Aurora Citizen

News & Views from the Citizens of Aurora Ontario

Archive for the ‘Town Council’ Category

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »

Council Composition: What Should It Look Like?

Posted by auroracitizen on August 3, 2010

We have had a number of comments about the make up of Council going forward. The 2 that seem to be of interest are whether we need 8 Councillors and whether we should have a ward system.

Total Number of Councillors:
The argument has been put forward that based on our population that 8 Councillors and their corresponding salaries and work load is not justified. Both 4 and 6 have been put forward as options.

On the other hand, our population continues to grow and Councillors are part-time and resultant do not have the time to make the same commitment as a full-time councillor. Particularly those that have other full-time commitments.

Ward System:
The Ward system was debated prior to this election as to whether it should be put to a vote on this coming election ballot. It was decide not to include the question on this ballot. Currently councillors are elected at large. Everyone is put in the same pot and the top 8 councillors become the Council. They have no particular alignment with any specific area.

A key argument against wards is that every Councillor can be called by any citizen and they are not beholden to a specific area.

Against is that a Councillor has too many issues to worry about and they can’t focus on helping a specific ward.

Please use this post to discuss the various merits of these 2 topics.

Posted in Community Corner, Community Input, Growth, Town Council | 39 Comments »

Why Does Sher St. Kitts Get Special Treatment?

Posted by auroracitizen on August 2, 2010

Signs on Town Property

 

A reader sent another snap of a new sign that popped up at the Church Street School/Cultural Centre. 

The sign was plunked down on the lawn of the building on Wednesday July 28th —  just two days after a similar sign was removed — after public outcry — from its illegal location at the Town Park. 

It’s yet another very large sign advertising the Jazz Festival.  

Here’s the problem. The Church Street School is also a Town owned (though not operated) property.  

The question remains, “Why is an advertisement for a commercial venture allowed to be erected on Town Owned property?”  

A simple answer? It isn’t.  

Follow the logic people.  If it wasn’t allowed to be on the Town Park property, because the Town Park is Town property, then it isn’t allowed to be on the Church Street School property, because it is Town owned property.  Pretty straight forward don’t you think?  

But yet there it sits. Town by-law staff should have removed it.  

The question that should be asked is, “Why haven’t they?”

Posted in Code of Ethics, Election 2010, Integrity, Leadership, Town Council | 5 Comments »

Is Jazz Festival Sign Breaking the Rules?

Posted by auroracitizen on July 25, 2010

Since when is this allowed on TOWN PROPERTY?

Jazz Festival Sign

A very large sign, on metal posts, advertising a private, ticketed (i.e. you have to pay money to attend) event!!

Local property taxes paying businesses are forbidden from placing signs in front of their place of business without a formal permit. Never seen a sign like this placed on Town property before.

Has Sher gotten a permit?

Can you even get a permit to place a promotional sign on Town property?

If not we hope the same by-law officer who was recently spotted checking vendor permits at the market will be checking into this situation.

Posted in Community Corner, Integrity, Legal, Local Business, Town Council | 26 Comments »

See It For Yourself — Then Decide For Yourself

Posted by auroracitizen on July 24, 2010

Council Watch #12 – by Richard Johnson

Well council once again put on quite a show at the July 13th council meeting. There were so many issues of concern raised that one does not know where to start.

While I remain impressed with the quality of our town staff, I’m left with the feeling that we may want to change the town we are twinned with to Salem, Mass given the clear and apparent witch hunt that appears to be well underway under the leadership of our Mayor.

The meat of the accusations that have been re-issued under the code of conduct appear at 4:24:00 to 4:39:30 of the tape located at this link:

Rogers Cable LINK: http://www.rogerstv.com/option.asp?lid=237&rid=70&mid=52&gid=69135#38_120_3103

The Integrity Commissioner is paid a maximum of $5,000 per month to a maximum of $60,000 per year. He is also paid a minimum monthly retainer, even when complaints are held in abeyance from August 1 to Dec 1. He also answers questions and educates council where and when required. John Leach agreed to send me the report that was prepared by staff when the IC was hired in order that I might be able to figure out what the monthly retainer is.

The section between 3:32:00 to 3:57:00 of the above noted meeting tape deals with two issues: the cut-off date for filing complaints in around election time moratoriums as well as the fact that council seems to only be focusing on accusations raised by Clr MacEachern (which complaints are supported by Mayor Phyllis Morris, Clr Wendy Geartner & Clr Steve Granger). A complaint that was apparently filed against Clr Granger seems to have fallen off the radar for some reason and amazingly no complaint has ever been submitted against Clr MacEachern as far as I am aware, despite her less than civil e-mails to Clr Wilson and Clr Buck and her actions towards others at the council table from time to time.

At 3:48:50 Evelyn Buck speaks about the code of conduct. The IC’s contract is a twelve month contract that can be terminated with 30 days notice.

While the Integrity Commissioner may in fact be an “independent (arms length) third party” as noted by the Mayor, he can also apparently be fired if he does not rule to the Mayor’s favour, as Mr. Nitkin found out the hard way. The fate of the previous IC can’t escape the notice of the current IC who is currently responsible for inspiring the current council to new levels of integrity. The jury is out as to how successful the new IC has been and how much money is too much money when witnessing the games that we continue to see being played, which games do in fact appear to be highly politically motivated.

Clr Buck states that the previous council “extorted” money and her statement was like throwing bloody meat into a shark tank. Start the tape at  4:07:50 onwards… and onwards to 4:13:00. Buck marches out at 4:10:00

See definition of extortion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion

Extortion:  “The term extortion is often used metaphorically to refer to usury or to price-gouging, though neither is legally considered extortion. It is also often used loosely to refer to everyday situations where one person feels indebted against their will, to another, in order to receive an essential service or avoid legal consequences. For example, certain lawsuits, fees for services such as banking, automobile insurance, gasoline prices, and even taxation, have all been labeled “legalized extortion” by people with various social or political beliefs. [citation needed]”

Even if I may disagree with Clr Buck on any number of issues and / or her choice of language, I still don’t think that the code of conduct and the $50,000 plus that has been spent to date in dealing with councillor Buck is money well spent when we given that not one thin dime to the food bank. This is a poisoned council and it very largely the Mayor’s doing as a result of her approach to public dialog and her clear and apparent manipulation of process.

Here is but one small example from the same meeting in question: The Mayor tried to paint a picture that only a small number of people do all the work, as per her attempt with Clr. MacEachern to get attendance records for in-camera CLOSED meetings made public (see 4:17:00 — 4:24:00) and despite the fact that the Mayor often ignores the input of at least three councillors constantly and she has thwarted their efforts to join committees and advisory groups.

I suspect that the reason that some councilors are less than fully utilised is because they have been ignored and mistreated. I trust that we don’t have to remind anyone that one Councilor (Grace Marsh) felt compelled to resign in frustration. Look at the town’s senior staff employment record for an inkling of how staff must feel under this business culture. This is a vindictive and manipulative council beyond all compare.

Apparently dealing with ethical issues with this group could well become a full-time job at our collective expense. Between the accolades that were showered on staff and committee members by the Mayor and the dealing of the above mentioned code of conduct issues, it is amazing that the above noted meeting was only four and a half hours long. If you feel that this post is far too long, I don’t blame you, but just try watching the entire council meeting.

RJ

Posted in Code of Ethics, Council Watch-Richard Johnson, Election 2010, Leadership, Staff Turnover, Town Council | Leave a Comment »

When Is It Campaigning — and When Isn’t It?

Posted by auroracitizen on July 8, 2010

 The annual Belinda’s BBQ was held last week at the Senior’s Centre. 

This event — sponsored by Belinda Stronach — is a popular (and tasty) fundraiser, with all proceeds going to the Senior’s Centre. 

Of course, Mayor Phyllis Morris was there, waving her Canadian flag, sniffing out the photo ops like only she can do. She even managed to find someone to present a plaque to.

There she was, moving from table to table, pressing the flesh, laughing and joking with people, all the while, dragging along Chris Ballard — Chair of the Economic Development Advisory Committee and recently confirmed candidate for Council (although this walkabout was before his nomination papers were filed).

So here’s the questions.

How does the EDAC committee chair have a role at attending the Seniors fundraiser or was this merely a prelude to announcing his candidacy?

When do “official” duties of the Mayor start to slip into campaigning  — which is very clearly not allowed until nomination papers are filed.

We spoke about this last week Mayor Morris Confuses Many With Her Ethical Choices and continued to be disappointed by the Mayor’s choices. If she plans to run — and we all believe she will — why doesn’t she just do the honourable thing.

Declare and this whole discussion disappears. Campaign away. But our concern is this pretending to do town work — often with town employees in tow — when it really appears she is just campaigning for re-election. Whether it be hanging out at the Farmers Market on frequents Saturday’s or trying to promote a Promenade Study at Yonge and Wellington — when does town work end and campaigning start?

I guess after the Mayor was spotted campaigning at Yonge and Wellington last Friday with Neil Garbe, she decided she needed someone else to accompany her on these very essential Mayoralty duties. 

But taking the Chair of EDAC to a Senior’s BBQ? Really. What would the connection be?

Wonder how an Integrity Commissioner would view these activities.

Quack, quack!!

Posted in Code of Ethics, Integrity, Leadership, Town Council | 71 Comments »

Is Mayor Morris Putting Lipstick on a Pig?

Posted by auroracitizen on July 3, 2010

Aurora getting makeover

In the recent Banner Article (June 29th, 2010), outgoing Mayor Morris rhapsodized about a “new programme” to provide the downtown core with a makeover in the coming months – just in time for the election – but not in time for the summer, Street Sale, Canada Day parade, movies in the park etc.. but hey, it will be ready for the election.

Morris described it as the “Clean up Aurora” programme. Apparently, the much ballyhooed programme consists of such basic things as repainting lane markers, railings, power-washing the sidewalks (seriously???)  She described it as a “quick win” for the downtown revitalization “plan” she’s been flogging to death in recent weeks – including apparently, standing on the sidewalk literally waving it about last Friday.
 
Is it just us, or does it all seem so desperate? And, well, just a little bit sad.

This is what the outgoing Mayor seems to think is downtown revitalization? Are you kidding me? Shouldn’t painting lines on the road so drivers know what lane they are in be common practice?  She thinks this needs to be part of a plan? It is pathetic that normal day-to-day business practice in public works is repackaged as some kind of new plan with bells, whistles and streamers (even a puff piece in the paper…)

Has this “plan” been discussed at Council?  Let’s hope not.  I certainly hope it doesn’t need to be debated. Can you imagine that council discussion? 

“I move a motion that we replace all the straight lines in town with wiggly ones…”

“I move a motion that the lines be painted red in honour of Canada’s Birthday Town…”

“This is just too much for us to consider, Madam Chair, I move a motion to refer that motion to staff to consider and report back to Council, madam chair…”

Good grief!

Morris hopes by “tidying” up the area, her fellow Auroran’s “…will no longer be ashamed of the downtown”.

She thinks Aurorans are “ashamed”???

If that was the case, then why did it take her 44 months of a 48 month term to notice?  Has she been paying attention at all to what’s happening in the Town she ostensibly serves? Or too busy pandering to the whiners – oops, sorry, potential voters – wanting light posts moved/trees planted/whistles silenced etc. etc. etc.

Even sadder is outgoing Mayor Morris’ comments that she hopes, “with luck” that the tidying efforts will get people, “excited” about the supposed pending changes to the core.  With luck?  She needs “luck” to get people interested in their town again???

Of course, unsaid is the fact that her hopes are all based on whether the study is ever completed, ever adopted, ever implemented. After all, we have seen so many studies shot down, re-written, shelved by this (and other) Councils, I doubt anyone pays much heed to Morris’ clarion call. More to the point, the next Council is not obligated to act — hence most Council actually develop plans early in the term so they can see it through on their term.

It is all well and good to “tidy-up” the Town – it’s about time. But to make this the central focus of what has been a term lacking in any substantive action simply highlights just how little else has actually been accomplished.

Past terms of Council have built Libraries, Seniors Centres and the new Aurora Rec Centre in a single term. Mayor Morris has managed a study.

Well … do what you’re able Phyllis.

This is just more spin to try to make an ineffectual term look like something it’s not — lipstick on a pig we say.

Posted in Election 2010, Growth, Leadership, Town Council | 3 Comments »

Chris Ballard Enters Race For Council

Posted by auroracitizen on July 1, 2010

Just checked the town website and noticed that Chris Ballard has submitted his nomination papers for Council. Chris is the current Chair of the Economic Development Advisory Committee and the owner of Aurora based CSB Communications — a communications company that currently lists the Town of Aurora on its website as a client.

Chris is also generally viewed as a friend of Phyllis Morris — recently spotted glad handing with her at the Seniors Centre at Belinda’s Barbecue.

This will raise an interesting quandary when it comes to declaring conflicts. How would sitting on Council impact his ability to work for the same town he is a Councillor for?

No doubt he will have an interesting response to the question. We’d certainly be interested in hearing what his response is.

For what it’s worth, our opinion is that he should decline any and all work associated with the Town and therefore avoid any hint of conflict.

Equally interesting will be  whether Chris will stand up against the Mayor should they both get elected or whether he will just be another vote that the Mayor counts on to support her agenda. Or will he possibly turn on her should he see her fortunes turn and another mayoralty candidate look like they will be the winner. Nothing worse that backing a losing horse in a political race.

This election is shaping up the be the most interesting in recent history. Only July 1 and already 3 Mayor candidates and 7 Councillor candidates. That must be a new record.

Possibly a commentary on the view of the current council’s performance.

Posted in Election 2010, Town Council | 19 Comments »

It’s Official – Geoff Dawe is Running for Mayor

Posted by auroracitizen on June 22, 2010

The rumours are true. The Auroran broke the story earlier today that Geoff Dawe is running for Mayor. 

In an email by former Mayor Tim Jones, Jones writes about the newest candidate as follows; “He is Geoff Dawe, the outgoing President of the Aurora Chamber of Commerce and 33 year resident of Aurora. Geoff has participated in and held leadership positions with his children’s school councils, his church and is president of his own company. More recently, Geoff has served as Chairperson of the Aurora Library Board.”

Jones went on to say; “He is a leader who seeks consensus, not retribution. He’s a team player, allowing full and uninterrupted input and with that input, he is a decision maker. Geoff respects the positions of others while asking for respect in return.”

It will be interesting to see how the 2 current candidates and Mayor react to this news.

Although Dawe has no direct Council experience, he brings a wealth of business experience and has been involved in town governance for many years serving as past Chair of the Library Board and President of the Aurora Chamber.

Maybe it’s time we had someone in a leadership position who actually has some real leadership experience — rather than the smoke and mirrors the current Mayor has bamboozled folks with for the last few years. It’s time Mayor Morris provided some specific documented experience rather than her generic claims of leadership and HR experience. Goodness knows, she hasn’t demonstrated any skills in either area.

Stay-tuned — it is shaping up to be an interesting summer.

Posted in Election 2010, Leadership, Town Council | 24 Comments »

Reader asks: Is the Code of Conduct Counter-productive?

Posted by auroracitizen on May 28, 2010

I had the opportunity this past Tuesday May 25th to watch the Aurora Council on Rogers TV in particular the debate and subsequent vote on the property development at Yonge & Centre streets. This issue consumed Tuesday evening’s council meeting and produced some heated debate from both sides as to whether the development should be delayed pending the release of the Promenade report.

I have also followed the reporting in the Banner and its web version yorkregion.com as well as the opinions in some of the Aurora based blogs including this one. It now strikes me that Aurora’s Code of Conduct may be working against any freedom of expression or was there actually a breach of the code committed in trying to sway the opinion of the Banner readers. It did strike me as odd that the chairperson of the town’s economic development advisory committee was critical of the councillors and the process.

Please read the excerpt from the below article and then the appropriate section from the Code of Conduct. What’s your opinion on this matter? Is the Code counter-productive, should it be applied to the letter of the law or simply a waste of space? 

1.    From http://www.yorkregion.com/news/local/article/821240–aurora-project-baffles-development-chairperson

 (I believe this article was also published in print in Tuesday May 25th edition of the Banner.)

Aurora project baffles development chairperson              by Sean Pearce

The chairperson of the town’s economic development advisory committee says he is scratching his head after council paved the way for a multi-storey residential building planned for Yonge and Centre streets last week.

The steering committee for the downtown study is working to release a draft version of its plan next month so it’s curious why councillors would vote to greenlight a six-to-seven-storey mixed-use development at this point, EDAC chairperson and downtown steering committee member Chris Ballard said.

It’s concerning councillors would approve official plan and bylaw amendments to permit the proposal, eyed for the northeast corner of Yonge and Centre, without knowing what the downtown study has to say, as it may set a poor long-term precedent, he said.

He’s also perplexed why it’s being waved through despite having about 25 fewer parking spaces than current policies permit.

“Why spend all of that time and effort on a plan with new rules and regulations and then just sneak this in under the wire?” he said. “I’m pretty miffed certain councillors would vote for this when they know we have a draft of the (Aurora) promenade study coming out in June.”

2.    From the Town of Aurora’s website “By-Law Number 5037-08.C Being a By-Law to Adopt a Code of Conduct for Members of Advisory & Statutory Committees”

Section 3 Communications and Media Relations

Committee Members will accurately and adequately communicate the attitudes and decisions of the Committee and Council, even if they disagree with the majority decision of Committee or Council.

Members shall show respect for the decision-making process of the Committee and Council.

Official information related to decisions and resolutions made by the Committee or Council will normally be communicated to the community and the media in an official capacity by the Mayor or designated staff member or through a Press Release issued by the Corporation.

Information concerning adopted policies, procedures and decisions of the committee shall be conveyed openly and accurately.

Confidential information will be communicated only when and after determined by Council.

When a committee member chooses to communicate through the media which may include or involve interviews, editorials, writing of a regular column in the newspaper of magazine, hosting/co-hosting a regular televised program, where they are identified as a “member of a committee of the Town of Aurora” which is a recognized entity of the Municipality as a Corporation, the committee member shall be expected to feature an appropriate acceptable disclaimer stating “the opinions reflected by the member are their own personal comments and are not endorsed nor representative of the committee or the Town of Aurora Council”.

Posted in Code of Ethics, Community Corner, Community Input, Leadership, Town Council | 5 Comments »

Why Take Our Word For It – Seeing is Believing

Posted by auroracitizen on May 26, 2010

Council Watch #9 – by Richard Johnson

It has been a while since I last posted a formal Council Watch comment, but that is not been as a result of lack of material!

Did anyone catch this week’s Council meeting on Rogers TV?

I’m aware that no one appeared to be sitting in the audience at the Town Chambers but I do have to wonder how many people know what is really going on at 1 Municipal Way these days! I would not blame anyone for claiming to have better things to do with their time, but sometimes I can’t help but tune in to see the latest developments at Council. For those people who may want to watch council in action, you may want to note the procedure provided below.

This week’s meeting was as good as any to give one an idea of what has been going on for some time now, at Council.

  1. Select: www.rogerstv.com
  2. Choose your region – Aurora – from the pull down menu, then choose your language (You probably only have to do this on your first visit)
  3. Click on Video on Demand link located near the top right corner of the home page.
  4. Select City Council from the Shows/Events option.
  5. Select City Council – Aurora from the Sections option.
  6. Select All from the Category option.

You should see all of the council meetings there and you can choose by date for the one you wish to view.

I can’t possibly cover all of the shenanigans I witnessed, but I can assure that all is not what it appears to be at the Town Hall when one puts what is being said into some necessary perspective. It really is something to behold.

Here are some highlights as far as I am concerned.

The town is still debating the costs surrounding the diesel generator it plans to install at the Town Hall. This issue strikes me as more than a bit ironic given the town’s clear and apparent lack of understanding with regards to the power supply issues and corresponding environmental impacts that the region has been facing for years, but at least one thing became very clear last night. Despite asking developers to “consider” (Council’s words not mine) incorporating more green initiatives into their developments while passing the cost on to consumers, the town itself does not appear to be prepared to incur any extra costs associated with buying a more environmentally friendly alternative to the proposed diesel generator or to even to install solar power generation on the new recreation center (not to mention any number of other similar eco-opportunities). Council also seemed to not grasp the difference between supplying back-up power to a telecom local area network (LAN) versus providing back-up power to the whole building. Council could not grasp why a substantial change in the stated specifications contained in the request for proposal resulted in an increased cost estimate. I kid you not. Staff tried in vain to explain the basics, but to no avail, so you guessed it, another staff report is on the way.

Given Council’s track record on power supply issues it is doubtful that they have explored the Ontario Power Authority’s Feed in Tariff (FIT) program or the fact that a properly designed and more environmentally friendly bio-diesel generator could in fact allow the town to recoup most, if not all, of the associated cost for the back-up source of power. To go a step further, a gas powered generator, a gas fired combined heat and power plant, or a district energy plant could be even cleaner still, but clearly local generation is not something the council is prepared to even discuss given our experience with power supply issues over the past few years, even if local generation does make technical, economic as well as environmental sense on any number of levels.

The simple truth is that Council wants to ensure that the lights stay on at the Town Hall with diesel power no less, even if the power may go out for the rest of us. Working towards finding viable long term and comprehensive power solutions clearly is not seen as being Council’s responsibility or priority for that matter. The most difficult thing for me to accept is that the facts surrounding the viable alternatives and the resulting impacts of various power supply solutions never do seem to matter. If you ask me, the Mayor and Councillor MacEachern get what they want on the big picture issues and who cares about what the impact is on others, including other municipalities, as a direct result of their actions and inactions?

This week the Mayor even stated her intention to do what I (and others) suggested should have been done over five years ago with regards to revisiting our planning codes and objectives in order to address corresponding environmental impacts more proactively, but then again it is an election year so why not claim to be on the cutting edge ? One can always bait and switch after the fact, regardless of what the speech writers may say so effectively during any given election.

The Mayor can’t even apparently understand the development approval process as was demonstrated by her handling of the condo development proposed for Yonge and Wellington. Remember the site that the Mayor demanded should get cleaned up ASAP and the same development that she repeatedly claims has not been delayed by council for years? In a rambling statement the Mayor said that the delays caused in 2008 were not under her term in office (go figure), but in that case she must have misspoken by accident. The Mayor and council could not for the life of them figure out the approval process and they asked for yet another staff report that could delay the development approval for a further three or four months. At this rate there is a good chance that there will be no shovels in the ground for at least another twelve months in the best case scenario. It was stated that Council does not want to make any decision until the Yonge Street improvement plan (aka the Ken Whitehurst & Co Report)  is presented in September after taking over a year to prepare, so I guess we’ll all just have to wait until the election to see what the grand plans are, not to mention who gets elected as Mayor on October 25th, 2010. The grand redevelopment plan pending will no doubt be incorporated with great fanfare into the Mayor’s re-election campaign given that Ken Whitehurst will very likely once again play a significant role in crafting Phyllis’s every utterance, along with the Mayor’s newly hired speech writer. You can see where this is all going.

The other inescapable highlight of this week’s meeting was the electioneering that is clearly well under way. Don’t get me wrong, I think that I still detected the bitter undertone and some less than subtle grumbling, but thanks to a great set up by Councillor Wilson the Mayor could boast what a GREAT job staff and council have done in reducing the back-log of issues. A job well done, way to go everyone and thanks especially who paid with their jobs! Amazingly the Mayor also even lost a couple of recorded votes which seems to buck the trend and may even suggest that either “the block” is not what it once was, or someone may have wanted to make the point that at least at times the block is controlled by others. Of course some would insist that there is no block or that all of this is completely normal and to be expected from a well oiled and professional team.

Oh the web we weave in Aurora!

I suggest that you should take the time necessary to watch the Rogers video of the meeting and decide for yourself if this is good government and smart growth development in action.

RJ

Posted in Council Watch-Richard Johnson, Integrity, Media, Town Council | 14 Comments »

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »