Posts
Local community hydro expert Richard Johnson and key member of STOP sent in the following comment. It is published unchanged. You can also read his Letter of the Week from June 26, 2009 in the Mississauga News on the same subject.
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views of the AURORA CITIZEN.
Mayor Phyllis Morris and Sue Walmer of MegaWHAT and EAC both apparently drive SUV's and rumour has it that they may well be sympathetic to the Conservatives as a few photos seem to suggest, which may all be well and fine with the exception that it also seems to fly in the face of the "green" image that they are so diligently trying to portray. So which is it, are they green or are they blue?
Sue Walmer refused to even discuss the power supply issue for three and a half years despite many attempts to engage her and EAC in the important issues being discussed in our community, before she then inexplicably co-authored MegaWHAT's ridiculously poorly founded position statement that both Mayor Morris and "shadow Mayor" MacEachern also appeared to align with through an obviously preconceived and apparently contrived Council resolution related to the same issue.
Clearly none of them even read, or at the very least understand the environmental assessment studies or the OPA needs analysis related to the local power supply issue before they adopted their hard line stance on these long standing issues.
Mayor Morris refused to permit council to become well informed before any vote was taken on the power supply issue despite the many offers made to educate council by numerous well informed people. None of them even came close to demonstrating an understanding of the issues or the viable alternatives.
For some of us, including the Town of Markham, who spent $750,000 on communications, technical and environmental law experts in Aurora's defence on these very same power supply issues, it was hard to watch. Mayor Morris, Sue Walmer and Council rejected the need for a critically required gas fired peaking plant to be built anywhere in Northern York Region or the province for that matter; despite the fact that the peaking plant was ironically required in order to incorporate wind or solar power solutions into the power grid as well as to protect our power reliability of Aurora, while at the same time reducing coal fired emissions in the province. Now these same people apparently all support a less environmentally friendly and a more expensive (per kilowatt) diesel powered UPS generator for the Town Hall!
Go figure. It just seems to go from bad to worse all of the time. I have to assume that the thinking may be that if you say you are a well informed defender of the environment or an energy expert enough times some people might actually believe you.
There is certainly no shortage of smoke and mirrors in Aurora at any event. Given the mixed signals being sent it really does make you wonder where they might stand with regards to the need for environmental assessments at all given that to date they seem to have ignored so much professional and well informed input from the likes of the Ontario Power Authority, OEB, IESO, APPrO, power company engineers and environmental assessment experts in any number of areas.
Through their mis-handling of environmental and planning issues locally they have arguably missed a significant opportunity to be constructively engaged in the power planning, environmental assessment and procurement processes. Under their leadership Aurora, the Region and even the province have missed the proverbial boat on smart growth infrastructure planning and sadly King, Mississauga the greater province are now paying a big price as a direct result.
It should come as no surprise to anyone that socio-economic impacts and other environmental concerns are often not addressed when we have so many governments, starting from the local governments upwards, that don't even seem to care about the facts or the viable options before they adopt their politically expedient stance on any given issue.
It is no surprise to me that the province has passed legislation to allow them to impose power supply infrastructure on unwilling host communities given the clear lack of professional and good faith co-operation we have witnessed from our local municipalities and most notably from Aurora. If I have learned anything in the past five years politics and planning are all about spin, self interest and money at the end of the day, don't kid yourself.
From my perspective, based on what we know from our local experience, it would be enlightening to know where Mayor Morris, shadow Mayor MacEachern and EAC stand with regards to the Globe & Mail news story quoted below. It sure does make you wonder where we are headed.
Ottawa could waive thousands more environmental assessments, (abbreviated quotes)
Martin Mittelstaedt and Dawn Walton, Toronto, Calgary — From Friday's Globe and Mail, Friday, Jun. 26, 2009
The number of federally funded infrastructure projects exempted from environmental assessments could soar to nearly 14,000, up from the 2,000 figure the Conservatives announced in March.
The new figure was introduced earlier this week in a Federal Court of Canada case by the Sierra Club of Canada challenging the legality of exemptions. It was based on a disclosure Ottawa made in the Canada Gazette last month indicating that up to an additional 12,000 projects will be approved under the infrastructure program.
The new total suggests the federal cabinet's decision to limit environmental assessments on infrastructure spending will have far broader effects than was initially thought. The exemption applies to a wide range of projects receiving federal money and includes highway widening, bridges and sewage treatment plants, but also ventures with little or no environmental impacts, such as bike trails and social-housing construction.
“Certainly we were appalled when it was at 2,000 and now we're at a sevenfold increase. That's just immense,” said Justin Duncan, a lawyer at Ecojustice, a public interest legal organization that is representing Sierra Club in the case. “Ballooning up to 14,000 certainly provides greater fodder for our case that the federal government is getting out of the [environmental assessment] game.”...
Speaking to reporters in Calgary, federal Environment Minister Jim Prentice, defended the exemption plan, saying the government “looked at the kinds of projects in the past where environmental assessments had resulted in delay, but not necessarily any improvements and where we felt that duplicative environmental assessments would not be in our best interests.”
Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.
Showing posts with label Growth. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Growth. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Development Charges
The Town is considering raising development charges by 12 - 39% -- which will raise the cost of residential and non-residential construction in Aurora.
Development charges are used to pay for everything from parks to roads. The theory is that new construction should pay for the services needed by those new home/business owners.
Of course, nothing is that simple. For example, business doesn't use parks and rec facilities, while smaller home subdivisions have more people so they use them more. Plus there is the ongoing cost to replace aging infrastructure which new residents also put pressure on.
Certainly, particularly in today's economy, any increase in development charges will increase prices in Aurora which could slow growth. Many residents would welcome slowed growth.
But if growth is slowed, then development charges that are already in the financial forecasts for future years (together with the tax revenue from that new construction) will be lost, putting an increased burden on existing taxpayers. Few residents are pleased with increased taxes.
And we all know that services in Aurora are already stretched.
So what is Council supposed to do? It is a difficult balancing act. We don't envy them.
There is a public meeting at Town Hall on Wed May 6 at 7 pm where you can get more information or make comments. Or you can share your thoughts here.
Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.
Development charges are used to pay for everything from parks to roads. The theory is that new construction should pay for the services needed by those new home/business owners.
Of course, nothing is that simple. For example, business doesn't use parks and rec facilities, while smaller home subdivisions have more people so they use them more. Plus there is the ongoing cost to replace aging infrastructure which new residents also put pressure on.
Certainly, particularly in today's economy, any increase in development charges will increase prices in Aurora which could slow growth. Many residents would welcome slowed growth.
But if growth is slowed, then development charges that are already in the financial forecasts for future years (together with the tax revenue from that new construction) will be lost, putting an increased burden on existing taxpayers. Few residents are pleased with increased taxes.
And we all know that services in Aurora are already stretched.
So what is Council supposed to do? It is a difficult balancing act. We don't envy them.
There is a public meeting at Town Hall on Wed May 6 at 7 pm where you can get more information or make comments. Or you can share your thoughts here.
Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Yonge & Wellington
This poor intersection has been the subject of much debate on how to relieve the congestion. Do you think it is congested? Should parking be removed close to the intersection (south of Wellington, east of Yonge)? Should the stop light patterns be changed? Should we test the diagonal cross walks being tested in Toronto? What suggestions do you have?
Saturday, December 6, 2008
How should the Region use returned tax funds?
For years the Region of York has been forced to send our tax dollars to Toronto to fund their social programs -- often providing residents of Toronto with services that York Region was unable to provide for our own residents. It has been a thorn in our side for many years. This pooling is being phased out. Each year it is reduced until we don't send any dollars south by the year 2013.
In 2004 we paid $79 million dollars. In 2009 we will be sending $13.2 million less than in 2008, allowing those dollars to be used for service here in York Region.
The question to be answered is what will these funds be used for?
Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.
In 2004 we paid $79 million dollars. In 2009 we will be sending $13.2 million less than in 2008, allowing those dollars to be used for service here in York Region.
The question to be answered is what will these funds be used for?
- Reduced tax burden to residents
- Enriched social programs
- More recreation facilities
- More arts programming
- More support to seniors
- More health facilities/programs
- Reduce infrastructure debt
- Build/upgrade infrastructure
Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Discussion: Aurora Traffic Woes
The northeast quadrant is proceeding with new speed humps along Mark Street. However, there doesn't seem to any real consensus on whether the residents want these or whether they are having the intended impact.
What role will citizens have with the Traffic Advisory Committee on this issue?
What other traffic issues are we concerned about. Former Council Ron Wallace used to complain bitterly about Yonge and Wellington -- is this still an issue. The new Dundas and Yonge traffic signals may have some learning we can benefit from.
What about the speed zone on St John's where it drops for approx 300 yards from 60 to 50 kms. Most regular travellers along that stretch are well aware of the situation.
What is Wellington and Leslie starting to look like now that the stores are starting to open. Will it end up like in Newmarket leading to/from the big box area?
Traffic flows like water -- to the path of least resistance. Whenever changes are made to one area to lower traffic just moves the traffic elsewhere and becomes someone else's problem.
Until we reduce the cars on the road, the problems will not disappear -- just become someone else's.
Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.
What role will citizens have with the Traffic Advisory Committee on this issue?
What other traffic issues are we concerned about. Former Council Ron Wallace used to complain bitterly about Yonge and Wellington -- is this still an issue. The new Dundas and Yonge traffic signals may have some learning we can benefit from.
What about the speed zone on St John's where it drops for approx 300 yards from 60 to 50 kms. Most regular travellers along that stretch are well aware of the situation.
What is Wellington and Leslie starting to look like now that the stores are starting to open. Will it end up like in Newmarket leading to/from the big box area?
Traffic flows like water -- to the path of least resistance. Whenever changes are made to one area to lower traffic just moves the traffic elsewhere and becomes someone else's problem.
Until we reduce the cars on the road, the problems will not disappear -- just become someone else's.
Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Community Corner: Green Power
A reader sent in the following comment. It is published unchanged.
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views of the AURORA CITIZEN.
I noticed during a visit to the Town Hall some weeks ago that they're now running on "Bullfrog Power". The website at http://www.bullfrogpower.com/
There is a media release here:
http://www.bullfrogpower.com/08releases/york_aurora.pdf
"The cost to each municipality is three cents per kWh over current electricity commodity rates, representing an annual cost for the Town of Aurora of $20,000 and $70,000 for The Regional Municipality of York.
Bullfrog customers continue to draw power from the electricity grid in the same way that they always have. Customers don't need any special equipment, setup or wiring. Verified annually by an independent audit by Deloitte, the amount of electricity Bullfrog customers buy is injected onto the electricity grid from EcoLogo-certified, green generation sources, including wind power and low-impact water power that displace polluting and carbon-intensive sources such as coal."
I'm not a power expert... but I'm wondering if someone can explain how this works. If you think of it like a liquid...The Town buys $xxx of electricity, Bullfrog 'injects' that amount of electricity into the grid, and it zips it's way along to the town hall, for a premium price.
Are there not laws that say ALL electricity should be as green as possible? The town hall is paying for the generation of the electricity at a premium - 3 cents per kWh over the current rate - but I doubt that there's a way to measure exactly what % of this 'green electricity' is actually used. Going back to the water analogy - isn't it the same idea as the Dasani water sold by Coke that starts out as Mississauga tap water? It's marketed as 'special' and better for you - but how does a consumer REALLY know?
Things that make you go 'hmmmm'.
Share your thoughts.
Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Traffic Calming Results Mixed
Good News! A report has been issued about the traffic calming measures in the Northeast quadrant of town. The skinny is that traffic counts are generally down, but the chicanes don't seem to be effective.
Council has taken the initial step to install some speed cushions along Mark Street, but referred the balance to the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee.
One of the early criticisms of these measures was that all members of the public hadn't been consulted. Hopefully now the broader public will have the opportunity to engage with this committee versus just a few interested residents.
Another question that needs to be addressed is, "What happened to the traffic that was cutting through this neighbourhood, and what has the impact of that change been to other residents?" Hopefully someone will provide some insight on this issue.
Traffic is like water, it goes to the path of least resistance. Since Yonge and Wellington hasn't been fixed, one has to wonder if the traffic has just become a problem for another neighbourhood.
This is a good news story. In fact, even the Mayor is quoted as stating "We want to remain open and transparent as we mover forward on this."
Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.
Council has taken the initial step to install some speed cushions along Mark Street, but referred the balance to the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee.
One of the early criticisms of these measures was that all members of the public hadn't been consulted. Hopefully now the broader public will have the opportunity to engage with this committee versus just a few interested residents.
Another question that needs to be addressed is, "What happened to the traffic that was cutting through this neighbourhood, and what has the impact of that change been to other residents?" Hopefully someone will provide some insight on this issue.
Traffic is like water, it goes to the path of least resistance. Since Yonge and Wellington hasn't been fixed, one has to wonder if the traffic has just become a problem for another neighbourhood.
This is a good news story. In fact, even the Mayor is quoted as stating "We want to remain open and transparent as we mover forward on this."
Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Lessons from Lincoln
In the book Team of Rivals, author Doris Kearns Goodwin focuses on how Abraham Lincoln built his cabinet. Instead of choosing cronies and old pals, Lincoln’s choices included three of his major rivals for the 1860 presidential nomination, William Seward, Edward Bates and Salmon Chase.
None of these men thought Lincoln was presidential material, and, in fact, he was considered a light-weight who was not prepared for the job.
Lincoln won them over by genuinely and methodically building his relationships with them. In fact, relationship-building encounters were a key to Lincoln’s success, whether it was at the highest political echelons or meeting the troops at the front.
Is there a lesson here for our current Mayor and Council?
Every interaction can be a relationship-building encounter, if we genuinely believe that relationship building is at the center of what we need and want to do. We can all learn from Mr. Lincoln.
Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.
None of these men thought Lincoln was presidential material, and, in fact, he was considered a light-weight who was not prepared for the job.
Lincoln won them over by genuinely and methodically building his relationships with them. In fact, relationship-building encounters were a key to Lincoln’s success, whether it was at the highest political echelons or meeting the troops at the front.
Is there a lesson here for our current Mayor and Council?
Every interaction can be a relationship-building encounter, if we genuinely believe that relationship building is at the center of what we need and want to do. We can all learn from Mr. Lincoln.
Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
How much growth is too much?
Every municipal election, candidates make promises about the rate of growth here in Aurora. The favoured buzzword is usually managed growth, but what does that really mean?
Everyone recognizes that it is impossible to stop growth, but what can the politicians and staff really do to manage growth.
A recent article in the Era Banner prompted this question.
If historically, we have issued approx 400 building permits each year, is the new pace of 600 permits the new level of managed growth?
If so, are you happy with this rate of growth? If not, do we want more, or less?
What can we as citizens of Aurora do to let our political leaders know we are unhappy.
A second article indicated that a developer had been granted a turning lane that had previously been denied. What does this apparent reversal signal?
When the Mayor stated that the reversal was the result of careful consideration it begs the questions "what was the orginal decision based on?"
Was their a detailed traffic study conducted to support this careful consideration? What will the impact be on the already congested Wellington traffic patterns? Does this decision signal a more welcoming reception to growth and developers?
Share your thoughts!
Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.
Everyone recognizes that it is impossible to stop growth, but what can the politicians and staff really do to manage growth.
A recent article in the Era Banner prompted this question.
If historically, we have issued approx 400 building permits each year, is the new pace of 600 permits the new level of managed growth?
If so, are you happy with this rate of growth? If not, do we want more, or less?
What can we as citizens of Aurora do to let our political leaders know we are unhappy.
A second article indicated that a developer had been granted a turning lane that had previously been denied. What does this apparent reversal signal?
When the Mayor stated that the reversal was the result of careful consideration it begs the questions "what was the orginal decision based on?"
Was their a detailed traffic study conducted to support this careful consideration? What will the impact be on the already congested Wellington traffic patterns? Does this decision signal a more welcoming reception to growth and developers?
Share your thoughts!
Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)