What's in Santa's Sack for Newmarket Council

Has your Newmarket Council been naughty or nice in 2015?  Let's take a peak inside Santa's sack to see what will be waiting for them on Christmas morning.

Mayor Tony Van Bynen - with his popularity at a low ebb at the moment, Santa has decided to give the Mayor a Donald Trump comb-over.  It will stop all those mean spirited Montgomery Burns comparisons.  

Regional Councillor John Taylor - Santa has the shiniest silver star with the word "Deputy" engraved on it because people just simply forget that he is also the Deputy Mayor and Mayor Tony's right-hand man. 

Ward 1 Councillor Tom Vegh - Santa is bringing Councillor Vegh the invoice for his $1,000 stay at the Toronto Delta Hotel last January.  Really Councillor Tom, why did you stick this bill with the taxpayers?

Ward 2 Councillor Dave Kerwin - a cord of chopped wood for his fireside chats. 

Ward 3 Councillor Jane Twinney - Santa remembers the time when Ms. Twinney was candidate in 2010 she used to remind everyone that then-Councillor Victor Woodhouse didn't live in his ward.  This Christmas, Santa is bringing Councillor Jane some change of address postcards.

Ward 4 Councillor Tom Hempen - Santa is bringing a list of complaints from his tenants for work that needs to be done.  He is also bringing Councillor Tom a map with X's marking where he owns rental properties so Councillor Tom doesn't forget the ones that are located in the Davis Drive intensification area.

Ward 5 Councillor Joe Sponga - what Councillor Joe needs most of all is a calendar with the dates of upcoming council meetings, committee of the whole, and workshops circled in red.  Councillor Joe missed quite a few of these dates in 2015.

Ward 6 Councillor Kelly Broome Plumley - Santa would like to bring Councillor Kelly a gift but she seems to have gone missing. Last term, then Ward 6 councillor Maddie Di Muccio was always in the making news and getting results. This term, nobody knows where the new Ward 6 councillor is.  So Santa has filed a missing persons report with the police.  If you have seen Councillor Kelly, please let Santa know. 

Ward 7 Councillor Christina Bisanz - With the news that the local riding is splitting into two and signs that current MPP Chris Ballard is pondering a run for the Mayor of Aurora, Santa is bringing Councillor Christina a second shot at the Liberal nomination for Newmarket Aurora in 2018. 

You don't have the right to yell "Fire" in a crowded theatre

The comments Newmarket-Aurora MPP Chris Ballard made earlier regarding a developer in Aurora were completely out of line. Ballard made allegations that were reckless, unsubstantiated and not becoming of someone who sits in the Ontario Legislature.

To put his words in context, imagine a judge saying before a trial begins, "I'm gonna to find him guilty and then I'm gonna sentence him to hang." Ballard's words were just as prejudicial.

And earlier this month, I took Newmarket Mayor Tony Van Bynen to task for saying "Failed candidates have no constituency" in reference to a member of the public who was speaking on electing the York Regional Chair. No elected official should denigrate any citizen for engaging in the political process. Van Bynen's remarks were arrogant and wrong.

But sometimes I need to point out that citizens cross the line too. We all have the right to complain about our politicians. We can even use hyperbole and overkill in our complaints. But there is a line a citizen shouldn't cross.

For example, a citizen should never say:

Chris Campbell‏@ChrisMayor2018
At the moment I do not recognize the legitimacy of @TonyVanBynen as Mayor @TownofNewmarket over questions on salary cover up 1/2

Words like these cross the line into sedition. Sedition occurs when someone's speech incites contempt for lawful authority. Whatever you may think of Tony Van Bynen as a politician, you should never publicly doubt that he was lawfully elected by the people of Newmarket. You must always recognize the legitimacy of his position.

When someone says he doesn't recognize the legitimacy of a duly elected official, he shows a contempt for our democracy.

Further, a citizen should never make the following claims:

Darryl Wolk‏@darrylwolk
Tony lied on Davis costs. Tony lied on jobs created. Tony lied on his own salary. 2016 TIME TO RESIGN @TONYVANBYNEN! #FailedMayor #Corrupt

When a citizen makes such an allegation, he crosses the line into libel. Libel occurs when someone writes a malicious, false statement about another. In this case, allegations of lying and corruption are written to make us feel contemptuous towards the Mayor of Newmarket.

I would be very surprised and extremely disappointed if the Mayor didn't take legal action. I say this, not because I care about his personal reputation, but I care very much about the office he holds. As Mayor, Van Bynen represents Newmarket. If he allows these words to be written without consequences, then the Town of Newmarket will be smeared with false allegations of corruption and lying.

I remind readers that this Mayor went to extreme lengths in 2013 using the full might of his administration with Kangaroo Court proceedings against a political rival. At the time, I described his actions as political opportunism. If the Mayor does nothing regarding Wolk then I'll be proven right.

Finally, for anyone who thinks that Wolk and Campbell would have done anything different that the current Mayor, consider this response from Campbell when asked how he would change things:

Chris Campbell‏@ChrisMayor2018
@RockNRollCroll @darrylwolk I'd review the process & policy first & appoint an external body to determine pay

Anybody that follows Council closely knows that in 2008 - 2009, Newmarket Council did exactly that. In fact, Tom Hempen and Jane Twinney won their seats thanks to claims that that their opponents voted themselves pay hikes. (Of course, you would have to live in Newmarket during this time to know this). Allegations that the Town of Newmarket somehow breached the Municipal Act with this pay policy are ridiculous.

Personally, I've always respected former Councillor Maddie Di Muccio's proposal regarding pay. She put forth a motion that Councillor's pay be changed as follows:

1. Remove the tax free portion of the pay. If Councillors earn $47,000 then they should pay income taxes on that full amount. (Right now, Councillors only pay income tax on 2/3 of their pay).

2. For every percentage tax increase, Council members should receive a reciprocal percentage pay decrease. If taxes are increased by 4%, then Council members would receive a 4% pay decrease as an incentive to balance their books.

When these ideas were tabled, the other Council members reacted with an opposition that I've never seen before. Councillor Twinney even left the chambers in tears because she was so distraught at the thought of being personally accountable .

But a merit pay system of salary tied to fiscal goals of town remains an excellent idea and a positive alternative comparing the pay of our council members to other municipalities.

Results for Ward 6 - Together? Not really.

Earlier this month, I wrote this post about the Tom Taylor Crescent to Yonge Street path connection in this blog post http://nwkttownhall.blogspot.ca/2015/12/councillor-broome-plumley-is-taking.html

The question of this path sailed smoothly through the Committee of the Whole meeting with just a few perfunctory questions about the proposed "Option 2".  Councillor Broome Plumley bragged about her success in this November 30th blog post here: http://kellybroome-plumley.blogspot.ca/2015/11/2015-regarding-proposed-trail-from.html

At the time, I was alone in voicing opposition to the $630,000 price tag associated with the construction of this approximately 200 meter path.

So you could have knocked me over with a feather last night when one Council member after another flip-flopped from supporting the path in the Committee of the Whole to opposing it at the Council meeting.

The reason for opposing the path is easy.  It's ridiculously expensive.  And to their credit, Councillors Twinney, Bisanz, Hempen, and Vegh did a good job expressing the obvious shortcoming with the proposed plan.

To counter this argument, Ward 6 Councillor Kelly Broome-Plumley meekly protested, "It's what the residents want."

That seems to be the consensus among the supporters of this path.  Regional Councillor Taylor and Ward 2 Councillor Dave Kerwin both stated that their support derived from what the residents want.

But as one area resident pointed out to me last night, most residents don't appear to support the $630,000 "Option 2" path.  There was a petition presented to Council in August 2014 that states residents don't want this trail at all.

Respecting what these residents wanted, that was the position the former Ward 6 Councillor, Maddie Di Muccio, took into Council chambers in mid August 2014.  Consulting with and then representing the viewpoints of constituents is what a councillor is supposed to do.

So how did Councillor Broome-Plumley become so disconnected from her constituents just a year after she was elected?  When did she stop listening to what her constituents wanted and start speaking for what other interests wanted instead?

I wrote about Kelly Broome-Plumley being a Manchurian candidate over a year ago.  Those who donated to her campaign paid large sums of money to ensure her loyalty and she has delivered her vote in council to their agenda at every turn.

What Councillor Broome-Plumley discovered last night is that loyalty doesn't extend both ways.  She can not count on Council to support her in the initiatives she wants to pass as yesterday Council failed to support her proposed plan for the path.

This path was supposed to be a major accomplishment for Councillor Broome-Plumley but today she has egg on her face.  She didn't listen to what the residents wanted and her allies showed they weren't loyal to her.

Councillor Broome-Plumley likes to end her blog posts with this tagline:  RESULTS FOR WARD 6 - TOGETHER

After last night, that tagline does not jive with Councillor Broome-Plumley's track record.

Hopefully everyone will learn their lesson and start listening to what the residents want.  It is time to put this path proposal in the dustbin and move on to more important initiatives.

However, my fear is that the gruesome-twosome are determined to see this path constructed and the area residents will eventually get saddled with something nobody wants, (save for the gruesome-twosome).

A Newmarket twist to the classic 12 Days of Christmas

On the first day of Christmas, Council gave to me -

Broadband internet for Tony.

On the second day of Christmas, Council gave to me - 
Too many missed meetings, and
Broadband internet for Tony.

On the third day at Christmas, Council gave to me - 
Three brief words from Kelly,
Too many missed meetings, and
Broadband internet for Tony

On the fourth day of Christmas, Council gave to me - 
Four percent tax increase.
Three brief words from Kelly,
Too many missed meetings, and
Broadband internet for Tony.

On the fifth day of Christmas, Council gave to me -

Five months Old Town Hall delays

Four percent tax increase.
Three brief words from Kelly,
Too many missed meetings, and
Broadband internet for Tony.

On the sixth day of Christmas, Council gave to me -
Six councillors sleeping

Five months Old Town Hall delays

Four percent tax increase.
Three brief words from Kelly,
Too many missed meetings, and
Broadband internet for Tony.

On the seventh day of Christmas, Council gave to me - 
Seven charity photo-ops
Six councillors sleeping

Five months Old Town Hall delays

Four percent tax increase.
Three brief words from Kelly,
Too many missed meetings, and
Broadband internet for Tony.

On the eighth day of Christmas, Council gave to me - 
Eight Deputy Mayor titles
Seven charity photo ops
Six councillors sleeping

Five months Old Town Hall delays

Four percent tax increase.
Three brief words from Kelly,
Too many missed meetings, and
Broadband internet for Tony.

On the ninth day of Christmas, Council gave to me - 
Nine Main St parking spots (but three were built on private property - whoops)
Eight Deputy Mayor titles
Seven charity photo-ops
Six councillors sleeping

Five months Old Town Hall delays

Four percent tax increase.
Three brief words from Kelly,
Too many missed meetings, and
Broadband internet for Tony.

On the tenth day of Christmas, Council gave to me - 
Top ten places to live in Canada (or did we come in thirty-first place?)
Nine Main St parking spots
Eight Deputy Mayor titles
Seven charity photo ops
Six councilors sleeping

Five months Old Town Hall delays

Four percent tax increase.
Three brief words from Kelly,
Too many missed meetings, and
Broadband internet for Tony.

On the eleventh day of Christmas, Council gave to me - 
An 11% increase on my water bill
Top ten places to live in Canada
Nine Main St parking spots
Eight Deputy Mayor titles
Seven charity photo ops
Six councillors sleeping

Five months Old Town Hall delays

 Four percent tax increase
Three brief words from Kelly,
Too many missed meetings, and
Broadband internet for Tony.

On the twelfth day of Christmas, Council gave to me - 
Twelve months of Nwkt Town Hall blog topics
An 11% increase on my water bill
Top ten places to live in Canada
Nine Main St parking spots
Eight Deputy Mayor titles
Seven charity photo ops
Six councillors sleeping

Five months Old Town Hall delays

 Four percent tax increase
Three brief words from Kelly,
Too many missed meetings, and
Broadband internet for Tony.


Merry Christmas Newmarket!

Is Newmarket sponsorship a cash cow or money pit?

This is a photo from the Era's web page which shows two Town of Newmarket supervisors - Stephanie Dryiw (Supervisor of Marketing and Sponsorship, Recreation & Culture) and Colin Service (Supervisor, Marketing and Sponsorship).  You can read the article via this link.

Ms. Dryiw isn't listed on the latest Sunshine list but Mr. Service is and his 2014 salary is listed at $124,484.98.

Being supervisors, we can assume each has direct reports below them.  In the private sector, it's typical for a supervisor to have in the range of 10 employees.  I don't know what ratio the Town of Newmarket uses but let's lowball and say 5 employees per supervisor.  That makes the "Marketing and Sponsorhip" team 10 employees plus 2 supervisors.

If Mr. Service makes $124,000 then for a similar job, Ms. Dryiw must be making very close to $100,000 annually.  Let's say that the average of the 10 employees is $35,000 annually too.  This would make the department's payroll in the range of $550,000.

To be financially viable, the department would have to bring in at a minimum two to one ratio of sponsorship dollars versus expenses.  Anything less than that makes the exercise not worthwhile.   Pretend that there is no additional expenses other than salary, then you would be looking at $1,100,000 in sponsorship money annually.  That means each of the 60 donors getting awards would have to sponsor events to the tune of just under $20,000 on average.

Here is a photo of all the sponsors:


Outside of Magna and Metro, I don't see others on this list who could afford a commitment of $20,000 annually.  (Remember what a big deal the Town made of the dog park sponsors who agreed to $5,000 annually?).

Our Town Councillors talk about sponsorship money as a potential revenue source but from what I can see, the exercise has been a complete failure.

Town Council promised the dog park would be paid for by sponsors.  It wasn't.

Town Council promised that the increased cost associated with the Old Town Hall would be paid by sponsors.  Where is that money?  

And when it comes to naming the Riverwalk Commons or ice rinks, I think that we're seeing corporate naming rights doled out at cut rates in order to preserve the facade that this sponsorship initiative is working out.

It's time to cut bait and save taxpayers the expense.

Unless, of course, the real reason for this program isn't revenue.  Maybe it's photo ops?

Why hasn't economic growth returned to Newmarket?

Earlier this year, York Region Council released a report stating that between the years 2010 and 2014, the economy in the Town of Newmarket created 100 jobs in all. This "growth" lagged well behind all other of York's nine municipalities, including those with a much lower population than ours.

Mayor Van Bynen fumed. He said publicly that this report couldn't be right and in the end he got York Region Council to revise its numbers to 500 jobs in all. Even that number was a paltry result when compared to the other York Region lower tier municipalities.

The question remains, if 2010-2014 was such a disaster, what is being done now to change this course?

We have a new Member of Parliament who sits on the government side of the house.

We have a new Member of Provincial Parliament who also sits on the government side of the house.

We have an united Town Council without any divisions in the ranks. Members of this Council are extremely tight with the Provincial and Federal level members, like never before.

Yet despite all the political cohesion between all levels of government, where are the jobs for Newmarket?

It's not a matter that Newmarket residents don't pay enough taxes to support growth initiatives. Our taxes have risen beyond the level of inflation for 10 years straight. Our mill rate sits at the second highest in York Region. Even though we lead in paying taxes, our economic growth trails everyone else.

It's not a matter that Newmarket Council isn't in sync with the Chamber of Commerce. These two groups couldn't be tighter. In fact, at the 2014 Chamber of Commerce debate for Mayor and Regional Councillor, the Chamber's president/moderator was likely the biggest supporter of the incumbent Van Bynen, Taylor campaigns, plus other members of Council too. Council and Newmarket Chambers absolutely adore each other.

It certainly isn't the fact that we don't invest public money into various businesses in town. The grants are there, even though they tend to flow towards supporters of Council first. Crony capitalism and corporate welfare are a way of life in Newmarket. It wasn't always this way, but Mayor Van Bynen has entrenched "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" as a way business gets done in this town.

We certainly have our own Newmarket Economic Development Advisory Committee (NEDAC) too. I can't tell you what this committee actually does because the committee has only met twice (once in October 2015 and then in November 2015) and the minutes of these meetings have not been published.

We seem to have all the necessary ingredients in place already. So why has our economy stalled while all the neighbouring towns and cities around us are booming?

Could one ingredient be missing?

LEADERSHIP

Without that, the jobs will never come to Newmarket.

They were elected but will they show up?

Despite the fact that sitting on Newmarket Council is considered part time work, I am still hesitant to write about attendance at council related meetings as a measure of a council member doing his or her job.

We've seen in the past Council members who have a perfect attendance record yet they contribute so little towards the debate of issues that their attendance doesn't matter.  What's the point to being at a meeting if the council member doesn't contribute anything?

Conversely, we have seen council members who have missed a couple of meetings but their commitment towards their constituents could not be doubted.  These members are engaged in debates, table motions, and come to every meeting prepared for the business at hand.

And yet, attendance can be a measure of the council member's attitude towards the important work before the town.  Attending or not attending meetings is one facet of a council member's job and I recognize that there is work being done outside of these meetings.  But the work done outside of the meeting isn't being recorded by anyone whereas we have records to refer to regarding attendance at meetings.

We should be able to reasonably extrapolate that a member of council who regularly skips meetings may not be particularly attentive to other aspects of their job.  After all, if you don't show up when people notice you are absent, how can you convince anyone that you are working hard at the other times?

Here is a summary of meetings scheduled in 2015 for Newmarket Council:

• Council meetings:  12 meetings (but 10 have minutes posted on line)
• Committee of the Whole meetings:  13 meetings (but 11 have minutes posted on line)
• Special Council meetings:  5 meetings (but 4 have minutes posted on line)
• Council Workshops:  11 meetings (but 10 have minutes posted on line)

So over a twelve month period, there are approximately 41 council meetings (or about one per week with the summer months scheduled off).

For the purpose of my review, I am only considering the meetings with minutes posted on line.  Therefore my review will only consider 35 meetings in all.  I am only considering absences but during some of these meetings, a council member may have arrived late or left early.  For the purpose of my review, those instances are considered "in attendance".  

Of the 35 meetings, the Mayor and Councillor Broome-Plumley have perfect attendance in 2015.  

Council members Bisanz, Kerwin and Taylor have missed 6% of these meetings.

Councillor Vegh missed 9% of this year's meetings

Councillors Twinney and Hempen missed 20% of the scheduled meetings.

And Councillor Sponga has missed 26% of the meetings.  

Newmarket residents interested in determining how well these politicians are serving the community should look at absenteeism as a problem.  I know many of my readers are managers or business owners.  How tolerant are you of an employee who misses work once every 4 or 5 days?  What if 33% of your employees were absent from work at this rate?  Could your workplace manage with this kind of absenteeism?

In the case of Newmarket Council, it is a rare occasion when all 9 members are present at any given meeting.  On a frequent basis, two or more council members are not present while important issues are being reviewed and key votes are being missed.  

Out of curiosity, I looked at the Library Board and the Central York Fire Services committees because they drive a large portion of the Town's budget each year.  As luck would have it, Councillor Sponga sits on both of these important committees.  

Between them, the Library and CYFS committees have met 18 times this year but only 15 meetings have minutes posted on line.  Councillor Sponga missed 7 of the 15 minuted meetings for a 47% absenteeism rate. 

Councillor Broome Plumley is taking care of (her employers') business

Over a year ago, I wrote this blog about the candidature of Ward 6 Councillor Kelly Broome-Plumley:  Click Here

The allegation was simple: Who arranged for Councillor Broome-Plumley to have a "fully funded" campaign (as others have alleged) and what did they expect to receive in return?

As far as I know, Kelly Broome-Plumley has never spoken about how much money she raised.  The sum far in away exceeded all others who ran for a ward council position.

From my observations, Councillor Broome-Plumley votes in tandem with the Mayor and Regional Councillor at every opportunity.  The evidence of her voting record can be found here:  Click Here  Newmarket Councillors will vote a dozen or more times on various items each meeting.  In approximately one year worth of voting, Councillor Broome-Plumley has been "in favour" of almost everything placed before her.  She has only voted against items on 5 occasions in total.  Even these "Opposed" votes were cast with her allies.

If the gruesome-twosome were looking for someone to rubber-stamp their agenda then the election of Kelly Broome-Plumley has been a resounding success.  In this past year, we've seen tax hikes, service cuts, user fees increase, water rates rise, and less municipal government transparency.  So while the Mayor and Regional Councillor may be "winning" with Kelly Broome-Plumely at their side, taxpayers of Newmarket have been on a crushing "losing" streak for quite some time.

Outside of Council meetings, Councillor Broome-Plumley sits on just one town committee.  This may shock residents of Ward 6 because as a candidate for election, Ms Broome-Plumley was quite critical of the half-dozen committees her predecessor participated in.  At the time, Broome-Plumley declared that was too few.

I could not find any community groups or other initiatives organized by the Councillor in the past year.

Nor could I find anywhere in the Era newspaper where she was quoted any issues relating to the town's operation or strategic plans for the future.

She has lead two initiatives in Council this term.

1)  The outdoor skating rink at Whipper Billy Watson Park located just around the corner from her home; and
2)  A walking trail connecting Yonge Street to Rita's Place

Both involved controversies.

The skating rink was given a single-sourced advertising agreement awarded to Ms. Broome Plumley's employer.  No other business or community group was allowed to bid on advertising for this rink which featured large signs being posted within the public park promoting Ms. Broome-Plumley's employer.

The walking trail she promoted will cost us almost double what was originally planned for a less accessible trail involving more destruction of trees, extensive grading, and too small for usual maintenance measures.

Want to guess the reason why we are spending approximately $630,000 on this trail as opposed to the $305,000 budgeted in 2014?

It turns out a big wig at Snap'd, which has employed Councillor Broome-Plumley's husband in the past (including these photos published in Snap'd last year:  Click Here)  owns one the homes that neighbours this proposed trail.

Oh, and did I mention that the Town of Newmarket was also going to hand over, free of charge and paying all related legal fees, a few meters of land to each of these same home owners?

And to top it all off, Councillor Broome-Plumley thanks this Snap'd big wig in her blog yesterday, for "her leadership role in speaking for her neighbours and helping us come to a plan we can all be proud of."

How does spending more than double the original planned amount and giving away public land in the process while destroying natural habitat become a plan "we can all be proud of?"

Well it's true if Councillor Broome-Plumley's definition of "we" is exclusive to her alliance with Van Bynen, Taylor, and her employers.

The taxpayers and residents of Ward 6?

We're not included within Councillor Broome-Plumley's version of "we".

Turf Fields - A tale of two cities

Here is a story of two turf fields in neighbouring towns.  The first turf field, located at St. Maximilian Kolbe High School, is a partnership between the Town of Aurora and the York Region Catholic School Board.  The second turf field, not yet built, will be a joint venture with the Town of Newmarket and the York Public School Board.  That field is slated for Dr. J.M. Denison High School.  Both fields cost $2,000,000 and both would generate revenues of approximately $10,000 annually.  Both fields cost the municipality approximately $1,000,000 towards the cost of construction.

The Aurora turf field was constructed in 2010 and the agreement between the Town of Aurora and the Catholic school board has been termed a partnership.  

By comparison, the Era is reporting that the agreement between the Town of Newmarket and the Public school board has hit a 'snag'.  The Town wants the Board to cover 66% of the maintenance cost of the field.  The Board feels the Town should cover the entire cost because the Board is providing the land for the field and the Town is benefiting from value of the land and the parking lot (which the Board maintains at 100% of the cost).  

Of note, the Public Board has similar agreements in place throughout York Region and it is typical for the municipality to cover the maintenance costs.  

At the Aurora field, it is reported that the Town of Aurora pays approximately $5,000 towards maintenance and $8,000 for lighting according to a 2010 article in the Era. 

This week's Era story on the Denison field suggests that the annual maintenance cost of a turf field would be in the range of $60,000 annually.  

The Town of Newmarket has a pricing policy that requires a 60/40 split on recovering costs.  What this means is that 60% of the cost of operating a facility is recovered by the users and 40% is subsidized by the public.  

If a turf field has a 20 year life span (and I think that is generous), then the amount of money that the Town must collect in user fees to recover the construction cost should be $30,000 plus an additional $36,000 to cover expected annual maintenance.  (These figures are 60% of the total).  

But the Town is only expecting to collect $10,000 annually.  This leaves the public subsidizing this field to the tune of 81% of the total costs versus 19% of the cost borne by the users.  

Before voting  to approve this expense, Council needs to explain why it has deviated so greatly from the fees it charges to other user groups.  Why is Newmarket Hockey paying its fair share of the cost of ice time, but user groups for this turf field are making off with a heavily subsidized rate?  

Reason dictates that we should oppose a publicly elected York Region Chair

There are a lot of arguments in support of "democracy" to elect the York Region Chair to replace the current system of election by the 21 members of Regional Council.

Personally, I think there are much bigger fish to fry in York.  Electing the Chair doesn't rank in my top 100 list of issues.

The only reason it is even being considered is because it helps improve the profile of the Ontario Liberals.  It is window dressing that makes them appear that they are in favour of public accountability when in actual fact, the government under Kathleen Wynne actually falls well short of anyone's standard in that regard.  (And there are multiple real life events to draw from to support that statement).  

To run a legitimate Region wide campaign will cost a candidate high six figures.  To illustrate this point, consider that in the City of Toronto, John Tory raised $2.8 million for his 2014 mayoralty race.  The City of Toronto has 2.6 million residents.  Therefore, Mayor Tory spent over $1 per resident.  Extrapolate from the 1.1 million residents of York Region and you get a sense of how much a winning campaign for Regional Chair will cost.

As no individual can self-finance such an expensive campaign, the eventual successful candidate will have to aggressively fund raise from those who can contribute - developers, government contractors, public sector unions, and lobbyists.

With this election, we would be giving great political influence to those with money, ignoring the advocates for the poor, for children, and the environment who are typically not as well financed.

Keep in mind that the Chair only votes when there is a tie and that has only happened once in 16 years.  Who would spend that kind of money to never vote at York Region Council?

But perhaps the best reason to oppose the election of the Chair is because there could be conflict with the agenda that the Chair was elected on versus the agenda of the rest of Council that comes from the lower tier Mayors and Regional Councillors who occupy the Council seats.

Presumably, the rest of Council has their mandate from their municipality's council on what issues they should champion.  I think the public has expressed their views already when electing their mayor and council.

The greatest number of public votes would come from voters living in Markham, Richmond Hill, and Vaughan.  Despite this, York Council has a balance in votes between those three cities and the remaining municipalities.

If a candidate wanted to win a public election, the way to go about it would be to promise all sorts of goodies to the voters who live in the big three but the cost of these goodies would be shared with the six municipalities who are receiving no benefit from them.

That would result in a deeply divided Council with the remaining six municipalities battling with the big three.

Do we really want to introduce into York Region the animosity that exists in Peel?  As the smallest of the Peel municipalities, Caledon representatives can (and in fact have) blocked Peel Council decisions by walking out of votes causing the Council to lose quorum.  It is not a good situation for anyone.

It is far better that we have a Chair (who currently only votes to break a tie) continue to represent the needs of all of York Region accountable equally to all of York Council.  The only way to ensure this is through the election by the 21 Council members.

Homelessness in York Region

The Toronto Star has published an article on the shocking rise of homelessness in York Region.  The tenor of the article is all wrong.  Homelessness isn't "hidden" as the article's headline suggests.  It is all around us and the crisis is plain for anyone to see.

In Newmarket, the youth shelter is filled to capacity.  East Gwillimbury has a men's shelter, the only one in York Region, and it too is bursting at the seams.  The Inn from the Cold, which operates seasonally in Newmarket, has difficulty keeping up with demand.

The Salvation Army, many local churches, United Way, and others run programs to help people on the precipice of becoming homeless, with programs and resources.

Yet, despite all of this, the problem persists.

Walk on Newmarket trails or through Jokers Hill trails in the early morning and the evidence of homelessness abounds.  Visit the library on a cold wintry day and you will see people who have nowhere else to go to keep warm.

In a town as wealthy as Newmarket, it is a community-wide tragedy to have people living without shelter surrounded by homes approaching $1,000,000.

Yet I don't want to give the impression that money solves the problem of homelessness.  Particular to Newmarket, we run into the issue of poor leadership that has exacerbated the crisis.

Mayor Van Bynen recently tweeted a photo of himself collected a large novelty cheque from the Royal Bank Branch on Yonge and Savage for Belinda's Place.  It is an ironic photo because directly across the street from the branch is the unfinished Belinda's Place, many months delayed (like so many other Newmarket construction projects led by this Mayor), despite having already reached its fundraising goals.

And it is an ironic photo because Royal Bank, (like all of the major banks), through predatory lending practices, that prey upon people who can't afford credit with 24% Visa or Mastercard interest rates, are the leading villains to the homelessness problem.  Social scientists used to blame addiction or family breakdown for homelessness, but after seeing the outcome of the 2008 US lending crisis, the billions of dollars each Canadian bank earns annually in profits are now looked upon in a much more sinister different light.

But ultimately, we need to look at those politicians at York Region Council who give a whole lot of lip service towards dealing with homelessness yet do absolutely nothing about.  York Region has 1.1 million residents yet only provides 30 spaces for homeless men (located in East Gwillimbury).  How can this make any sense to a self-appointed homelessness advocate like Newmarket's Deputy Mayor, John Taylor?  For years, he has been a leading member of the Housing York Inc. board, a taxpayer funded organization that provides emergency and low cost housing in York Region.  This organization is failing badly in its mandate to help.

If you are on the risk of becoming homeless and you live in southern York Region, (Markham, Richmond Hill, or Vaughan), there is very little help available from Housing York Inc.  Moving north, there is slightly more help available.

York Region is wealthy.  Corporations like the Royal Bank with their billions in annual profits are wealthy.  Surely there are scraps available to resolve the shelter bed shortage for this upcoming winter.

30 shelter beds for homeless men in our municipality of 1,100,000 residents is barbaric.  We must do much better.

Hollingsworth Arena can be sold and still used for hockey. Here's how.

There are many times when I sit back and ask myself, "Why doesn't Newmarket Council look at the obvious options?"

The issues with Hollingsworth are well known.  At 40 years old, it's an facility that is reaching the end of its life.  Despite that fact, there is truth to what Ward 3 Councillor Jane Twinney says too.  The arena is still in relatively good condition.  If there wasn't an offer to purchase from developer San Michael, we wouldn't be talking about tearing the building down.  We'd be quietly maintaining the structure and hoping to wring out a few more seasons out of the arena.

But the San Michael offer is reportedly a good one.  Probably too good to pass up, especially in an area of town that is prime for some re-development.  Building kitty-corner to the hospital is sure to attract buyers who work at Southlake.  Wouldn't we all like a home so close to work?

Yet the history of condominium construction in Newmarket should give everyone on Council pause to look at the best alternatives to keeping Hollingsworth.

One such option, and the preferred choice at the moment, is a P3 option (Private Public Partnership) of a new arena for the Pickering College grounds.

Another option is to build a third ice pad at the Ray Twinney Complex with its ample land and parking already in place.  This option is estimated to cost approximately $10 million according to staff.

But looking at how slow developers have been to build condominiums on projects already approved by the Town (such as Slessor Square and George St to name a couple), why not look at a third option for the Town?

The option I would propose is to sell the Hollingsworth land and then lease back the use of the arena for the next few years as San Michael goes through the process of selling units prior to construction.  This would be a win-win for both the developer and for Newmarket arena users.

San Michael can make some revenue in terms of rent on land that would otherwise sit empty.  And Newmarket doesn't need to spend millions of dollars to build a new arena if it can get a few more years out of Hollingsworth at a reasonable cost.  

A credible conservative candidate for Newmarket Mayor emerges

Could Ottawa's loss be the Town of Newmarket's gain?

There seems to be a consensus building among local conservatives and other community minded individuals that the aftermath of Monday's election results could be an opportunity to return responsible government to Newmarket's town hall.

After years of corruption and "Laurel & Hardy" type bumbling by the gruesome twosome of Van Bynen and Taylor, many would like to recruit Lois Brown to become a candidate for mayor of Newmarket.

Lois Brown would immediately bring a credible conservative alternative to Newmarket's municipal government.  Her experience working with the provincial and federal governments could be exactly what we need to get our economy going again.

Would Ms. Brown be interested in this role?  It is too soon after her stinging defeat to say.  But considering how effectively Vaughan Mayor Maurizio Bevilaqua transitioned from MP to the mayor's chains, it would not be unprecedented for her to pursue this.

Remember that the Town of Newmarket Mayor is the 4th highest paid mayor in all of Canada/  If she wins in 2018, Ms. Brown would see a bump in pay.

Newmarket corruption exposed by Toronto media

It is well documented that "friends of Tony" thrive in Newmarket with government contracts and municipal government grants.

It is also well known that opponents of Tony face retaliation and retribution.

While listening to CFRB 1010 this morning it wasn't any surprise to hear that strong allegations of corruption have once again been leveled against our local government.

The co-owner of The Cove, Chris Benson, believes that Tony Van Bynen is purposefully trying to put him out of business.  Chris has been a vocal opponent of the Mayor's handling of Davis Drive. You can read about it here:

Tony and the spokesperson for Viva continue to spout the old company line.  According to these two, this bus lane is a good investment for Newmarket and the project is on time and on budget.

How can it be good for Davis when the York Region government is now the biggest landowner on this 2.6 km stretch through expropriation of land?  If this land was in the hands of small business owners, jobs would be created and the economy would benefit.

I believe that the York Region government is looking to benefit financially when businesses like the Cove shut down and gentrification of Davis Drive begins.  Developers will call the Region to purchase some of its many landholdings for new high rise condo towers.  The days of Davis Drive being the economic engine in Newmarket are numbered.  This area will transformed into high density residential while jobs will go elsewhere as local shops are forced to close.  York Region government will profit immensely from the gentrification of Davis Drive.

As for being on time and on budget, it is well known that the Viva bus lanes were supposed to have been completed in early 2014. The Viva spokesperson now claims that the 2014 wasn't a "deadline" but a "best guess".  I'm not buying his line and neither should you.

What we have in Newmarket are backroom secret deals and then lying to the public about it being the modus operandi of this administration.

Davis Drive's $261 million project is scheduled to be done by December 17, 2015.  The $480 million Yonge Street Viva bus lane project is just beginning.  Expect years and years of construction delays, economic hardship, job losses, and corruption as the mega project drags on.  A high cost to pay for a bus route with few riders.  

Hollingsworth Arena to be sold

The signs that the Hollingsworth Arena's days are coming to an end are all over the October 20, 2015 Committee of the Whole agenda.  You don't need tea leaves or tarot cards to know the arena's ultimate fate.

During the October 20th Committee of the Whole meeting, the developer San Michael will speak to Council again.

Then there is a vote requiring staff to work out the capital costs for replacing Hollingsworth with either a 3P arena sharing the costs and ownership with Pickering College, or by adding a third rink at the Ray Twinney Complex.

Further on in the agenda, there is a motion to be tabled by John Taylor for an outdoor rink.  It is not known whether Taylor intends this rink as an alternative to the Pickering College/ Ray Twinney proposals or in addition to them.

What is known is that the Town of Newmarket has no need for two additional ice pads at this time.  Youth involvement in hockey has been dropping steadily even though the town's population has been increasing.  With plans for new development over the next 15 years coming from high rise condos, such as the 15 storey San Michael proposal for the Hollingsworth land, we know that there won't be many children in those buildings.  Families generally don't live in those types of residences.

So, if we are building just one new ice pad, my support would be to decline the P3 Pickering College proposal and an indoor rink at Ray Twinney but go with an outdoor rink located at the Ray Twinney Complex where parking and land are both readily available.

If it is a standard sized rink, with proper refrigeration and care, there is no reason why Newmarket Minor Hockey and the various men's leagues couldn't use an outdoor rink.  In fact, the novelty might even appeal to users.  We have seen the popularity of the Toronto Maple Leafs outdoor practices and the NHL heavily promotes its Winter Classic games.

An outdoor rink should be the most cost effective way to replace Hollingsworth.

But if Taylor wants this outdoor pad in addition to building another ice pad elsewhere, then that is just a dumb idea.  There is no justification for two new pads.  It would be wasting money that frankly the Town doesn't have.  When the Magna Centre was opened, the plan at that time was to shut down Hollingsworth.  At that time we had a surplus of ice pads.  The only reason a new ice pad is even being considered is because the Town's "Play Book" policy anticipates that one could be needed in the future as the Town continues to grow.

As an end note, how are residents to know if residents are getting a good deal for selling Hollingsworth? The fact that the selling price has been kept a secret casts suspicions of the Town.  The developer has been meeting with Town staff for five-plus years.  This deal has been in the works for a long time but has been kept secret from the public.

Like many residents, I am getting sick of a Council that doesn't trust and/or like the people they supposedly represent.  Mayor Van Bynen is so concerned about public backlash that he keeps everything about this deal a secret.

But I have to ask, if selling this arena was a good deal for the public, then why would he anticipate backlash?   Or is there more to these secret meetings with the developer than meets the eye?

John Taylor's Support of the YRT's Anti Worker Union Busting Tactics Calls for Explanation

An interesting article in the Toronto Star exposing the anti-labour union busting tactics of the York Region Transit employees.

York Region Transit may be privately owned, but it is heavily subsidized by and under contract to the Region of York.  As such, it should operate to the standards of the regional municipalities.

The YRT is taking advantage of a legal loophole within Ontario labour laws known as 'contract flipping' which allows the employer to lay off experienced workers and replace them with less experienced (as in lower salaried) workers.  It may be legal but it certainly isn't socially responsible or even good business.

The Toronto Star story tells of an 8-year veteran bus driver being laid off and replaced by a driver who was licensed for less than a few weeks.  I think a quick survey of passengers on the topic, "Would you feel safer with a new bus driver or an experienced bus driver?" would overwhelmingly favour the latter.

Having employees perpetually fearful of losing their jobs doesn't bode well for the economy which relies on people feeling secure enough to make large purchases.  Would you commit to a new car or a new home if you thought you could be made unemployed at any time?

The real reason why this contract flipping takes place?  It is a no holds barred fight to destroy the ATU the union which represents the drivers who lost their jobs.  When York Region Transit flipped from Veolia workers to Tok Transit, the ATU lost their representation rights.  

Newmarket Regional Councillor John Taylor sits on York Region's Transportation Committee.  He needs to explain to residents why York Region Council supports such strident anti-union, anti-worker tactics.  

Would super villain Bane be a better mayor than Tony Van Bynen?

John Daggett:  I've paid you a small fortune

Bane:  And this gives you power over me?

This memorable exchange from the movie The Dark Knight Rises involves John Daggett a construction magnate and the super villain Bane.  I bring this dialog up as a comparison between how things are done in the movies versus real life.

In the movies, people in power stand up to greedy developers.

In real life (and in the case of Newmarket Council in particular), the developers usually get their way.
 
Take for instance the mysterious circumstances surrounding the Hollingsworth Arena.  The only reason why I use the word "mysterious" is because we truly don't have much information about the deal.  Council is keeping a lot of secrets these days.  But most expect that the public recreation facility will be sold off and we'll get the usual line that the deal is good for us.  Like the soccer club loan, we won't be told either the details of the deal or receive an explanation how we have benefited.  We will just have to take the gruesome twosome's word for it that the public has done good.

Back in April, Council decided to tackle the issue of parkland.  With new development coming to Newmarket, Council had to make a decision about how much parkland would be needed for these new communities.  Council decided that 1 hectare for every 300 housing units would be the appropriate formula.

To demonstrate what this means, consider the case of the recent Glenway subdivision which is purportedly to be approximately 750 housing units. The formula would require two and a half hectares of parkland to be given to the Town of Newmarket by Marrianeville (the developer).

Upon learning of Council's decision on this formula, developers, including their lobbying arm known as BILD, went ballistic claiming that such a formula would cause them undue hardship.

Did Council stand by their convictions and send the developers a clear message that Council is "in charge"?

Sadly, no.

Council has decided to hire a consultant, Mark Conway, Senior Partner at N Barry Lyon Consultants, to work with the developers to find a compromise.

As we seen with Glenway, when the issues get tough for the gruesome twosome, they hire consultants in order to avoid making a decision themselves.

Its really too bad that when an issue comes up between the people who want a "live-able" Newmarket versus the greedy ambitions of developers, we can't rely on our elected officials to do the right thing.

Election Sign Fines Require Transparency From Town

Within the next few days, federal election signs will begin to pop up on municipal property through out Newmarket.  

This will be the first time federal candidates will face fines for breaching the Town of Newmarket election sign bylaws.  All candidates have been briefed on sign placement.  Let's hope they are diligent about complying with the bylaw.

The justifications behind the sign bylaws were thoroughly debated last term of Council.  Former Councillor Maddie Di Muccio battled valiantly in opposing the implementation of the fines with arguments that the fines were unnecessary and anti-democratic.  In the end, hers was the only vote against the new rules.

On the other side of the coin, former Councillor Chris Emanuel was the champion for implementing election signs fines.  He was apparently upset by what he felt was 'clutter' on municipal property.  You will recall that this was a theme for him.  He also fought for licensing charities with donation boxes on private property because they too could look messy.

The Town of Newmarket has remained silent about how the election sign bylaw was received during the municipal election of October 2014.  I am sure that pretty much everyone is aware of Mayor Van Bynen getting away with placing hundreds of signs on College Manor on the night of the debate.  The Town's Bylaw Enforcement Department has a lot to answer as to why it turned a blind eye.

There have also been photos of 100's of election signs in "lock up."  A closer examination of the photos suggest there might be an inequity between candidates.  The public cannot judge this for certain because the Town refuses to release details about which candidates had signs removed by Bylaw Enforcement.

In refusing to release these details, many are wondering if the Town is compliant with Ontario's municipal election reporting rules.  In Ontario, regardless of laws that would normally protect personal information, all details concerning election related expenses are supposed to be made public.  Being fined for an election sign is an election related expense (as the Bylaw is specific to election signs) so the Town has an obligation to release this information.

If the Town of Newmarket made this information public, then all of us could judge if there was political interference from the Bylaws Enforcement Department.  The Town is refusing to release this information so we are left to speculate.

At least one former candidate is refusing to pay his allotted sign fees.

The Town of Newmarket must take every measure, up to and including taking this former candidate to Court to collect.  Failing to do so would be unfair to all other law-abiding candidates who respected the law and paid their fines.

If the Town of Newmarket does not sue this one individual, then the other candidates should in turn sue the Town for the unfair way the election bylaw signs have been collected.

Either everyone pays their allotted election signs fines or no one pays.  It's time for the Town of Newmarket to decide.  

Keep the P1 Parking Area Locked Up

Last night Council debate the P1 Parking lot and I wasn't surprised to learn how Buckley Insurance is the centre of much controversy.

As a background, Town staff are proposing parking spaces to be constructed on top of Riverwalk Commons park/ walking trails land.  But at least part of the intended parking area is owned by Buckley Insurance.  The Town staff are still figuring out the difference between public and private land in this area.

The solution that Council adopted last night is to block off the disputed parking spots until the ownership issue is cleared up.

Buckley won't be happy, as dissenting voter Councillor Kerwin pointed out, because he won't be able to use these spaces for his own private needs.  As many know, Buckley isn't the most community minded of companies but he is tight with our Council.  Buckley Insurance is the type of place where employees are forced to have mirrors at their phones "so customers can hear you smile."  He is also the type of business owner to be constantly involved in legal disputes with his neighbours.  You can draw your own conclusions about Buckley from that.

My suggestion to the Town of Newmarket is far more pragmatic.  Keep the P1 area locked up.  This P1 area should be used for pedestrians and families to enjoy.  Parked cars in that area will ruin the vibe of Riverwalk Commons.

On the northwest corner of the municipal parking lot on Doug Duncan Drive, there are tennis courts that could be re-purposed into approximately 30 parking spaces with little effort.

Frankly, this location is a dumb place for tennis courts and Newmarket has an abundance of alternative parkland that would be more suitable.  The excessively large parking lot at Ray Twinney Complex would seem to be an ideal location for tennis courts as much of the infrastructure required is already there.

As for Councillor Kerwrin's suggestion of parking at the old Fire Hall?  I think the Town should follow through with its plan to sell this property.  The proceeds of the sale could go towards relocating the tennis courts from Doug Duncan Drive.

Dave Kerwin's Rain Barrel versus Your Tax Bill

Do we really have a Town Councillor in Newmarket who has no understanding of what it means to live within a community?  Does the concept of paying taxes for the benefit of greater public good truly escape Ward 3 Councillor Dave Kerwin?

Long time observers will note that Councillor Kerwin prides himself as a holier-than-thou environmentalist.  If you doubt this, just ask him how many bags of garbage he puts out every two weeks. (The answer is none).

At Monday's Town of Newmarket Cimmittee of the Whole, a student intern was given an opportunity to present his work on storm sewer funding. And it was not a surprise that Councillor Kerwin leaped at the opportunity to inform us all about his state of the art water run-off capture system at his house.  He proudly exclaims that not a single rain drop of water will run off his property into the storm sewer.

He demands to know of the intern, will there be tax savings for rain water conservationists like him?

The poor intern, bless his heart, didn't see it coming.  He answered meekly that perhaps the Town could consider some sort of discount for people like the Kerwins.

That "perhaps" opened the door for a new diatribe on the Kerwin household's garbage disposal strategies.  Thankfully the Mayor cut him short.

But let's for a second examine what Mr. Kerwin is saying when he is asking for a discount off storm water sewer rates and garbage pick up.  Let's imagine what a Kerwin-like property tax system that provides discounts based on usage could entail?

1. Should non-library users be able to opt out of paying taxes towards this service?
2. If my family members don't play hockey, soccer or tennis, can I receive a discount off my taxes because my family doesn't use the Town's recreation facilities?
3. If I don't drive, should I pay to maintain the roads in Newmarket?
4. If my house didn't have a fire, can I stop paying tax towards the fire department?
5. If I don't have any school aged kids, do I still need to pay for supporting public education?
6. I am neither a criminal nor a victim, so why am I paying for police services?  
7. I've never called my Mayor, Council member, or any member of the Town of Newmarket staff for anything. Shouldn't I receive a discount?  Why am I paying their salaries?

It doesn't take long to understand that if we give in to Councillor Kerwin's ridiculous demands for a tax discount based on usage that in very short order, the fabric of our community would be in shambles.  

Even if Councillor Kerwin doesn't put out garbage or use the Town's storm sewers like the rest of us, he still benefits from these services.  If garbage wasn't picked up, rats, vermin and disease would infest our community.  If storm water had nowhere to drain to, it would fill up basements all over town.  

It's too bad that Councillor Kerwin is either not smart enough to understand this concept or not community minded enough to care.  Either way, explain to me why is this man on Council?  

A mid summer's Council meeting

When I sat down to write this blog post, I couldn't limit my topic to just one issue.  So I've decided on a longer blog covering 4 issues.

Yesterday's meeting had some major issues before Council.  It was too bad that the material wasn't part of a regularly scheduled meeting when more people would know to attend.  This was a 'special' meeting and not part of the regular schedule.

York Region Growth Plans

Up first was a presentation from the York Region planner about growth.  Many of the numbers concerning Newmarket are old news. What was eye-popping was the growth planned for some of the neighbouring municipalities.

In particular, East Gwillimbury is expected to grow from approximately 24,000 residents today to well over 100,000 residents in 15 years.  The first thought that came to mind was the sewage lagoons in Holland Landing.  These lagoons are already filled beyond capacity.  When 75,000 more people flush their toilets, where is it going?

When East Gwillimbury grew at the intersection of Yonge and Green Lane, they relied on Newmarket to provide water and sewage services.  Is that the plan going forward?

There has long been talk about building a new water treatment plant to replace the Holland Landing lagoons but this plant has been deferred time and time again.  Earlier this spring York Region Council approved yet another deferral of this much needed infrastructure investment.  Simply put, the Region doesn't have any money to build a new plant.

With few answers made available to the public, it seems clear that York Region's growth plans are really the stuff of pipe dreams (both literally and figuratively).

Sports Users Fees

We learned at Council that the Town of Newmarket has a philosophy for charging higher user fees for recreational programs that isn't shared by neighbouring towns.  The Town believes that the users should pay for the programs whereas neighbouring towns subsidize use.

Town staff acknowledged that the rates charged to various sports leagues cost more than elsewhere.  It was acknowledged that these rates were affecting participation in some programs (due to affordability) and it was suggested that some children may need financial assistance to continue to belong to an organized sports league.

With all of that in mind, Council voted to approve a proposed 3.5% rate hike (although the final approval won't take place until September 14 to allow for the proscribed public notice period).  These higher rates will take effect on January 1st.

When asked why they decided on 3.5%, the Director sheepishly admitted that was the amount of increase assigned in the town's budget.

In other words, town staff acknowledge our rates our high but don't have any explanation why we are raising these fees again other than the Finance Director tells us to.

If any Council member found any of this troubling, they didn't seem to raise any objections.  On the contrary, Regional Counicllor John Taylor asked staff to come up with some reasons that he could use to justify the increase, such as the construction of a turf field.

Snow Removal

Most residential streets have snow piled on either side as the plows pass.  In some areas, it is impossible to do this.  In those areas, the snow is collected and dumped at the Ray Twinney Complex.  This arrangement has been going on for decades.

A few residents who live on McCaffrey Road don't like this arrangement as it involves trucks coming and going as they dump their loads.

The Ray Twinney Complex parking lot is an ideal place to dump snow because it complies with strict environmental rules.  The lot has a oil grit filtration system in place ensuring that melting snows don't pollute water ways.

Without that filter, which we learned cost in the range of $40,000 to install, it is illegal to dump snow.
In a clear case of kowtowing, Ward 7 Councillor Christina Bisanz has taken it upon herself to demand that the snow dumping happen elsewhere.  She showed naivete when she demanded this change happen immediately (in time for the 2015 winter season) and used a regional road (Davis Drive) as justification for making this change.  Davis Drive snow is the responsibility of York Region not Newmarket.

That said, no one can ever say that this council doesn't stick together through thick and thin.  It won't happen this year but likely for the 2016, Council will approve spending in the range of $100,000 plus annual costs to make the 5 or 6 affected homeowners on McCaffrey Road happy.

If you don't think $100,000 is a significant amount of money, keep in mind that the estimated cost of plowing sidewalks throughout the town is approximately $200,000 annually.  It is opportunity cost and the greater number of Newmarket residents have lost out, especially the elderly who cannot walk on our neighbourhood sidewalks each winter.

Voting Records

I had a quick glimpse of how council members are voting this term.  Based on what is posted on the Town of Newmarket web page, there are only two instances where an issue was not decided by unanimous votes.  In January, Councillor Kerwin voted against a closed door meeting item and in March, Mayor Van Bynen was the only yes vote on a tax levy issue.  Every other vote, and there have been hundreds, have been unanimous.

What is scary is that Regional Councillor Taylor, Councillors Vegh, Twinney, Hempen, Sponga, Broome Plumley, and Bisanz vote alike on every single issue.  Its like they have one mind between them.  Think of your spouse, (or if no spouse, a close friend).  You may agree on many things but can you honestly say you agree 100% of the time?  If that is unreasonable, then the only other explanation is that certain council members are mailing it in.  They just don't care anymore.

If you watch many meetings, you will see with the exception of Taylor, the remaining 5 have very little to say on any issue.  If they do speak up, it is usually to parrot something that Taylor has already said.  This is why Council meetings, which used to be two or three hours long last term, are now measured in minutes since December.

I am very concerned about the future of our democracy in this Town.  Where issues should be raised - Council Chambers - debate has fallen silent.  Our Council has taken to agreeing with whatever the town staff place before them.  No questions asked.

.

Newmarket Residents Are Allowed Only One Colour of Paint

I have seen another social media account poking fun at the Era for publishing a story about a woman painting her fence.  On the surface, it may be appropriate to mock the paper if this is the kind of news that the Era considers worthy of its front page.

But from the stories I've heard over the past 12-months from readers who contact me, maybe it is about time that we start paying attention to the Town of Newmarket bylaw enforcement.

Not a week goes by when I am not contacted by someone having difficulty with how bylaws are being enforced.  The types of complaints may vary from height of a pergola being added to an existing backyard deck; to a dispute over a new fence; to property standards not being met.  What is the common theme in each complaint I hear about is as follows:

1) The bylaw officer doesn't enforce the bylaw consistently and according to the written bylaw
2) No communication from the bylaws officer after initial contact is made
3) No attempt is made to find a common sense solution

In short, the bylaw officer gets involved resulting in neighbours getting angry with neighbours, and then the bylaw officer leaves the scene so that anger can fester.

Over two years ago, someone complained about spray paint vandalism on Ms. Bujko's Manning Crescent fence.  Weeks ago, the bylaw officer contacted Mrs. Bujko and informed her that she had to remove the vandalism.  Mrs. Bujko decided to paint over the vandalism using periwinkle and magenta paints.

Despite no one complaining about Mrs. Bujko's colour scheme, the bylaw officer went back to Mrs. Bujko and demanded that she only use one colour on her fence.  Mrs. Bujko will have to choose only periwinkle or magenta but she can't have both.

Whether you agree with Mrs. Bujko's colour scheme is not the point.  Its about basic property rights.  She owns her fence and her paint job is not bothering anyone except for the Town of Newmarket's bylaw officer.  Surely this bylaw officer has bigger fish to fry?

Why did this small problem need to escalate to the point of being front page news?  The answer is not as pretty as Mrs. Bujko's periwinkle/ magenta fence.  This problem escalated because senior management at the Town of Newmarket and/ or our elected officials let things get out of hand.  Its a symptom of a failing management team at the Town of Newmarket.

That's why this story is front page news.  Overzealous bylaw enforcement highlights for all residents to see exactly how our tax dollars are being wasted.

Snap'd Creeps Us Out Again.

To be honest, I have always had a raised eyebrow concerning Snap'd Newmarket.  A few years ago, a child I was watching got a little more attention from one of their photographers than I felt comfortable with asking a lot of semi inappropriate questions that you really shouldn't be asking a child.

Today, when a Snap'd photographer asks to take a photo of me when I am at some community event, I politely decline.

Snap'd has been getting free space at various community centres and other public buildings and as a business owner, that freebie just rubs me the wrong way.  As a business owner, I've often thought that I should take some of my own products and put them on the display for my own commercial benefit.  My products don't cause the amount of litter that Snap'd papers cause either.  Snap'd gets its way with free displays whereas other businesses don't.  It isn't fair.

Snap'd gets this "special deal" because in the world of Mayor Tony Van Bynen, people who strategically donate to certain election campaigns get ahead.  Corruption may be too harsh.  Let's call it the more genteel word, cronyism.

Tony's Cronies sums it up.

Recently Snap'd via their twitter account got just a little too creepy with their very personal line of questions:  It may sound friendly but this was their response when somebody asked if the new dog park could have a soft opening before August 8th.  From all appearances, its classic passive aggression.

To my eyes, an inappropriate line of questioning from the folks a Snap'd in response to a very reasonable request.  Once again, Snap'd crosses the line by failing to respect someone's personal space and privacy.  

Just creepy.

Newmarket must consider aesthetics in new construction projects

Under the Places to Grow Act, the province has designated Newmarket to grow exponentially from now until 2031.  For many long term residents, it is hard to imagine the town we grew up in changing so quickly.  What will Newmarket look like in fifteen years?

We know that the trend will be towards concrete and steel high rise towers reaching as high as 15-storeys or more.  Our town has run out of develop-able land upon which single families homes can be built.

Looking at recent construction projects undertaken by the Town of Newmarket, I wonder if these new towers will be aesthetically pleasing.  After all, nobody is going to look at the Magna Centre or Belinda's Place and think those are nice looking looking buildings.  With each passing day as it nears the completion of construction, Belinda's Place is turning out to be a real architectural eyesore.

Even the Courthouse on Yonge and Davis, while not actually constructed by the Town but would have had building plans approved by the Town, is as ugly as any building can be with a glorified port-a-pak type expansion.  Every time I drive past I ask myself, "They cut down 100 year old trees for this?"

And lastly, the Old Town Hall, which was a nice looking building before its most recent renovations, will look to become a gaudy hybrid with an uninspired glass atrium that has only served to jack up the cost of construction substantially.

With such an unimpressive track record, I believe that Newmarket should be looking into bringing in a planner who understands what it means to build an aesthetically pleasing community.  If we don't take appearances into consideration soon, we'll under up with a Town that will be reminiscent of some Soviet era eastern bloc nation.

Is Van Bynen keeping us in the dark about our library?

Two years ago, I wrote about the need for the public library to amalgamate within York Region in order to save money and provide better services to the community. You can read that editorial by clicking here

So it comes as no surprise that the Towns of Whitchurch Stouffville, Aurora and Newmarket are considering just that. Stouffville Council members learned that talks were already underway for the three communities to work together on providing library service at their council meeting last night.

The biggest surprise of the evening was a tweet from Newmarket Library CEO that he wasn't aware of any of this.

It appears that the Town of Newmarket is working behind the backs of the Newmarket Library Board and its CEO.

We'll have to see how this plays out, but the CEO and the NPL Board being shut out of these types of discussions seems to undermine the autonomy of those members.

Are we surprised about Newmarket mayor Tony Van Bynen's secrecy? Closed door meetings and back room deals is how he and his administration operates.

Southlake Foundation Update

I was challenged by a reader that my previous story (here) on the mass resignations from the Southlake Hospital Foundation was wrong.  This reader said this story (here) was the real reason why these members resigned.

My source was actually remarkably accurate for someone who acknowledged not being in the room during this late June closed door meeting.  Every single detail was true, with exception to the identity of the person whom the hospital's administration wanted to turf.

I went back to my source and asked about the Ms. Poscente, the current (but possibly impermanent) CEO of the Southlake Foundation.

My source observed two items of note.  First, even if the hospital administration may have been gunning for Neila, the former Foundation Chair (and local donut store owner) Jim Alexander'a statement doesn't explain why she ended up as a candidate for termination by the hospital's administration.

Secondly, my source says that heavyweights like Newmarket Mayor Tony Van Bynen and Aurora Mayor Geoff Dawe have been making phone calls to Mr. Alexander and friends to try and mend fences.

My source still feels certain that Steve Hinder was the real target of hospital administrators.  It is suggested that perhaps Neila Poscente was asked to seek Mr. Hinder's departure from the Foundation and she wasn't willing or able to carry that task out.  As a power struggle ensued between the Foundation and the people who actually run the operations at the hospital, the only way to resolve the matter effectively was to seek Neila's termination.

Because every other detail of what my source said was incredibly accurate, I have no doubt about the claim of a power struggle between the Foundation and hospital administrators.  At very least, the people who run the golf tournaments and organize the Mardi Gras Ball seem to have gotten a little too big for their britches in the eyes of hospital management and seeking Neila's termination was the way to reign this renegade group in again.

It is so embarrassing that these so-called "community leaders" like Jim Alexander and friends have put a blight on our town and hospital with their child-like antics.  Their lack of character have taken a world class health care facility and lessened it because they wanted to be "in charge".  That kind of behaviour may be acceptable in the drive thru lane at the local donut store but it isn't acceptable at the leadership levels of our hospital.  

If you wish to voice your disapproval to what these most disloyal former members of the Southlake Foundation board are alleged to have done, may I humbly suggest that you donate to the hospital today?  You can donate by following this link:  Donate to Southlake

The Story Behind the En Masse Resignations at Southlake Foundation

Southlake Hospital is one of the best community health care facilities in Ontario.  It ranks near the top in many different areas of operation and that is a testament to the hard work and dedication of the people who work there.

News that the Southlake Hospital Foundation (the people responsible for fundraising for the hospital) board had 12 of 14 members suddenly resign has rocked the community.

These resignations have created confusion.  Do these resignations mean that something is being mismanaged in the hospital?  The answer is clearly, "No", because the Foundation has nothing to do with the day-to-day operations of the hospital.  The Foundation organizes golf tournaments, the Mardi Gras Ball and other fundraising events.

There was rampant speculation that charity funds may have been embezzled or have gone missing.  The chatter about this rumour had gotten to such a fever pitch that the Foundation felt pressure to put out second statement on the board resignations which was reported in the Toronto Star.  This second statement made it clear that the resignations on the Foundation board were not related to any fiduciary matter.

The public can be assured that it is still safe to donate to Southlake hospital and all donations are working to improve the quality of our local health care.  Nobody affiliated with the Southlake Foundation is alleging any criminal conduct or mishandling of Southlake hospital donations.

As reported in the Toronto Star, (which you can read here: The Star) the reason for the mass resignations is as follows:

The hospital and foundation confirmed the mass resignation and said a “personnel issue” was behind the sudden action.

“The matter in question dealt with a personnel issue, and was not fiduciary. Personnel matters will not be discussed with the media or (publicly),” the board said in an email statement Wednesday.

My source with close connections to these matters sheds some light.  The source, (and for the record, my source was not actually present during the closed door meeting that preceded the resignations), believes that "personnel matters" do not involve any employee of the Foundation.  Instead, the personnel matter involves a board member of Southlake Foundation.  

Keep in mind that the 12 Board members who quit would have control over the outcome of any controversial staffing change, (for example, whether to hire or fire an employee of the Foundation), by virtue that they number 12 of 14 votes.  

But when a Southlake Foundation board member was asked to resign, my source believes that the other 11 member stood in solidarity during that closed door meeting.   

My source believes that the controversy (such as this recent imbroglio: Hinder) that surrounds Steve Hinder got to be too much for Southlake senior administration.  At one time Mr. Hinder's involvement with the Foundation was important because of his close ties with Belinda Stronach, but with the Stronachs and Magna International now appearing to be distancing themselves from Mr. Hinder, his ability to raise money for the Foundation was diminished substantially.  The hospital's administration, valuing the hospital's relationship with the Stronachs and Magna International, determined that it was time for Mr. Hinder to leave the board.  

My source suggests that other board members were upset about the way Hinder was being shuffled out.  As my source explains it, Hinder has not yet had his day in court and these board members felt that there should be a presumption of innocence given to him especially in light of Mr. Hinder's record for volunteerism with the hospital. 

If this is correct, then it is too bad that these 11 resigning board members had more loyalty to Hinder than they did to the hospital and the communities that Southlake serves.  Their mass resignations have undoubtedly hurt the hospital's ability to raise money.  They have inappropriately implicated the hospital in controversy because of their feelings towards Hinder.  These resignations speak to their character and not in a good way.  

Donut store owner, Jim Alexander, is among the group who resigned on June 30th.  Here is what he had to say in an earlier statement:

"As a volunteer board made up of prominent community leaders, the foundation board was guided by our individual principles and values.  As we were not willing to compromise those principles and values, we felt that the best thing to do for the future of Southlake Regional Centre and its Foundation was to resign."

The question for Mr. Alexander, (and other resigning members), is which one of these principles and values allows him to undermine the worthy fundraising efforts of Southlake Hospital?

If you wish to voice your disapproval to what these most disloyal former members of the Southlake Foundation board are alleged to have done, may I humbly suggest that you donate to the hospital today?  You can donate by following this link:  Donate to Southlake

Council continues to cater to only the wealthy in times of austerity

Have you noticed what's happening to your grocery bill lately?

Throughout southern Ontario, the cost of food keeps rising.  In a province with public medicare, the long term effects of expensive food is magnified, as healthy food becomes unattainable for our poor.  Those who cannot afford to eat healthy invariably resort to low cost, high calorie processed foods that lead to obesity and dietary concerns.

So good on Newmarket's Marc Mantha and his ongoing advocacy for backyard hens.  Allowing residents to garden for fresh vegetables and have inexpensive access to fresh eggs can go a long way to bridging the financial gap for many.

But in a town where our local politicians believe that a $500,000 home qualifies as affordable  housing, it should be no surprise that our Council wants to reserve this healthy lifestyle choice to the wealthiest residents exclusively.

They have passed a pilot project allowing for backyard hens for homes that have a minimum of 50 feet distance from the hens to the next residence.

In other words, if I were to build a coop in the middle of my backyard, and I have neighbours on either side of my home, then I would need to live on a property with a minimum 65ft frontage in order to meet that 50ft requirement.  (32 ft to my property line plus 18 ft to the neighbour's home, provided that there is that much space to the neighbour's home).  I haven't even begun to factor in how large the backyard would need to be if the home has neighbours to the rear.

But how many of our community's poor live on 65ft lots?  How many middle class residents have 65 ft lots?

Unfortunately, it is only the wealthiest families in the community who can afford a large lot.  Therefore it is only the wealthiest who can have a healthy lifestyle in Newmarket.  Thanks to your Newmarket Town Council.

Bell Let's Talk About Internet Giga Bytes

Each month, our Newmarket Mayor publishes a column in the Newmarket Era, and without fail, each column boasts about his broad band internet plan. He talks about the need to connect. He talks about the Town's plans to create 32,000 new jobs by the year 2051, (despite the fact that his administration saw just a pitiful 100 new jobs since 2010, while the municipalities around us had much better job creation numbers).

This past week, Bell beat him to the punch. Bell has announced over a billion dollars in spending to make the City of Toronto a giga byte internet city. Toronto will have the fastest internet on the planet.

And with that billion dollar investment will come new jobs. Bell estimates that Toronto will see 2400 new jobs created because of improved internet access.

The Town of Newmarket has always been rather murky with their expected job creation numbers resulting from their broad band plan. Bell's 2400 new jobs estimate should give us some insight. Using the same ratio as Bell's estimate, Newmarket would see only 10.2 new jobs created by Van Bynen's broad band plan - a far cry from his own estimate.

It's time for Newmarket to be realistic about its broad band plans. To date, Van Bynen's administration refuses to discuss how much their plan will cost. We know that they have received and accepted a proposal from one company but the cost of this proposal is being kept secret. I expect that the money received from the Hollingsworth Arena sale will cover it.

And it is time for the Van Bynen administration to be honest about new job figures. Taxpayers will be spending millions to connect a few businesses. Most businesses in town won't have access. Curiously, the Town isn't connecting along the bus rapid transit corridor but is connecting the coffee shops, boutique restaurants and farmers market on Main Street for some inexplicable reason.

I am not opposed to having better internet connectivity in Newmarket. I am opposed to the way the Van Bynen administration intends to carry it out.  The secrecy needs to go. The service should follow where the employment corridors are - Yonge Street, Davis Drive, and Leslie St.  Main Street connectivity makes no sense whatsoever.

The Era and John Taylor in hot water after going too far with allegations

Based on traffic to my blog, it seems that there are many, many people looking for me to comment.

Over the past four years, the idea of our local council members "getting along" has been raised as a pretty consistent theme.  The fact is, the gruesome-twosome wasn't getting along with former Councillor Maddie Di Muccio. They employed integrity commissioner reports and are believed to be associated with underhanded election campaign tactics to force her out of office.

But having full control over the council votes wasn't enough for the gruesome-twosome. John Taylor took things too far and continued to harangue Di Muccio even after she lost. It was an embarrassing display of hubris and now we are learning that the as the idiom goes, the chickens have come home to roost for at least one member of the gruesome-twosome.

Earlier this year, the integrity commissioner process was exposed for what is was: a kangaroo court. After the Integrity Commissioner ridiculously exonerated Regional Councillor John Taylor, even the senior management of the Town of Newmarket could not stand the embarrassment any longer.  The senior staff admitted that the current Code of Conduct was a sham and ordered a complete tear-down/ re-build of the process.

After that exposure, Taylor and his ally, the Newmarket Era, went on attack mode against Di Muccio. It was a naive strategy because it appears as though they fell into their own swords.

We are now learning that both Mr. Taylor and the Newmarket Era have been sued for libel by Di Muccio. The Era has published a clarification to their story - which appeared to be an attempt to mitigate their potential payout. It will be up to a judge to see if their clarification helped them but on the surface it appears that they are admitting to libel because of its publication.

As a member of the public, I am keenly interested in these types of cases. A lot has been said by the gruesome-twosome and their ally, the Newmarket Era, about Maddie Di Muccio over the past number of years.  Much of what was said seemed too incredulous for an educated person to believe. Now there is a legal challenge to prove the veracity of their words.

The reputations and legacy of the parties involved will be written based on who wins or loses. The Era and Mr. Taylor have only one defense: prove what they stated to be true. If they can't, they will be known as libelous from here on and never to be trusted ever again.

I have yet to go down to the courthouse to order a copy of the plaintiff's claim. I have done so previously with the Steve Hinder lawsuit and found it very informative.  When I get a chance to get a copy of the claim, I will post details to update my readers.

Stay tuned.