities in the Slessor group's leadership with exactly the same connections to these Council members.
There are a number of things I find completely disturbing:
1) The blog reports on comments from David Sovran (Vice Chair of the Glenway Preservation Association). In these comments, Mr. Sovran describes the process before the Council committee of the whole meeting on Tuesday, May 21 where he plans to speak on behalf of his membership. He then makes reference to Council convening to meet behind closed doors to discuss a report from staff. The question on every one's mind should be, why closed door?
The reasons that a Council can legally convene to a secret, closed door meeting are on this Ontario government web site. http://www.ombudsman.on.ca/Files/sitemedia/Documents/Resources/sunshinelaw-en.pdf I encourage everyone to read this document thoroughly but especially the residents of Glenway who don't deserve to be frozen out of the process.
We should not be surprised that this Council wants to shut the public out. It serves the politicians' benefit (and not the public) when only a handful of people know about the discussions and decisions taking place. I am sure some of these fat cats are laughing at the cleverness of telling the public they support them but knowing that closed door secret meetings shield them from accountability. If you have any doubt whats-so-ever that our local elected representatives are not entirely committed to being completely transparent with the Glenway community, refer to this blog here: http://maddiedimuccio.webs.com/apps/blog/show/8999505-my-resolution-for-transparency-on-the-newmarket-glenway-issue-lost
How differently might things have gone had Council supported this motion and included residents from Glenway in the application review process? How ironic that the Councillor whom the Shrink Slessor Square blogger deigns to reference as 'persona non grata' and 'acidic', was the only one who wanted to actually involve Glenway residents in this process? If the appointed leaders of the Glenway fight consider her to be persona non grata then they likely have shut out the only elected official actually working for them and opened the door wide open to those Council members about whom everyone is worried about. As Mr. Sovran is quoted in the blog: "We know developers have strong relationships with politicians.” In other words, perhaps the wolves in sheep's clothing are in charge of the Town of Newmarket's OMB defense?
(Please note: For the sake of my own credibility, I have stated my own opinion on Glenway previously. I personally disagree with Councillor Di Muccio's position on Glenway. My own opinion seems to fall in line with Councillor Twinney who has spoken in favour of developing Glenway).
2) According to the blogger there was a suggestion from the floor to hire a private investigator to gather information on possible "corrupt dealings". I empathize with the blogger when he expected that remark to be greeted with laughter. He suggests that he was stunned when there was only pondering instead. That, my friends, speaks volumes. While there may only whispers and vague hints that certain prominent individuals are suspected to be too close with certain developers, next year we get an election and in Newmarket the vote will be a referendum asking if the municipal government needs to be swept clean. In the mean time, let us welcome the Shrink Slessor Square blogger to the realities of the Van Bynen/ Taylor gruesome two-some's regime.
3) Questions about money raised and subsequently not being answered should send shivers through the Glenway Preservation Association membership. As the blogger asks, why the need for secrecy? I have written previously that I felt there was a little too much coziness between the leadership of the Glenway Preservation Association and certain members of Council. I don't think this close relationship has helped their cause. In fact, prior experience would indicate this has made the association less influential than what it might have been. Glenway Preservation Association members only need to consider to the weak position that the Shrink Slessor Square group had with Council and notice the similarities in the Slessor group's leadership with exactly the same connections to these Council members.
Monday 13 May 2013
Honouring our Politicians
Drive around Newmarket and you will find numerous examples of streets and parks named after current and former members of Newmarket Town Council. In fact, our local politicians are quite adept at naming things after themselves. But, ever since public scrutiny has been brought to attention through numerous recent mis-steps (including the backroom politics behind not naming a field after the young athlete who died upon it, naming a street after someone who is currently on trial accused of being a serial child molester, the Dave Kerwin Trail, and the Frank Stronach Park - just to name a few recent examples), it has been tougher and tougher for local politicians to bestow honours on each other.
Well thank goodness for the Queen's Diamond Jubilee Medal. The once-prestigious medal that was supposed to be an honour coming from the Governor General has been outsourced to so-called "partner agencies" to help dole out to, well to put it bluntly, people like these: http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/02/12/councillors-honour-themselves/
Somewhere along the way, what was once recognition for actually contributing something to Canada was co-opted, most notably by Jack Layton's brain child The Federation of Canadian Municipalities, into silliness. Personally, I know of a great many very deserving recipients of the Jubilee medal and I hope that the medal in some way pays gratitude for what they have given to to their communities. Unfortunately, the medal's prestige has been somewhat tarnished by unscrupulous politicians who have given the medal to themselves or their political operatives. That's a shame.
Like the Council in London, our Town also has very strong ties to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. In 2011, our council members spent an aggregate of $16,925.25 jet setting across the country to attend related events. In 2012, the Mayor and Council members' expense reports were not quite so clear but I've determined that at minimum another $9,935.13 went from Newmarket ratepayers' wallets to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities' coffers.
Like London, we also have a Councillor who sits on the Federation of Canadian Municipalities Board of Directors. On April 29th, 2013 Newmarket Council voted to support Councillor Emanuel's Federation of Canadian Municipalities candidacy. Why should it be any surprise then (in our modern era of "horse trading" at Newmarket Town Hall) that, not even two weeks later, this happens: http://www.newmarket.ca/en/townhall/resourcelibrary/MediaRelease_MayorDiamondJubilee_Final2013.pdf ?
Even Mayor Van Bynen's closest admirers will be hard pressed to come up with one or two positive accomplishments in his multi-term tenure as the head of this council. Taxes have steadily increased. Public debt has sky rocketed. Reserve funds have been depleted. Dysfunction, scandal, suspicion, and cronyism are rampant under his management at Town Hall. None of these "accomplishments" are worthy of a medal.
I say let's leave the medals for people who actually do some good in community. We should have much higher standards than the likes of the current Mayor.
Well thank goodness for the Queen's Diamond Jubilee Medal. The once-prestigious medal that was supposed to be an honour coming from the Governor General has been outsourced to so-called "partner agencies" to help dole out to, well to put it bluntly, people like these: http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/02/12/councillors-honour-themselves/
Somewhere along the way, what was once recognition for actually contributing something to Canada was co-opted, most notably by Jack Layton's brain child The Federation of Canadian Municipalities, into silliness. Personally, I know of a great many very deserving recipients of the Jubilee medal and I hope that the medal in some way pays gratitude for what they have given to to their communities. Unfortunately, the medal's prestige has been somewhat tarnished by unscrupulous politicians who have given the medal to themselves or their political operatives. That's a shame.
Like the Council in London, our Town also has very strong ties to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. In 2011, our council members spent an aggregate of $16,925.25 jet setting across the country to attend related events. In 2012, the Mayor and Council members' expense reports were not quite so clear but I've determined that at minimum another $9,935.13 went from Newmarket ratepayers' wallets to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities' coffers.
Like London, we also have a Councillor who sits on the Federation of Canadian Municipalities Board of Directors. On April 29th, 2013 Newmarket Council voted to support Councillor Emanuel's Federation of Canadian Municipalities candidacy. Why should it be any surprise then (in our modern era of "horse trading" at Newmarket Town Hall) that, not even two weeks later, this happens: http://www.newmarket.ca/en/townhall/resourcelibrary/MediaRelease_MayorDiamondJubilee_Final2013.pdf ?
Even Mayor Van Bynen's closest admirers will be hard pressed to come up with one or two positive accomplishments in his multi-term tenure as the head of this council. Taxes have steadily increased. Public debt has sky rocketed. Reserve funds have been depleted. Dysfunction, scandal, suspicion, and cronyism are rampant under his management at Town Hall. None of these "accomplishments" are worthy of a medal.
I say let's leave the medals for people who actually do some good in community. We should have much higher standards than the likes of the current Mayor.
Friday 10 May 2013
What should be done with the ice house?
If you were watching the Leafs lose to Boston instead of Newmarket Council raising your property taxes for the second time on Monday night, here is the link to the on-line video http://www.rogerstv.com/page.aspx?lid=237&rid=70&sid=3183&gid=112618 so you can catch up.
If you are like me, you will be struck by the amount of debate time went into the so-called "heritage" building known as the ice house located behind the Tannery Mall on Davis Drive versus the haste the tax increase flew through to a vote (without any public consultation of course).
To me, it is a sure sign of the audacious elitism of this current Mayor and council.
If you take the GO train from Newmarket Station, you are already familiar with the ice house. Having seen it, you will wonder why (or how) it is still standing and not given an immediate demolition order. From all appearances, the building doesn't look structurally safe, let alone suitable for occupancy. It has been invaded by wildlife, both the natural and human-kind, and it appears to be in serious need of the wrecker's ball to make way something that can be useful and purposeful.
Yet according to some members of council there is historical significance to this building and they argued long and hard to block the owner of the property from doing the only thing reasonable - knock the building down.
Why council would dedicate so much time to this property but not give a hooey about the property owners who are overburdened by their repeated tax grabs? I believe they have lost touch of what it means to serve the community at large. Don't just take my word for it. Why doesn't the town planners take a quick survey of the commuters standing on the GO train platform about what should be done with the ice house. I am certain these commuters' clear and unequivocal response will be to let the property owner tear it down.
If you are like me, you will be struck by the amount of debate time went into the so-called "heritage" building known as the ice house located behind the Tannery Mall on Davis Drive versus the haste the tax increase flew through to a vote (without any public consultation of course).
To me, it is a sure sign of the audacious elitism of this current Mayor and council.
If you take the GO train from Newmarket Station, you are already familiar with the ice house. Having seen it, you will wonder why (or how) it is still standing and not given an immediate demolition order. From all appearances, the building doesn't look structurally safe, let alone suitable for occupancy. It has been invaded by wildlife, both the natural and human-kind, and it appears to be in serious need of the wrecker's ball to make way something that can be useful and purposeful.
Yet according to some members of council there is historical significance to this building and they argued long and hard to block the owner of the property from doing the only thing reasonable - knock the building down.
Why council would dedicate so much time to this property but not give a hooey about the property owners who are overburdened by their repeated tax grabs? I believe they have lost touch of what it means to serve the community at large. Don't just take my word for it. Why doesn't the town planners take a quick survey of the commuters standing on the GO train platform about what should be done with the ice house. I am certain these commuters' clear and unequivocal response will be to let the property owner tear it down.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)