Aurora Citizen

News & Views from the Citizens of Aurora Ontario

Defeated Councillors Are Again Private Citizens

Posted by auroracitizen on November 26, 2010

Just a gentle reminder that we have a new Council  — which means that defeated outgoing Council members are no longer in public service. They are now private citizens.

Which means, as private citizens, they are no longer an appropriate subject for discussion — the same rules that apply to other private citizens. So when framing your comments — please keep this in mind  🙂

And let’s not dwell on the past actions of the defeated; let’s leave them behind, together with the defeated — where the voters of this community decided they belonged.

Let’s focus on future and leave the past where it belongs — with yesterday newspaper.

Posted in Election 2010, Town Council | 5 Comments »

Discussion Topic: Traffic

Posted by auroracitizen on November 23, 2010

Another key issue in the Aurora community is the traffic woes and increasing volume due to new development both in Aurora and Newmarket. This topic has been the focus of considerable discussion over the years — but the situation continues to get worse. Over the years we have seen initiatives that include;

  • traffic studies
  • traffic calming in 1 select neighbourhood
  • addition of stop signs and no left turn signs
  • speed limit changes
  • use of advance signals
  • road widening (Bathurst)
  • attempts to re-direct traffic
  • redevelopment of roads (i.e. St Johns)

Yet in spite of all these initiatives (and more we couldn’t remember) traffic problems continue to affect our community — although when compared to a 2+ hour commute from downtown, some might say we have it pretty good.

A readers shared this experience

Here is a pet peeve of mine that is starting to become a problem for me and others.

If you are driving south on Bathurst in the morning around 7:45am, as you approach Bloomington there are cars pulled over in the right turn lane (where there is a bus stop). Turns out that these cars are driven by parents of kids that are taking a bus. Rather than let the poor kids stand outside, they sit in the cars – idling – blocking the turn lane to turn right onto Bloomington. Not only are they blocking the turn lane, on more than one occasion I have seen a car trying to pull into the turn lane at a higher than normal speed and had to slam on the brakes to avoid running into a car stopped there.

Are we raising our kids to be such babies that they can’t stand at a bus stop? Surely it is against the HTA to stop there?

We would expect that at some point (incoming) Council will have this before them. So what suggestions do we have for them?

How will the downtown be best served by the traffic initiatives — including parking/no parking initiatives? What about safety concerns?

Who has the priority to the roads — pedestrians, vehicles, business owners (parking?). How do these issues impact traffic flow? Do we want it moving fast for convenience or slow for safety and shopping?

Lots of questions — and lots of answers.

We may not have all the answers, but when you have lots of ideas — you have a much better chance of coming up with a great idea.

Share your thoughts and let’s give Council some help 🙂

Posted in Discussion Topic, Traffic/Parking | 18 Comments »

Mayor Elect Says No Means No

Posted by auroracitizen on November 22, 2010

On November 17, 2010 @8:29 pm in the post Recount Results,  “Anonymous” stated;

“Humfryes, Ballard, Gaertner, and Gallo should be a good check on Dawe, to make sure he doesn’t sell out the town to developers, and gut the new official plan.

I’m looking forward to seeing Dawes financial report to see how much developer backing he has.”

I was originally going to simply respond with a comment, but then I decided to submit a stand-alone post and see if we can’t have some fun with it.

First, to reiterate, I stated during the campaign, that I would not accept donations from developers. I said this a number of times and I was quoted (accurately) in the paper. So, that fact is very much public, and I fully expect it will be verified with my audited returns.

As I used to have to say to my kids, what part of NO do you not understand.

Should the audit show that I did unknowingly receive a donation from a developer, then I will

  1. return that donation, and;
  2. personally donate an equal amount to the Aurora Food Pantry.

HOWEVER, should the audit show that I indeed DID NOT receive donations from developers then I ask Anonymous to make a donation to the Aurora Food pantry – say $100.00.

What say you, Anonymous? Are you up for this challenge? Are you ready to make a positive difference to life in Aurora?

Let me know.

Geoff Dawe – Mayor Elect

Posted in Code of Ethics, Election 2010, Geoff Dawe, Integrity, Leadership | 28 Comments »

Aurora Pet Cemetary to be Developed

Posted by auroracitizen on November 21, 2010

Hi there –

I was wondering if anyone was familiar with the Aurora Pet Cemetery? I have recently visited the “secret” cemetery (I had to trespass of course but it was well worth it)!

I captured 100 plus pictures of pet head stones dating back to the early 1900’s right up until the early 80’s. You can find all kinds of different pets ranging from dogs, cats, birds and bunnies!

For any pet lover it pulls at your heart strings and doesn’t let go …… the shame is that a developer has purchased the land and will be destroying what I think is quite a significant piece of Auroras history and quite interesting as well.

I have been investigating this land mark all summer long and would love to share my findings with someone who might like to help me bring some “visibility” to this very unique and touching part of our town….. at the very least it would be nice to profile it, if not save some of the head stones that exist there (although I counted easily 200 plus) of the ones that I could find…..

Thank you for your time

Kelli

Moderators Note:Kelli provided her phone number for anyone who wanted to contact her. Please send an email to info@auroracitizen.ca and we will connect you.

Posted in Community Corner, Community Input, Guest Post | 10 Comments »

Discussion Topic: Hydro Power

Posted by auroracitizen on November 20, 2010

There has been considerable discussion in one of  the posts about wind turbines and hydro needs. We have moved the comments across below, so we can continue the discussion focused around hydro issues

  • Luckywife said

    November 18, 2010 at 9:16 am eTo Tim The Enchanter:

    For sure, there will be plenty of debate, whether it will be reasoned, remains to be seen. As much as I try not to be cynical, I just can’t help myself. It has been so long since I have seen anything even resembling reason, that I have a difficult time believing that folks know what it is anymore. I have high hopes for our new council, not because I think they can do better, but because I don’t believe they could possibly do any worse than MorMac. For now, at least, I am cautiously optimistic.

    Saving the Moraine is a worthwhile initiative. Do we really know what we are saving it from? Dear Dalton has given lots of lip service to saving it, but again, the cynic in me can’t help assuming that it is only because the demographic of the surrounding area is middle to upper income. Lip service can buy alot of Liberal votes. A little to the east of us, people are in a huff about their Bluff. To the west, there is alot of chest thumping and digging in of heels to stop anymore development around the Escarpment. Dear Dalton pays lip service to that too. But, does anyone ever wonder where Dear Dalton is planning on erecting the $60 billion worth of wind turbines he’s purchased for us? That’s not dirty development. That’s green energy. We have only to erect them. The wind will come, Dalton says so. At the risk of pissing of David Suzuki and the eco-nuts that will come and bury the eggs of a million stink bugs in my yard, I’d rather have a 100 golf courses than gleaming hulks of twisted metal sparkling in the sunshine. If we can’t leave it alone and untouched, I’d rather see homes and people on it than a steel junkyard. But, again, that’s just me being cynical.

    Best regards,
    Luckywife

  • Anonymoose said

    November 18, 2010 at 2:17 pm eLuckywife, cynical is certainly not the word I would use to describe your perspective.

    You would really prefer to see farm land and forests paved over with houses and golf courses rather than a portion of the same space being occupied by wind turbines??? Huh??

    That is just such a totally bizarre perspective, I can’t even begin to get my head around it.

    Saving the Moraine is indeed a worthwhile initiative, but given your perspective, I can’t see how you would ever come to agree with this statement, let alone utter it yourself.

  • Luckywife said

    November 19, 2010 at 8:17 am eTo Anonymoose:

    “You would really prefer to see farm land and forests paved over with houses and golf courses rather than a portion of the same space being occupied by wind turbines??? Huh??”

    The answer is no more people, no more houses, no more golf courses, and no wind turbines. If I have to choose one over the other, then yes, I would prefer homes and people.

    Question: How many wind turbines would it take to supply the energy needs of 5000 homes?

    If you answered 0, because it is not possible, then you would be correct. Ergo, steel junkyard.

    Please don’t think that I am a NIMBY. Because if Dalton called me up tomorrow and said “Luckywife, I want you to have a wind turbine! I’m going to give you a grant to help you pay for it, a tax break, and $.80 for every kwh it generates!” You know what my response would be? I’d want to know if I took down my deck, my shed, my pool and my spruce tree, could I fit two?

    Best regards,
    Luckywife

  • Anonymoose said

    November 19, 2010 at 12:53 pm eLuckyWife,

    “Question: How many wind turbines would it take to supply the energy needs of 5000 homes?

    If you answered 0, because it is not possible, then you would be correct. Ergo, steel junkyard.”

    I’m afraid I do not understand this statement. Not possible?? Are you serious? Wind turbines can produce many megawatts of electricity. Currently in Ontario we have over 1000 MW of capacity which (assuming 30% efficiency at any instant in time) will easily run over 10000 homes. There is over another 2000MW currently under construction. To get the same power from coal would require burning about 3 million tonnes.

    You’re right it’s not NIMBYism. You just don’t understand anything about energy production or use.

  • Matt Maddocks said

    November 19, 2010 at 11:04 pm eAnonymoose – I don’t concur with your math, and I do understand a few things about energy;
    As of the end of 2009, total output of all Ontario active windfarm energy production was rated at approx 2.3 MW.
    According to the CEC, the average Canadian home consumes approx 2 kW annually.
    This output of wind-sourced energy would therefore heat and light approx 1150 homes.
    According to census, the total number of households in Ontario in 2009 was approx 3.9 million.
    1150 homes in 3.9 million represents approx. 0.3%.
    My point is that wind power, while cool, green, clean, and hip, in reality produces a mouses-fart worth of demanded energy in Ontario. And and I’ve always held the opinion to address the bigger issue of human consumption and demand, rather than the delivery system, I don’t currently place much stock in turbines, at least at this point in their development.
    Luckywife, keep the deck, shed, pool, and spuce. Way more fun in the summer than a couple of gawkly ol’ windmills anyway.

    How did we get on this anyway? Weren’t we talking about the recount?

  • Luckywife said

    November 20, 2010 at 2:07 am eTo Anonymoose:

    Actually, our current wind capacity is 1152MW, with another 491MW scheduled to come online in the next year. Where are the wind farms of the other 1500MW of the 2000MW you mentioned as being “currently under construction” being built? When will they come online?

    To assume “30% efficiency at any instant in time” is very generous and misleading. For instance, in April of 2009 we averaged a wind output of 41%, when we did not need it. In June of the same year, we averaged 14%, when we did need it. Wind power cannot be generated on demand. It cannot be stored for later use. Mother Nature is 100% in control of whether we have output – or not. Having 2000 turbines on a farm as opposed to 200 will certainly increase the MW output, but it won’t change the rate of efficiency. At best, it will only ever provide us with supplemental power. All that we can do is to try and forecast the wind, like we do weather conditions. That is no more of a guarentee than the weather forecast is.

    I think that I am quite justified to have reservations about our government preaching wind power as the holy grail of green energy. It is not selfish and shortsighted to worry over sky-rocketing hydro bills. Billions already spent, billions more in the future, all of it on credit. That’s an awful lot of eggs in one basket. I am not arguing that green energy is kind to our enviroment. It is. I am not convinced that in our climate, that wind or even solar is the best solution for us, given its costs and limitations.

  • Luckywife said

    November 20, 2010 at 2:21 am eSorry Matt, I’m the one that brought it up and took us off topic. Too much time on my hands this week, Luckyhusband is away on a business trip. I’m bored and lonesome and of course, kids, being teenagers, want nothing to do with me unless I am cooking them a meal or chauffering them around town.

    Note to self: Shut the hell up and go to bed!

    Regards,
    Luckywife

  • Anonymoose said

    November 20, 2010 at 7:58 am eLuckywife, don’t be sorry. This is a perfectly valid discussion for Aurorans to be having. Matt your numbers are the ones that are off kW are a measure of instantanious power. Your A/C uses close to 2KW at any moment in time. Over the course of a month an average household will use anything between 30-60 kWH. That is killowatt-hours.

    Luckywife, you’re right. I misread some other OPA documents. When doing some googling just now, I can across this which is a nice summary.

    http://www.powerauthority.on.ca/current-electricity-contracts/wind-power

    I never claimed that wind power is the holy grail, nor I think did OPA. As you say it is unpredictable and can never be counted on to supply more than about 10% . Especially without some quick responding peaker plants or better storage technology, to mitigate the variance of wind energy. That does not mean that wind energy should not be an integral part of a green solution, just as hydro already is, and solar should be. There is no reason for example that we should not have a grand windfarm 15KM off the shore of lake Ontario.

    Why is 30% misleading? 41% one month, 14% another. 30% over a year could be quite reasonable. Especially if you have multiple farms spread across the province.

  • Paul Sesto said

    November 20, 2010 at 8:09 am eTo add to the info from Luckywife, Matt Maddocks and Anonymoose, one of the problems with wind turbines is that they are either fully on (and variable with the power output) or off depending on the wind speed. If the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine there is no wind or solar (adding that into the discussion) energy. Yes, it adds to the grid but it is not consistent and reliable. So as more wind and solar are added so as to reduce coal burning plants, more peaker plants may also have to be added to provide the power on cloudy or windless days (the wind turbines also apparently freewheel if the wind is too strong). Hydro electric in Ontario may be the most reliable green energy but we have probably tapped “that stream” to the max. The answer to Ontario’s power needs is a whole new debate.

Posted in Discussion Topic, Hydro | 10 Comments »

Discussion Topic: Charitable Programs

Posted by auroracitizen on November 19, 2010

Should the Town provide space for charities to offer their programs? Many municipal governments provide food banks with rent-free space to operate, for example. Aurora doesn’t, but should the town do so?

Is it appropriate for groups to use Town facilities for charitable fund-raising? Should those groups pay the usual fee, a reduced fee, or should the Town provide space and staff provide free support to help support charitable endeavours?

What role should the town play in supporting charities financially? Should we waive fees or should they pay user fees like other groups?

What about making donations to charities?

Is anyone familiar with the current Town policy? Is there a policy? Let us know.

Posted in Charitable Programs, Discussion Topic | 52 Comments »

Thoughts for Consideration

Posted by auroracitizen on November 19, 2010

We’d like to start some new discussion threads on the Aurora Citizen focused on “What we want and what we believe?”

The premise is that there are some topics we should discuss as citizens of the Town of Aurora.  These are questions about how we want our town to grow and how we want our tax dollars spent.  How should the budget reflect what we want?

It’s one thing to say we want lower taxes, or value for our taxes, or even that we are willing to see our taxes increase if it benefits the community.

It’s another thing to say we want support for the most vulnerable in our society, or that we want wonderful infrastructure for community programming, or that we want to recognize our Aurora heritage.  We might want to support youth programs or seniors programs because they help families in our Town live better lives.  On the other hand, who pays?  How deep are the taxpayers’ pockets?

There are things we “want” and there are things we “believe”.  If we discuss them, we can find the things we know will benefit our community.  Then we can tell Council. We are hopeful the new Council will read this blog and consider the opinions expressed.

Let’s try an use this online channel to start a genuine debate and conversation.

So look for subject headings intended to start a discussion and join in.

Also, please send in suggestions of other topics you don’t see here.

Posted in Discussion Topic | 1 Comment »

Does Aurora Smell?

Posted by auroracitizen on November 19, 2010

Has anyone noticed that disgusting smell that’s been permeating throughout Aurora?

No, nothing to do with the residue left over from the municipal elections. This smell is real.

Whenever the wind blows up from the south side of town, that awful stink from the yard waste drop off site on Bloomington completely covers the town. It incredible how this has continued on and off again for a few years now.

Can’t something be done about this? I can’t possibly be the only one to find the smell nauseous.

Kevin in Aurora

Posted in Community Corner, Environment, Waste | 18 Comments »

Recount Results

Posted by auroracitizen on November 16, 2010

For those waiting with bated breath, the results are in and Paul Pirri was “announced” as the eighth Councillor elect. The previous 7 were unchanged as well.

Of interest — the separation between Perri and Granger increased by 6 votes, and Councillor Wilson came within 2 votes of knocking off Granger for 9th place

Candidate Original Recount +/-
Abel 5803 5810 +7
Thompson 5335 5341 +6
Buck 5317 5322 +5
Humfryes 5308 5304 -4
Gallo 4601 4601 0
Gaertner 4343 4344 +1
Ballard 4276 4279 +3
Pirri 4144 4150 +6
Granger 4123 4122 -1
Wilson 4116 4121 +5
MacEachern 4000 3998 -2

There were also no disputed votes.

So what does this mean?

We understand there is a 15 day period where candidates have the opportunity to challenge any disputed votes. However since there were none, the waiting period is a moot point — but the Clerk cannot “declare” the winner until that time has elapsed. In any case it would require a judicial review and would be outside the power of Council to affect this matter any further.

The only other potential wrinkle would be for someone to challenge the entire electoral vote — but again this would require a judicial review.

So it would appear the election results are effectively final.

Congratulations to Paul and all elected Councillors.

Posted in Election 2010 | 72 Comments »

Why Can’t Morris Understand CCLA Involvement?

Posted by auroracitizen on November 15, 2010

When speaking about the possible involvement of the CCLA in the lawsuit , Phyllis Morris is quoted in this weeks Auroran, 

“It is hard to imagine that such an Association would choose to align themselves with extreme anonymous language and personal threats.”

Really?

In a recent National Post article, Cara Zwibel, director of the fundamental freedoms program with the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, says it is always a concern when public officials take litigious steps against critical constituents.

“There may be things that cross the line, but we want to see that line get pushed to create a nice, big area for people to express themselves,” Ms. Zwibel said.

Is it surprising that Phyllis doesn’t grasp the basis for their concern — to safeguard the rights of citizens as outlined under the Canadian Charter of Rights which guarantees the citizens of this country the right to freely express their opinions?

Possibly Phyllis should read the insightful letter written by Mr Paul Sesto in the same edition of the Auroran. It clearly and eloquently states the basis for why the CCLA and citizens should be concerned about this lawsuit.

Given the recent activities to remember and honour those that fought for these rights, it is even more telling that she can’t put aside her own agenda and acknowledge that the opinions expressed by people through their votes was a reflection of her behaviour over a period of 4 years.

Maybe it was her behaviour that made Ms. Morris the subject of “ridicule, hatred and contempt” — not because a community blog shone a light on those activities. We simply believed that a more educated public would make a more educated decision.

Her ability to draw only 21% of the vote suggests a deeper dissatisfaction and speaks for itself. It would appear she underestimated the intelligence of the public.

Should we be complimented that she blames this blog for her loss?

The same article in the National Post suggests we have significantly more power than we ever thought we had. The truth is our circulation increased significantly as a result of the publicity provided by her lawsuit — far surpassing anything we saw prior to the  lawsuit being filed.

The public outrage at her lawsuit probably did more damage than anything ever written in all the blogs or newspapers combined.

If she wants someone to blame — she simply needs to look in the mirror.

Posted in Legal | 15 Comments »

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »