Seems there is puzzlement abroad at my defence of Councillor Gaertner.
I do not understand why.
Does anyone have better reason to know how it is to be publicly denigrated, harried, insulted, abused and accused by multiple forces rallied for the purpose?
To have lawyers retained repeatedly at public expense to investigate and engage in artifice to drive me to quit and run for the hills.
Is anyone better qualified to recognise the signs and portents?
Or call it for what it is ?
Councillor Gaertner was elected by a sufficient number of votes to take a seat at the table.
No person or group of has the right to challenge that authority.
It is the process whereby we govern ourselves.
Voters went to the polls and made a choice.
As is their right. They decided and it shall be for the four years of the term.
What the rest of us will do is respect the right of the electors to choose.
Councillor Gaertner conducts herself now as in the first and second time elected. The voters did not choose an unknown quantity.
If we respect the right to choose we must respect the choice.
It's called being civilized.
Monday, June 4, 2012
Sunday, June 3, 2012
Master Plans Are Wish Lists
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "J' Accuse":
If one were to take a tractor & mower onto the area below the water tower and simply cut the growth, there would be all kinds of good stuff for mulch. It was crop land. As far as I know, Aurora already owns the land. Use what we have. You could plant plenty of saplings up there. Clearing the land once a year would be good and the planting need not interfere with all the action up there. There even is a deserted apple orchard - if the trees are dead, clear them and use the lumber. Aurora needs to look at what it has instead of what it has on its wish list.
*****************
The Region is responsible for our supply of water. The water tower property belongs to the Region and if an abandoned apple orchard is part of the parcel it owns that too.
The Hydro building and yard belongs to the town and we need it. But we leased it away to the federal government for ten years without a cancellation clause..
Let me tell you about wish lists.
The administration busies itself constantly retaining consultants to create plans for this and that and the next thing.
We have Master Plans for parks and recreation ,for Environment and for Trails.
We are doing one one now to create a second heritage district at the request of Susan Morton Leonard
Newmarket is doing, or talking about doing, a culture master plan
and some in Aurora think that's a simply marvelous idea,darling.
We have the Promenade Plan to guide future design of the downtown core.It's not our property or our investment but we intend to dictate how it's done anyway
We had a Strategic Plan. It needed a five year review. But staff recommended a completely new plan for twenty years instead of five.
So we are doing that at a cost of $80,000.
How a plan is put together is as follows. Staff set up terms of reference and call for proposals.The winning consultant sets up meetings and workshops to encourage people to "envision" what they would like in the future in the area of the study.
A handful of people, usually the same handful, earnestly participate.stretch their imaginations and envision what would be great to see.
None of which has anything to do with financial feasibility, available resources or the state of the economy.The essential feature is "vision".We hear a lot about vision.
The current Aurora visioning statement is:
"Where businesses thrive and neighbors care" It's part of whatwe got for the $80.000
I know it's easy to mock. I am probably the only Councillor who is
less than impressed.
It doesn't matter much anyway..
The others really believe in the process.
The new plan sets" strategy "for the next twenty years.
The Region is much bolder. They have opted for a fifty year crystal ball. They are very sure of their continued existence.
At the last environmental advisory committee meeting, members noted agendas only take only twenty minutes. There's a feeling they have nothing meaningful to do.
It's because there is nothing left to do.
A master environmental plan is in place. All that's left is for staff to follow the plan and edge Council along in the right direction.
Budgets and programs are based on the plans.Yes indeed. And why not ? Everything possible is in "The Plan" and pre-approved by Council. .
The tiniest aspect of our future needs have been planned well beyond the term of council..There ain't much left for Council to deliberate either.
Only a Master plan for Culture remains to be handed down from the hands of the masters to the populace.
Like capital forecasts, where we tuck away cockamamie schemes like snow melt treatment facilities costing a cool million to be done in stages.
Think of that, a million bucks to "treat" a fraction of the melting snow that falls in the winter. $270,000? has already been spent on the design.
The strategy for the next twenty years has been etched in stone as the will of the people.
Like Moses' tablets of the ten commandments.
These are the times we live in.
So much better than the past when we would consider carefully what we needed, could afford, where the funds could come from or how great would be the burden on homeowners and businesses..
We didn't think of education and income of the highest wage earners as a guide to how much we could increase the load.
We struck a budget on the basis of those on the opposite end of the scale.
We did the most with the least in olden times,when the treasurer kept Councils grounded and Councillors made the decisions and
we moved forward just the same.
If one were to take a tractor & mower onto the area below the water tower and simply cut the growth, there would be all kinds of good stuff for mulch. It was crop land. As far as I know, Aurora already owns the land. Use what we have. You could plant plenty of saplings up there. Clearing the land once a year would be good and the planting need not interfere with all the action up there. There even is a deserted apple orchard - if the trees are dead, clear them and use the lumber. Aurora needs to look at what it has instead of what it has on its wish list.
*****************
The Region is responsible for our supply of water. The water tower property belongs to the Region and if an abandoned apple orchard is part of the parcel it owns that too.
The Hydro building and yard belongs to the town and we need it. But we leased it away to the federal government for ten years without a cancellation clause..
Let me tell you about wish lists.
The administration busies itself constantly retaining consultants to create plans for this and that and the next thing.
We have Master Plans for parks and recreation ,for Environment and for Trails.
We are doing one one now to create a second heritage district at the request of Susan Morton Leonard
Newmarket is doing, or talking about doing, a culture master plan
and some in Aurora think that's a simply marvelous idea,darling.
We have the Promenade Plan to guide future design of the downtown core.It's not our property or our investment but we intend to dictate how it's done anyway
We had a Strategic Plan. It needed a five year review. But staff recommended a completely new plan for twenty years instead of five.
So we are doing that at a cost of $80,000.
How a plan is put together is as follows. Staff set up terms of reference and call for proposals.The winning consultant sets up meetings and workshops to encourage people to "envision" what they would like in the future in the area of the study.
A handful of people, usually the same handful, earnestly participate.stretch their imaginations and envision what would be great to see.
None of which has anything to do with financial feasibility, available resources or the state of the economy.The essential feature is "vision".We hear a lot about vision.
The current Aurora visioning statement is:
"Where businesses thrive and neighbors care" It's part of whatwe got for the $80.000
I know it's easy to mock. I am probably the only Councillor who is
less than impressed.
It doesn't matter much anyway..
The others really believe in the process.
The new plan sets" strategy "for the next twenty years.
The Region is much bolder. They have opted for a fifty year crystal ball. They are very sure of their continued existence.
At the last environmental advisory committee meeting, members noted agendas only take only twenty minutes. There's a feeling they have nothing meaningful to do.
It's because there is nothing left to do.
A master environmental plan is in place. All that's left is for staff to follow the plan and edge Council along in the right direction.
Budgets and programs are based on the plans.Yes indeed. And why not ? Everything possible is in "The Plan" and pre-approved by Council. .
The tiniest aspect of our future needs have been planned well beyond the term of council..There ain't much left for Council to deliberate either.
Only a Master plan for Culture remains to be handed down from the hands of the masters to the populace.
Like capital forecasts, where we tuck away cockamamie schemes like snow melt treatment facilities costing a cool million to be done in stages.
Think of that, a million bucks to "treat" a fraction of the melting snow that falls in the winter. $270,000? has already been spent on the design.
The strategy for the next twenty years has been etched in stone as the will of the people.
Like Moses' tablets of the ten commandments.
These are the times we live in.
So much better than the past when we would consider carefully what we needed, could afford, where the funds could come from or how great would be the burden on homeowners and businesses..
We didn't think of education and income of the highest wage earners as a guide to how much we could increase the load.
We struck a budget on the basis of those on the opposite end of the scale.
We did the most with the least in olden times,when the treasurer kept Councils grounded and Councillors made the decisions and
we moved forward just the same.
Saturday, June 2, 2012
J' Accuse
Councillor Gaertner is taking a pounding for her comments on the merits of the sale of 22 aces of town property..
Tha Aurora Banner editorialised on the Councillor's comments.
The Aurora Citizen re-printed the editorial and joined the public flogging.
Chris Watts stepped up to take his turn with the barbed whip this morning .
I do not agree with the Councillor's position and said so during the public debate..
But the Councillor's view is not entirely without merit.
Twenty-two acres is twenty five per cent of the parcel.. A substantial part of the building is warehouse space. Warehousing does not provide the number of jobs as other uses.
400 jobs cited are not new jobs.Employees will transfer with the operation.
The numbers will swell town employment statistics. Future opportunities are possible.New employment opportunities are welcome.
But I am mindful of the size of the parcel. Job numbers are not the best they could be.
I have since learned a trail link on the edge of the property has been removed. Apparently Bulk Barn insisted.
My enthusiasm is somewhat dampened.
I do not believe the town is a supplicant.
I resent Council was not consulted.
This property deal is not a simple transaction. Over six million dollars are estimated to service the entire parcel of eighty acres.There is a sharing of costs with Bulk Barn.
Land contours are having to be changed substantially
Part of the property is in the Oak Ridges Moraine.
The servicing plan requires the parks department to be turfed out
once again. .
Part of the property has been used by parks department for years. To turn trees into mulch, compost grass clippings, ,accommodate a small tree nursery and sundry other parks functions.
We no longer have the former Hydro building yard. Need for a new location is critical.
So the big brave fellows out there beating drums and Councillor Gaertner mercilessly, need to get hold of few more facts before charging to the top of the knoll with swords and voices raised .(mixed metaphors be damned)
Bulk Barn is welcome. It's good news. It's not spectacular.
22 acres is a sizable chunk out of 80 acres.
6 million (estimate) for servicing is a substantial amount.
The only advantage is jobs.We need to ensure the objective is realized to the full. Benefit is measured against cost.
Otherwise, we shall have surrendered land needed for our own purposes for a scheme that's a dud.
I'm not yet dancing around the Maypole on the village green. I hope we are managing things properly.
Councillor Gaertner exercised her authority and took a position.
I commend her for that.
Now to change the subject let me pose a new question.
At what concentration and decibel level does fair comment turn into bullying and intimidation?
Tha Aurora Banner editorialised on the Councillor's comments.
The Aurora Citizen re-printed the editorial and joined the public flogging.
Chris Watts stepped up to take his turn with the barbed whip this morning .
I do not agree with the Councillor's position and said so during the public debate..
But the Councillor's view is not entirely without merit.
Twenty-two acres is twenty five per cent of the parcel.. A substantial part of the building is warehouse space. Warehousing does not provide the number of jobs as other uses.
400 jobs cited are not new jobs.Employees will transfer with the operation.
The numbers will swell town employment statistics. Future opportunities are possible.New employment opportunities are welcome.
But I am mindful of the size of the parcel. Job numbers are not the best they could be.
I have since learned a trail link on the edge of the property has been removed. Apparently Bulk Barn insisted.
My enthusiasm is somewhat dampened.
I do not believe the town is a supplicant.
I resent Council was not consulted.
This property deal is not a simple transaction. Over six million dollars are estimated to service the entire parcel of eighty acres.There is a sharing of costs with Bulk Barn.
Land contours are having to be changed substantially
Part of the property is in the Oak Ridges Moraine.
The servicing plan requires the parks department to be turfed out
once again. .
Part of the property has been used by parks department for years. To turn trees into mulch, compost grass clippings, ,accommodate a small tree nursery and sundry other parks functions.
We no longer have the former Hydro building yard. Need for a new location is critical.
So the big brave fellows out there beating drums and Councillor Gaertner mercilessly, need to get hold of few more facts before charging to the top of the knoll with swords and voices raised .(mixed metaphors be damned)
Bulk Barn is welcome. It's good news. It's not spectacular.
22 acres is a sizable chunk out of 80 acres.
6 million (estimate) for servicing is a substantial amount.
The only advantage is jobs.We need to ensure the objective is realized to the full. Benefit is measured against cost.
Otherwise, we shall have surrendered land needed for our own purposes for a scheme that's a dud.
I'm not yet dancing around the Maypole on the village green. I hope we are managing things properly.
Councillor Gaertner exercised her authority and took a position.
I commend her for that.
Now to change the subject let me pose a new question.
At what concentration and decibel level does fair comment turn into bullying and intimidation?
Good M-o-r-n-i-n-g Bathurst Blasphemer
.
*Bathurst Blasphemer has left a new comment on your post "Bathurst Discussion Continues":
To be brief, I have no idea how the Region would collect money either.
As to your other Where and How questions, the answers are in the Regional policy document.
Now Traffic Calming is a different situation because it is controlled by the Town.
I believe that Kennedy Street residents have requested calming measures.
Are there plans to set a policy or simply debate the need on a case by case basis?
Should we all pay or should the neighbourhood pay all or some of the cost?
Growth has its advantages but sometimes causes problems too.
GO has already announced that in the not too distant future we will have weekend train service, and eventually all day service if the demand is there.
A GO train rumbling through Aurora possibly every hour.
That should make for interesting debate about level crossings and whistles.
*************8
Thank you again for your response.Council rules don't allow in-depth discussion. Rules of Order were reviewed, thirty minutes were reduced to ten. Thirty were seldom used but ten is ridiculous.
I am frequently cut off by the Mayor before I have fully stated my position.
Last term I contended with sneering. jeering,insufferable condescension and abuse at the hands of the Presiding member.
This term the situation is vastly improved
.It was eight months into the last term that I started the blog.
Now I have the satisfaction of continuing to debate with whoever chooses to join.
It means people have a new source of information. They don't have to be content with truncated Council debate on television.
They can comment. Ask questions. Share information and gain a perspective not heretofore available.. Like yourself.
This morning I challenge the contention that character and function of Bathurst Street has changed since homes were built twenty years ago.
Bathurst was a county road before it was Regional. Distinction from municipal lies in its purpose. A regional road carries traffic from one municipality to another.
Municipal roads carry traffic within the municipality.Even they are classified. .Kennedy Street West is an arterial collector. meaning it collects traffic from side streets.
Provincial Highways carry traffic throughout the Province.
The Trans-Canada Highway traverses the nation.
Bathurst Street has always been a County road . Opening roads were the first function of government.
It was never a local road.
Road allowances taken in the mid -seventies at the time of paving Bathurst.clearly delineated its future.
The Region has planning jurisdiction over 10, I thought it was feet but it might be metres, on either side of the road.
They always had the jurisdiction to require developers to erect noise barriers between homes and regional roads.
I have seen them in Woodbridge, probably thirty years ago.
I would be very surprised if the Region paid for that construction.
On the issue of trains and railway tracks North of the north- east traffic calming imbroglio, I once stood in a field proposed for development and wondered who would buy a home abutting a railway track.
But they came and they did. Later they argued there was only one train using the track at the time.and it was during the day. They didn't realise it would change.
I can understand purchasing a first home, a buyer, without experience, might overlook certain possibilities and disregard others.
I've done it. Anyone privileged to own a home has.
I don't understand why, years down the road, after discovering dis-advantages of the choice, that entitles an owner to expect the problem to be solved at public expense.
The train whistle is a dead issue.
You now have the acoustic barrier. As I watch it grow, it seems the project must have expanded.
The Region is two billion dollars in debt. Daily interest on the debt probably costs millions.
Constructing noise barriers after the fact sets a precedent hard to reverse
On this single observation,I would opine ( I picked that word up from a past solicitor) regional fiscal management is in the pits.
It is out of control. If it was an American bank it would fold.
Every property-owner in the Region, including residents having expensive noise barriers built at public expense, has reason to be concerned similar decisions are being made we are not aware.
I see blue sky through the foliage on my maple tree. Maybe the week-end will be better than forecast..
Have a great one anyway. It will not come again.
Enjoy the rain. It's a blessing.
*Bathurst Blasphemer has left a new comment on your post "Bathurst Discussion Continues":
To be brief, I have no idea how the Region would collect money either.
As to your other Where and How questions, the answers are in the Regional policy document.
Now Traffic Calming is a different situation because it is controlled by the Town.
I believe that Kennedy Street residents have requested calming measures.
Are there plans to set a policy or simply debate the need on a case by case basis?
Should we all pay or should the neighbourhood pay all or some of the cost?
Growth has its advantages but sometimes causes problems too.
GO has already announced that in the not too distant future we will have weekend train service, and eventually all day service if the demand is there.
A GO train rumbling through Aurora possibly every hour.
That should make for interesting debate about level crossings and whistles.
*************8
Thank you again for your response.Council rules don't allow in-depth discussion. Rules of Order were reviewed, thirty minutes were reduced to ten. Thirty were seldom used but ten is ridiculous.
I am frequently cut off by the Mayor before I have fully stated my position.
Last term I contended with sneering. jeering,insufferable condescension and abuse at the hands of the Presiding member.
This term the situation is vastly improved
.It was eight months into the last term that I started the blog.
Now I have the satisfaction of continuing to debate with whoever chooses to join.
It means people have a new source of information. They don't have to be content with truncated Council debate on television.
They can comment. Ask questions. Share information and gain a perspective not heretofore available.. Like yourself.
This morning I challenge the contention that character and function of Bathurst Street has changed since homes were built twenty years ago.
Bathurst was a county road before it was Regional. Distinction from municipal lies in its purpose. A regional road carries traffic from one municipality to another.
Municipal roads carry traffic within the municipality.Even they are classified. .Kennedy Street West is an arterial collector. meaning it collects traffic from side streets.
Provincial Highways carry traffic throughout the Province.
The Trans-Canada Highway traverses the nation.
Bathurst Street has always been a County road . Opening roads were the first function of government.
It was never a local road.
Road allowances taken in the mid -seventies at the time of paving Bathurst.clearly delineated its future.
The Region has planning jurisdiction over 10, I thought it was feet but it might be metres, on either side of the road.
They always had the jurisdiction to require developers to erect noise barriers between homes and regional roads.
I have seen them in Woodbridge, probably thirty years ago.
I would be very surprised if the Region paid for that construction.
On the issue of trains and railway tracks North of the north- east traffic calming imbroglio, I once stood in a field proposed for development and wondered who would buy a home abutting a railway track.
But they came and they did. Later they argued there was only one train using the track at the time.and it was during the day. They didn't realise it would change.
I can understand purchasing a first home, a buyer, without experience, might overlook certain possibilities and disregard others.
I've done it. Anyone privileged to own a home has.
I don't understand why, years down the road, after discovering dis-advantages of the choice, that entitles an owner to expect the problem to be solved at public expense.
The train whistle is a dead issue.
You now have the acoustic barrier. As I watch it grow, it seems the project must have expanded.
The Region is two billion dollars in debt. Daily interest on the debt probably costs millions.
Constructing noise barriers after the fact sets a precedent hard to reverse
On this single observation,I would opine ( I picked that word up from a past solicitor) regional fiscal management is in the pits.
It is out of control. If it was an American bank it would fold.
Every property-owner in the Region, including residents having expensive noise barriers built at public expense, has reason to be concerned similar decisions are being made we are not aware.
I see blue sky through the foliage on my maple tree. Maybe the week-end will be better than forecast..
Have a great one anyway. It will not come again.
Enjoy the rain. It's a blessing.
Friday, June 1, 2012
Bathurst Discussion Continues
Bathurst Blasphemer has left a new comment on your post "Facts For The Record":
I would expect that the subject of prudent spending at the Regional level is a source of endless questions, arguments and counter-arguments.
I certainly do not want to extend this discussion endlessly but I would like to make a few points.Anyone can view the 5 page noise barrier policy on the Region's website.
It is dated 2006.
No doubt the policy is partially the result of noise concerns from folks like us in the Bathurst area.
In short - the Region will install a barrier under certain circumstances:
IF the noise increases to a certain level.
IF it can be shown a barrier will be effective.
IF there are no other alternatives.
The Region will pay IF the noise is a result of a Capital Improvement to CERTAIN Regional roads - such as expanding Bathurst to four lanes.
In addition, under certain circumstances, and subject to funding approval, a "neighbourhood initiative" noise barrier could still be installed if enough neighbours agreed to put up half the cost.
An example of that would be if Bathurst was still two lanes but area residents thought it was getting too noisy anyway.
I expect Councillor Buck would argue that the Region shouldn't be paying for any of it.
I also expect some would agree.
However.
The policy is clear and applies to any neighbourhoods in the Region that qualify.
This is not a "squeaky wheel gets the grease" or "one of the Bathurst residents must know someone" deal.
Under the policy we qualified so we got it.
Can the Town of Aurora say the same about the traffic calming project in Northeast Aurora?
Does the Town have a standard traffic calming policy that applies equally to all?
Wasn't that project a classic example of "squeaky wheel" that should have been "neighbourhood initiative"?
Now it appears as if we might all have to pay to remove these very same chicanes that were once so "necessary"?
The amount of tax dollars involved in the traffic calming situation is certainly less than the noise barrier but the principle is the same:
Establishing and following a written policy for all is preferable, in my opinion at least, to the "squeaky wheels with friends on council" approach, even if that policy is a result of prodding from concerned residents.
And unlike a "favour", a written policy can be debated, argued, amended or replaced.
Again, I apologize for the wordiness.
**********************
No need to apologize. Wes appreciate the information provided. I'm equally sure no-one faults Bathurst Street residents for doing something they would likely do themselves if the need .arose.
The Region's spending policies are not the subject of endless questioning . They are never talked about at all.
People do not relate to the Region. I contend the Region does not relate to people.
The traffic calming project in the north east quadrant of the town is exactly the same category as Bathurst Street fencing. It had less to commend it. At least the Region went to the trouble of creating a policy, however fragile, to make things look right.
You are right that I do not agree to spreading the cost of neighborhood projects . You are also right that some would agree .I would add,others would not.
In the essence of democratic politics we are free to disagree without hating each other..
A policy is it is not chiselled in stone. A policy can be observed or ignored. It can be changed for political expediency... It can be variously interpreted. .
If the policy was advertised and promoted, the Region would be inundated with requests for
acoustic barriers on all Regional roads that have become busier with time and development .
Why would developers agree to erect acoustic barriers if the noise decibel was not at the required level at the time of building.?
How would the Region be able to predict it ever would reach the decibel level to need a barrier?
I do not remember any public debate or discussion about the policy when it was adopted in 2006.
There is no requirement under the Planning Act for any level of government to publicize policies.They have no teeth.
Is there anything in the policy about paying with development levies rather that adding to the
tax burden.
That "Neighbourhood Initiative" referred to in the Region's policy. Sounds suspiciously like a Neighborhood Improvement.
I referred to that already..
The problem is a Neighbourhood Improvement is paid for by a tax imposed on the benefiting property. It's not attached to the owner. It's attached to the property..
The Region is not the tax collector. .That's the town's responsibility.
There is no practical way the Region could enter i an agreement with property owners to pay 50% of a project. .They do not have the mechanism.
Not everyone would be interested in this discussion. I think my readers are.
I thank you for providing information we would otherwise never have discovered.
That's the burr under my saddle with the Region.
And I do not have a solution..
And that's the other burr.
. . . .
I would expect that the subject of prudent spending at the Regional level is a source of endless questions, arguments and counter-arguments.
I certainly do not want to extend this discussion endlessly but I would like to make a few points.Anyone can view the 5 page noise barrier policy on the Region's website.
It is dated 2006.
No doubt the policy is partially the result of noise concerns from folks like us in the Bathurst area.
In short - the Region will install a barrier under certain circumstances:
IF the noise increases to a certain level.
IF it can be shown a barrier will be effective.
IF there are no other alternatives.
The Region will pay IF the noise is a result of a Capital Improvement to CERTAIN Regional roads - such as expanding Bathurst to four lanes.
In addition, under certain circumstances, and subject to funding approval, a "neighbourhood initiative" noise barrier could still be installed if enough neighbours agreed to put up half the cost.
An example of that would be if Bathurst was still two lanes but area residents thought it was getting too noisy anyway.
I expect Councillor Buck would argue that the Region shouldn't be paying for any of it.
I also expect some would agree.
However.
The policy is clear and applies to any neighbourhoods in the Region that qualify.
This is not a "squeaky wheel gets the grease" or "one of the Bathurst residents must know someone" deal.
Under the policy we qualified so we got it.
Can the Town of Aurora say the same about the traffic calming project in Northeast Aurora?
Does the Town have a standard traffic calming policy that applies equally to all?
Wasn't that project a classic example of "squeaky wheel" that should have been "neighbourhood initiative"?
Now it appears as if we might all have to pay to remove these very same chicanes that were once so "necessary"?
The amount of tax dollars involved in the traffic calming situation is certainly less than the noise barrier but the principle is the same:
Establishing and following a written policy for all is preferable, in my opinion at least, to the "squeaky wheels with friends on council" approach, even if that policy is a result of prodding from concerned residents.
And unlike a "favour", a written policy can be debated, argued, amended or replaced.
Again, I apologize for the wordiness.
**********************
No need to apologize. Wes appreciate the information provided. I'm equally sure no-one faults Bathurst Street residents for doing something they would likely do themselves if the need .arose.
The Region's spending policies are not the subject of endless questioning . They are never talked about at all.
People do not relate to the Region. I contend the Region does not relate to people.
The traffic calming project in the north east quadrant of the town is exactly the same category as Bathurst Street fencing. It had less to commend it. At least the Region went to the trouble of creating a policy, however fragile, to make things look right.
You are right that I do not agree to spreading the cost of neighborhood projects . You are also right that some would agree .I would add,others would not.
In the essence of democratic politics we are free to disagree without hating each other..
A policy is it is not chiselled in stone. A policy can be observed or ignored. It can be changed for political expediency... It can be variously interpreted. .
If the policy was advertised and promoted, the Region would be inundated with requests for
acoustic barriers on all Regional roads that have become busier with time and development .
Why would developers agree to erect acoustic barriers if the noise decibel was not at the required level at the time of building.?
How would the Region be able to predict it ever would reach the decibel level to need a barrier?
I do not remember any public debate or discussion about the policy when it was adopted in 2006.
There is no requirement under the Planning Act for any level of government to publicize policies.They have no teeth.
Is there anything in the policy about paying with development levies rather that adding to the
tax burden.
That "Neighbourhood Initiative" referred to in the Region's policy. Sounds suspiciously like a Neighborhood Improvement.
I referred to that already..
The problem is a Neighbourhood Improvement is paid for by a tax imposed on the benefiting property. It's not attached to the owner. It's attached to the property..
The Region is not the tax collector. .That's the town's responsibility.
There is no practical way the Region could enter i an agreement with property owners to pay 50% of a project. .They do not have the mechanism.
Not everyone would be interested in this discussion. I think my readers are.
I thank you for providing information we would otherwise never have discovered.
That's the burr under my saddle with the Region.
And I do not have a solution..
And that's the other burr.
. . . .
Quuestions Abound ..! ! !
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "You Are Right...Up To A Point":
I think the residents would be best served if you ran for Mayor next election. You will surely win and then you would have a seat at the Region's table. Then with your Dale Carnegie manner you can convince them all of the errors of their ways...
***************
What am I supposed to make of the above comment? Is it a compliment or is it sarcasm.
I never took a Dale Carnegie course. But the late Dick Illingworth did. As politicians, our style was not the same.
So I lean towards sarcasm.
It doesn't matter. No more than it matters who occupies our single seat at the region.
The southern municipalities hold the balance of power. As long as regional Councillors are pandered by regional staff, and regional staff, in turn, are unchallenged, there's little likelihood of the region providing satisfactory service or fiscal management.
The essential tension between council and administration is missing.Absent without leave... Missing in action...No visible signs of life...Non-existent...Failed brakes....Spiraling out of Control.
Who occupies the chair would not likely make a difference either. It never has. Chances are some opportunistic politician sees an opportunity to pick up a cool couple of hundred a year without having to do anything but keep an already contented Council happy.
Think what an election campaign for the top office would call for:
The size of the Region. It's big enough to accommodate several federal and several provincial ridings.
How much would it cost?
Where would the money come from?
What would the voters list look like? Would it need to be organised on party lines?
The real competition would be in Markham Vaughan and Richmond Hill.
A Chinese-Italian of Jewish persuasion would definitely have the edge.
Development money would provide the means.
Think about the enormity of the exercise...the cost
What would be the benefit?
Would we be better served ?
I think not
Hey...wait a minute...am I allowed to say that without casting aspersions on every other person who might have an opinion?
Well.....I just did...so sue me.
Does the Region have a Code of Conduct and an Integrity Commissioner?
Is the Pope Catholic?
I think the residents would be best served if you ran for Mayor next election. You will surely win and then you would have a seat at the Region's table. Then with your Dale Carnegie manner you can convince them all of the errors of their ways...
***************
What am I supposed to make of the above comment? Is it a compliment or is it sarcasm.
I never took a Dale Carnegie course. But the late Dick Illingworth did. As politicians, our style was not the same.
So I lean towards sarcasm.
It doesn't matter. No more than it matters who occupies our single seat at the region.
The southern municipalities hold the balance of power. As long as regional Councillors are pandered by regional staff, and regional staff, in turn, are unchallenged, there's little likelihood of the region providing satisfactory service or fiscal management.
The essential tension between council and administration is missing.Absent without leave... Missing in action...No visible signs of life...Non-existent...Failed brakes....Spiraling out of Control.
Who occupies the chair would not likely make a difference either. It never has. Chances are some opportunistic politician sees an opportunity to pick up a cool couple of hundred a year without having to do anything but keep an already contented Council happy.
Think what an election campaign for the top office would call for:
The size of the Region. It's big enough to accommodate several federal and several provincial ridings.
How much would it cost?
Where would the money come from?
What would the voters list look like? Would it need to be organised on party lines?
The real competition would be in Markham Vaughan and Richmond Hill.
A Chinese-Italian of Jewish persuasion would definitely have the edge.
Development money would provide the means.
Think about the enormity of the exercise...the cost
What would be the benefit?
Would we be better served ?
I think not
Hey...wait a minute...am I allowed to say that without casting aspersions on every other person who might have an opinion?
Well.....I just did...so sue me.
Does the Region have a Code of Conduct and an Integrity Commissioner?
Is the Pope Catholic?
You Are Right...Up To A Point
"Aurora's homeowners are paying for the Region's project." And so are Vaughan's residents, and Richmond Hill's, and Markham's and so on. I would think they should be more pissed than Aurora's residents. We do not live in a vacuum. I submit to you however that the majority of these residents have a valid complaint. Some of these houses were built in a time when Bathurst was a 2 lane road, not the 4 lane aterial roadway it is now. The environment was changed on them, they did not buy with the environment as it is now. I do not blame the homeowner - as you do here. on Facts For The Record
*****************************
Residents of the Region are all entitled to be pissed off by the Region's spending policies.
Homeowners are entitled to put forward their interest to government.
I speak only for residents of Aurora.
I do not blame residents for bringing concerns forward.They have that right.
I would cry too if it happened to me.
My criticism is reserved for the Region and the decision they made.
It doesn't end now. The acoustic fence will have to be maintained. In another twenty years, it will likely have to be replaced at public expense again.
Had the Region required developers to build acoustic fencing at the time of building, the cost would have been bourne by home-owners.
Done now. it should be a local improvement. Under the town's jurisdiction.
A local improvement has two benefits. Those who want the improvement pay for it. It's done at their request. Seventy-five per cent of participating property-owners have to approve.
That way,benefit is measured against cost and property-owners make their own judgement about the value.
Bathurst Street was re-constructed in the mid seventies when the Province was sharing the cost at 50cents on the dollar.
Two lanes were paved but full width was taken and the design provided for increased lanes..
It was a preferred option toYonge Street.
Homes built twenty years ago and development since, have increased the traffic and the need to add lanes.
Homebuyers in urban Aurora had no reason to expect it was or would continue to be a country road.
The fact the urban boundary ends on Aurora's side is areason that mitigates against the Region's decision to take responsibility for fencing.
In the foreseeable future, the west side of Bathurst will NOT be developed.
NO urban traffic will emanate from there.
Gravel roads are not urbanized without urban traffic.
Bathurst pavement ends at Green Lane with,I think, East Gwillimbury on one side and King on the other; both rural municipalities.
With respect, just because former city-dwellers come to live in a small urban municipality surrounded by rural townships, doesn't mean they don't have the responsibility to learn something about the nature of the place where they have chosen to make a major property investment.
The Region, in accommodating a special interest group under our very noses has not served us or them well.
I shudder to think what they are doing where we are not watching.
How do they justify two billion dollars worth of debt? .
*****************************
Residents of the Region are all entitled to be pissed off by the Region's spending policies.
Homeowners are entitled to put forward their interest to government.
I speak only for residents of Aurora.
I do not blame residents for bringing concerns forward.They have that right.
I would cry too if it happened to me.
My criticism is reserved for the Region and the decision they made.
It doesn't end now. The acoustic fence will have to be maintained. In another twenty years, it will likely have to be replaced at public expense again.
Had the Region required developers to build acoustic fencing at the time of building, the cost would have been bourne by home-owners.
Done now. it should be a local improvement. Under the town's jurisdiction.
A local improvement has two benefits. Those who want the improvement pay for it. It's done at their request. Seventy-five per cent of participating property-owners have to approve.
That way,benefit is measured against cost and property-owners make their own judgement about the value.
Bathurst Street was re-constructed in the mid seventies when the Province was sharing the cost at 50cents on the dollar.
Two lanes were paved but full width was taken and the design provided for increased lanes..
It was a preferred option toYonge Street.
Homes built twenty years ago and development since, have increased the traffic and the need to add lanes.
Homebuyers in urban Aurora had no reason to expect it was or would continue to be a country road.
The fact the urban boundary ends on Aurora's side is areason that mitigates against the Region's decision to take responsibility for fencing.
In the foreseeable future, the west side of Bathurst will NOT be developed.
NO urban traffic will emanate from there.
Gravel roads are not urbanized without urban traffic.
Bathurst pavement ends at Green Lane with,I think, East Gwillimbury on one side and King on the other; both rural municipalities.
With respect, just because former city-dwellers come to live in a small urban municipality surrounded by rural townships, doesn't mean they don't have the responsibility to learn something about the nature of the place where they have chosen to make a major property investment.
The Region, in accommodating a special interest group under our very noses has not served us or them well.
I shudder to think what they are doing where we are not watching.
How do they justify two billion dollars worth of debt? .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)