 By Pepper Parr
September 11th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The original headline on this article has been revised: a reader took exception to the use of the phrase: “pulling teeth from hens” which she felt was sexist. We didn’t see it that way and that certainly wasn’t our intention.
This is begining to feel like we are trying to pull teeth from hens: just release the documents.
A number of weeks ago the Gazette asked Ward 1 and 2 school board trustee Leah Reynolds if she would send us the complete contents of the texts she sent and received from Marianne Meed Ward during the June 7th Board of Education meeting. That was the meeting at which the trustees decided to close two of the city’s seven high schools.
We asked the same question of Marianne Meed Ward who is member of city council and served on the Program Accommodation Review committee that was not able to arrive at a consensus or send a direction or recommendation to the Director of Education and to the trustees.
Some would argue that writing a direction or recommendation was not part of their mandate. So?
Everyone seems to share the view that the process was flawed – any comment from the members of that PARC would have been welcome – and might have given the trustees a clearer sense as to what was wrong with the process used.
Reynolds replied to our request with the following:
 Trustee Reynolds had a heavy book marked edition of Robert Rules of Order – clearly came to the meeting prepared to fight a procedural battle – with a parents who is also a member of city council “coaching” her from the public gallery. Thank you for your question, which I would have gladly provided to you earlier if asked.
Before, during and after meetings, I – as do all trustees – receive messages, questions and concerns from constituents and parents. As confirmed by the Chair at the June 7th and the June 21st meetings that communication does not violate any code of conduct nor is it contrary to any Board policy. As elected officials, hearing from our communities is part of the democratic process and the right of constituents to freedom of expression. While I cannot control who or what information parents or constituents send me, it is my job to listen and to take it into consideration to inform my questions and decision.
School closure conversations are difficult and the decisions are not desired by all of the residents of our community. My remarks were recorded on June 7 on why I supported the director’s report. Let me know if you want them.
The question was – would she send the texts that were exchanged by Meed Ward and Reynolds – which she chose not to answer.
We asked the same question of Meed Ward – we copied each of them on the separate message sent which was as follows:
I am putting together an article on how the Board of Trustees arrived at the decision they did to close two of the city’s seven high schools.
The communication between you and Trustee Reynolds during the debate are part of that story. Would you be good enough to send me all of the texts that you sent to Reynolds during the meeting.
If you wish please feel free to add any comment on the context within which the texts were sent.
Thank you – hope you and the family had a great summer.
Meed Ward came back with:
There is nothing to send. There was no communication during debate of the school closure motions.
As has been previously explained, the communication via text was related to a procedural matter prior to any discussion of the motions themselves, specifically a ruling of the chair on what order motions would be heard.
 Marianne Meed Ward texting messages to trustee Leah Reynolds during a Board of Education meeting. Some of the content appeared to be instructions on how to vote on a procedural matter. There was never a risk of motions not being debated; the issue was simply in what order – simultaneously or sequentially. Getting procedure right protects the outcome of any subsequent vote, thus protecting everyone’s interests including those making this an issue.
The communication had nothing to do with the votes on the school closure motions themselves, and no impact on them.
In the end the chair’s ruling was upheld 7-4 by trustees, the debate and votes on the dual campus and school closures proceeded simultaneously for another three hours. There was no communication during these debates and votes.
My communication is no different than the many emails or texts that were sent by other parents to trustees through the meetings. What makes this different and why it has become a story is because someone read and photographed private correspondence, published it on social media, then misrepresented the substance of the text in a broadcast news story. There was no effort to contact me directly for the truth about the communication, simply a rush to judgment with the aim of social shaming, via the press and social media.
That Ms Meed Ward is precisely the point –part of what you texted was read and it didn’t look all that good. Let the public see every word that was passed between the two of you – they will figure it out.
Some folks have willingly engaged in character assassination as a tactic to save their school. I understand the emotions involved in having your school on the closure list – having lived with it for the previous 6 months. But the ends don’t justify the means. We need to do better than this, especially on difficult issues like school closures. Thankfully the vast majority of citizens have been respectful in sharing their views and making their case throughout this process with facts and evidence, and without personal attacks.
I think there is a splitting of hairs here – the little bit of the texting that the public was able to see appeared to be directions from Meed Ward to trustee Reynolds.
The Bateman community managed to interest CHCH television in the story. The ran a piece on their newscast – link to that broadcast is HERE.
There is considerable concern within the community on just what happened. We have no idea what the two woman were up to. If there is a public concern both woman have an obligation to release whatever the content of the texts were – with time stamps on them.
Related news stories:
Bateman parents want an investigation.
Parents want trustee suspended.
Parent admits sending message – she wasn’t just any parent either
 By Rory Nisan
September 10, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Part of what makes Burlington arguably the best suburb in the GTA is that, almost anywhere in the city, you are no more than twenty minutes from the Escarpment or the lake. Nature is at your doorstep, as is the culture of the downtown mixed with the expansive views of the water.
As many readers know, a provincial mandate to increase the city’s population combined with the decision to not build north of the Dundas/407 barrier means that Burlington will be growing “up” rather than “out”.
 One of the prime places to just enjoy the city is on the north side of Lakeshore looking out over the lake. When the weather is right – seats are hard to get. The city’s plans for this growth have focused on “mobility hubs” around our three GO Train stations and, more controversially, the downtown corridor. The latter was destined to be the toughest sell: the downtown is not a true hub of mobility in 2017. The truth is that the downtown is a place people want to live for the lake, the restaurants and night life and the culture, not because it is a starting point for transportation to other destinations. Unlike the other three, the downtown is, by its nature, a destination hub first, a transportation one second.
There is an agenda to grow in the downtown core, and while it may in fact be good for the city as a whole, a bit of cognitive dissonance is required to buy into the mobility hub rationale.
When I attended a meeting about this downtown mobility hub this past Thursday, it was not surprising that the Art Gallery of Burlington’s largest hall was filled with interested and sometimes concerned local downtown residents.
Presentations from consultants began shortly after 7 pm, and it wasn’t long before the anxiety of the audience became evident. They did not wait long before interrupting the consultants to ask questions. After responding to a few of them, the consultants understandably implored the audience to let them get through their slides before taking any more.
However, when they finished a few minutes later, they handed workbooks out to the audience and left the microphone, taking no questions in front of the audience. Instead, city staff were deployed to the tables to answer questions in a small group format.
This conveniently prevented the consultants or the city from having to answer questions in front of the packed hall. The city staff patiently and diligently listened to attendees, responding to concerns and asking them to make their views known through the workbooks.
 Resident suggest that if “residential condo towers dominate the downtown core, the beauty of the area will be lost and the development initiative will become counterproductive. I’m not sure what the consultants’ roles were, other than to fend off potentially embarrassing questions. They presented from prepared remarks for about half an hour and then we didn’t see them again.
Their job was, as is often the case, more about “having a consultation” than actually consulting. While the efforts of the city’s employees to answer queries was welcomed, at some point the city’s leadership will have to stand up and take some heat from area residents. Otherwise, a sense that they were not heard will prevail, and the social licence required for such a large remaking of the downtown will not be given.
Most of the attention focused on the many maps provided, outlining different districts that were often non-contiguous. It became unwieldy trying to understand what the consequences would be at the street level. Still, there was a lot of thought put into the detailed maps and it works as a basis for further discussion.
Several residents wondered whether views of the lake would be further blocked by high rises. The answer: quite possibly. The Old Lakeshore Road Precinct is marked for mid- and high-rises up to 15 storeys.
 Rahoons Persian Eatery at Village Square has won awards for its menu and service. One of the city’s most under utilized locations. As an uptown resident, I want to see the downtown to become an even better destination for all Burlington residents to enjoy. Having more people in the core, if done right, can lead to more thriving businesses and great energy. The downtown looks great on a sunny summer or fall weekend, but it’s a bit of a ghost town in the winter. I see the Village Square as a test of the vibrancy of the downtown. It is a beautiful business centre, reminiscent of the romantic squares of Europe but it has yet to become the thriving destination it deserves to be.
That being said, while adding residents to the core is important for business and culture, if residential condo towers dominate the downtown core, the beauty of the area will be lost and the development initiative will become counterproductive. This is a real risk — one need only look down the QEW to the cold condos along the lake in Toronto.
This would be exacerbated if the City is serious about making the downtown a commuter area — that will attract investors rather than residents and we then risk the high vacancy rates predominant in Vancouver.
We need a made-in-Burlington solution for the downtown and the first step would be more transparency from the City’s planners and leadership on its vision for the area and real consultation with decision-makers, not outside consultants.
The first step should be to pull the downtown core out of the Mobility Hub process in recognition that this area is unique from the real mobility hubs and needs special attention. We are not talking about building a mobility hub around the John Street Bus Terminal. We are talking about permanently altering the character of the downtown area. It’s time to get serious.
 There was a time when Lakeshore was known as Water Street and traffic was a little slower. Rory Nisan is a long-time Burlington resident and Lester B. Pearson High School alumnus. He has been an active member of the Save Pearson community organization.
 By Pepper Parr
September 10th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The Gazette has been communicating electronically with Board of Education trustee Leah Reynolds about the texts that took place between Reynolds and Marianne Meed Ward, a PAR member while it existed. The texts were exchanged during the Board meeting at which the decision was made to close two of the city’s seven high schools. That request for that information has yet to be reported on.
While waiting for the text data, Ward 1 and 2 Halton Board of Education trustee Leah Reynolds sent in the following comment on her controversial vote for the closing of two of the seen high schools in Burlington.
 Board of Education trustee for \Wards 1 and 2 Leah Reynolds in discussion with students from Central high school. Reynolds represents Central High school which was on the original list of schools recommended for closure. The Director of Education revised his list of recommendations and removed Central and added Bateman, Pearson was on the original list and remained on that list.
Reynolds provides some background on the decision making process she went through.
“In October of 2016 I did not support engaging a Program Accommodation Review (PAR) . My concern at that time was the recommendation excluded an important stakeholder (representation from grade 7 and 8). Notwithstanding that roughly one third of both schools population receive programming directly within Aldershot and Burlington Central schools, this group had no right to voice opinion on the high school closure at the PAR discussion table.” Reynolds said at the time that “This revised motion does not negatively impact these Grades 7 and 8 students.”
“Through the PAR discussions, I learned the extent in which Burlington students lacked equity of opportunity in program and as pointed out by my trustee peers – also across Halton. Low enrolments at 5 out of 7 high schools meant students can’t get the classes they need. Since the future of our children depends on what they are exposed to having a variety of course selections including skilled trades in every high school is paramount. We know that critical mass is important to allow students voice and choice and to provide multiple pathway options and to graduate. To obtain needed courses, Burlington students are confronted with the prospect of changing schools, taking classes online, attending summer schools or even taking another year of school.”
“This report (the revised recommendation) speaks to the importance of maintaining a community school in each area of Burlington. The overlapping geographical catchment of Bateman and Nelson and MM Robinson and Pearson allows students to receive programming within their local community. It also provides a new state of the art purpose-built composite school in the South and increased programming in the North. This report speaks to the values of delivering education closer to where students live, thus reducing bus ride times. All of the changes are meant to improve the delivery of the mandatory Ontario English curriculum.”
“Currently, we are spending money keeping underutilized buildings open that could be used to improve programming for all students. In light of the information learned throughout the PAR including the many emails and phone calls I have gotten from parents and students, I believe this recommendation puts the best interests of all student first, for the long term.”
“I recognize” said Reynolds that “ some will not be happy I have changed my position on school closures and weighed my decision on sound facts. This is not about me, it’s about what is in the best interest of all HDSB students.”
 City Councillor Marianne Meed Ward at her nomination meeting in 2014 with Leah Reynolds who was nominated at the same time for the Board of trustees Full disclosure: During 2016 I spent time with Leah Reynolds mentoring her on the role of a city Councillor. Directed her to significant city of Burlington publications: Procedural bylaw, copies of the Operational and Capital budget binders and discussed with her the Standing Committee structure as well as what was entailed in serving as a Regional Councillor.
Reynolds was interested in moving from her role as a trustee to that of a city Councillor. We met on five or six occasions – always in a coffee shop for several hours on each occasion.
Those mentoring meetings ended when the PAR process began.
 One of the younger runners enters the home stretch of the Terry Fox 5k run. Many his age did a second go around to make it a 10k run.  By Pepper Par
September 9th 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The way in which a community comes together to support a family that has been devastated is something to behold.
Hundreds upon hundreds of people in Burlington and those involved in any way with what Casey Cosgrove did in and for Burlington, have rallied and moved in to support the family during a very hard time.
 Casey with his wife and daughter out on the streets in the Alton community distributing flyers door to door for the Terry Fox run – this was in 2013. One group has taken on the task of preparing meals.
Another has set up a Gofundme campaign to raise funds to ensure that the three children are able to complete their education.
Last week the lineup of people at the Wave Twin Rinks, Pub 21 wound down the stairs and outside the building; an amazing turnout.
One can only guess at how many people are going to show up at the annual Terry Fox run on Sunday the 17th – everyone will be a Team Casey participant.
A few hours after the run there will be a celebration of Casey’s life at the Burlington Convention Centre on Burloak between 4 and 6 pm.
The people who set up the Gofundme account described what they were setting out to the with the Memorial Education Fund.
“After being diagnosed in 2010 with stage 4 Lung Cancer and enduring a courageous 7 year battle against all odds, our dear Casey has left us to battle on without him. Ever optimistic and ready to push headlong into the next trial, Casey showed us all the true meaning of courage, bravery, positivity, spirit, and strength. Casey always donated his time and energy to several community causes and was ever present as a Champion for the Terry Fox Foundation, working tirelessly to help bring the Terry Fox Mile Marker to Burlington. He touched hundreds of people, leaving a lasting impression of what a true Hero is. Any contributions that can be made to help with educational costs for his three loving children Evan, Jack and Kate would be greatly appreciated.
The Casey Cosgrove Memorial Education fund web site is HERE
Our last interview with Casey Cosgrove.
By Pepper Parr
September 9th, 2019
BURLINGTON, ON
He is in the process of becoming a media star, the “go to guy” if you want a comment on how municipalities are going to handle the demand for housing.
 Mayor’s 2015 Christmas card picture. The Mayor was on CBC twice this week- once with Anna Maria Tremonti on The Current, where we learned that the Mayor was one of the Regional Council members who voted for a program that would have the Region paying for a large part of the cost of a back flow valve, that prevents water from your home’s sewer line from flowing back into the plumbing when there is heavy rains. On August 4th 2014 there were heavy rains.
The Mayor told Tremonti that he as one of the Regional Council members who put his hand up and voted yes.
Unfortunately for the Mayor he was not one of the people who took advantage of that opportunity and when the city was severely flood on August 4th, 2014 he got five feet of water in his basement while his next door neighbour, who had a back flow valve was reported to have been dry.
 Having told the The Current audience (the program is broadcast nationally) the Mayor was then heard on CBC’s Metro Morning with Matt Galloway where he explained what the city manager meant when he said Burlington was not going to be able to build any more single family dwellings because the city has run out of land.
Land use in Burlington is made up of 50% rural, 34% traditional suburban housing, 11% employment lands and the 5% of the city that is not going to have any high rise structures.
The Mayor told the world that a decision was made in 2006 to protect the escarpment and not allow the creation of sub-divisions north of the Hwy 407 – Dundas roadways.
The full interview is HERE
During his conversation with Galloway the Mayor said there was a range of views on the change that is taking place in the city. He used the phrase “bubble wrapped” to describe those who did not want to see any change in the structure of the city.
Interesting interview – worth listening to. You can arrive at your own conclusions as to whether this Mayor reflects your view of your city.
 In one of his tweets the Mayor appears to be telling his followers that he is going to run for mayor in 2018. Why else would he put quote marks around the word “running” The Mayor is clearly upping his game and doing everything he can to get a bit of a leg up on the race for the Office of Mayor that will be decided in October of 2018. Expect at least two people to run against him.
 Sometime ago he wanted the citizens of the city to know that he was a transit advocate and once rode the bus to work – and posted a selfie so that people would know he was actually on the bus.
The releasing of this picture to the public is something the Mayor might have run by his communications adviser.
 By Staff
September 8, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
 Suzanne Mammel Executive Officer Hamilton Halton Home Builders Association Suzzane Mammel is a pretty direct woman; trained as an engineer, she was dealing in planning matters before a city council committee when she made the point that her association Hamilton Halton Home Builders, “can’t be supportive of this OP, because it doesn’t provide the information our members need to do business here.
“We applaud the efforts to have a new Official Plan that meets the needs of all parties, this isn’t it.
This was basically the theme that came through her presentation to city council – it isn’t complete – far from it and the time line in place to get it complete is far too short.
Mammel, the Executive Officer of the Hamilton-Halton Home Builders’ Association, explained that they spent considerable time reviewing the document, meeting with staff, and providing comments, both on big picture and detailed issues.
Mammel was telling city council and staff that “the OP is important to how the City grows in the future, and it’s very important to get it right.”
“We are very supportive of the City’s initiative to create a new official plan that guides how our City continues to grow in the years to come, and addresses the new realities the City is facing: growth via intensification versus the greenfield type of developments that have dominated in recent decades, and new mandated growth targets and densities imposed by the Province to meet the Growth Plan.
 The city has a lot on the go – many are asking if the Planning department has bitten off more than they can chew. “We recognize that this is a bit of a daunting task. The policies need to firstly meet these mandated targets, and those from the Regional OP, while at the same time attempting to balance the needs and desires of the City’s businesses and residents, residents like me. In a letter to this committee in June, I noted that “we believe that the title of the document “Growing Bold”, and its correlation to similar themes under the City’s strategic plan are applaudable but must be unapologetic, and guide future applicants to successfully provide economically feasible, quality developments that are in keeping with big picture City goals, and that marry the City’s vision with the growth targets mandated by higher order government.”
Our membership need a strong and solid document that directs how growth should occur.
There are many moving parts, and it is not as easy as an outsider may think. She added that the mandated time frame staff was given to bring this draft forward resulted in an OP that is incomplete.
 Burlington city manager James Ridge “One of the initial comments and concerns we raised, and the biggest concern with this draft document, was a lack of critical information: information that if absent in the OP, does not provide the level of detail required by any applicant to understand if they are in conformance with an OP. I asked for it formally and in writing of staff. I noted it in a meeting I had with the City Manager and Director of Planning in June, and I noted it in my formal submission to this committee at the end of June.
“ What population growth has been achieved to date (relative to the targets set in the Regional OP and the densities set for urban growth centers and mobility hubs in the original and updated Growth Plan), what remains to achieve these targets and where will that growth occur. We understand this information is being developed but believe the information is absolutely critical before finalizing the mobility hub Area Specific Plans or the Official Plan”
“To date this information has not been provided, nor am I aware that it is available” she said. “There has been an attempt to address it – we’ve been referred to reports done to support specific OMB appeals with respect to downtown, and anecdotally we’ve been told such things like – we’re confident we’ll reach the numbers.
 A critical document – are we getting it right? This just isn’t good enough. It is critical to getting this whole thing right and therefore should be foremost in the approach to the OP and included in it in a clear and obvious way, like it is in the Official Plans of our neighbours like Hamilton and Oakville.
While there is a lot of policy and vision included in the document, what good is it if it fails to achieve the mandated growth? It begs the question: why was it not included?
This is a new and full OP, and should be the document in which this information is contained. It will be the document of reference in the future. It generally indicates that growth is to be directed firstly to the downtown – being the urban growth centre, the three remaining mobility hubs, uptown, and then corridors, and to a lesser extent, modest intensification into existing neighbourhoods. What it fails to answer is those critical questions I noted a couple minutes ago, including what portion of growth should and will be apportioned to each of these areas.
The approach of directing growth to the areas chosen is a good one. We are mandated by the Province to have a minimum level of density in the urban growth centre, and mobility hubs – it is economically appropriate to direct densities to those significant investments. But the big picture numbers to make these areas successful are not available.
How can we move forward with detailed studies, like is happening in the mobility hubs, without knowing if those concepts are achieving the required minimum targets we are expected to achieve?
 Mary Lou Tanner, educated as a geographer and now the Chief of the Planning department has more on her plate that many in the development business feel can be done within the tie frames in place. She explains a point to Councillor John Taylor Which refers me back to the daunting task. Some have and will say, the City has put the cart before the horse. The process taken elects to do things concurrently, which in theory may be fine. I acknowledge that we are in a state of flux, but that is not justification for not including any substantiating detail.
But without these big picture numbers, there is no ability for an applicant to understand if they are in conformity with the OP, if decisions made by a proponent on densities proposed are appropriate, too much, or too little, or what the justification is for a decision made by the City when advising an applicant has got it wrong.
When you combine these with the provincial landscape, changes to the Planning Act that prevent an OP amendment to be submitted within two years of the date of this OP being approved, and the likelihood of changes to the OMB which would limit appeals to those decisions which lack conformity to the OP, it is even more critical that this base information be provided.
 The mobility hub concept was to be the way the Official Plan would be implemented – some developers think the city has put he cart before the horse. Detailed land use permissions are being envisioned through the Mobility Hub study – which is essentially a secondary planning process. This is appropriate. This is a finer level of detail than an OP. The draft document itself says “the Official Plan provides high level direction on land use, built form and density ranges”, which I note are not provided.
 An aerial look at the west side of the city with Hamilton Harbour in the background. However, in many instances, the document strays from this intent and as noted numerous times above, is lacking in critical information, at other times it delves into the minutiae of development issues, that are better left for such documents as a site specific zoning bylaw or a site plan guideline.
Sometimes a little dose of sarcasm is needed to make a point. Mammel pointed out that the level of detail in an OP could render an application out of conformity, and with no recourse to amend or appeal, given the current situation we are in, details such as site lighting, fencing and loading dock locations, are “I hope we can all agree, not Official Plan level issues.
The reality said Mammel is that “we can’t be supportive of this OP, because it doesn’t provide the information our members need to do business here, to understand what will be required of them.
 Andrew Smith the planner tasked with the writing of the Official Plan that is currently in draft form. The time line they have given Smith is seen as far too tight. Staff require more time to put together a fulsome document. But there seems to be a systemic problem here – the approach and timelines currently being applied to all significant changes being undertaken by the Planning Dept. It is frankly too rushed.
We have respectfully asked for details, rationale, and justification through many of these processes, including the Official Plan. But time hasn’t allowed, and the formal documents are rushing forward. The concern is this: whether it be the OP, concepts for Mobility Hubs, or any other document introduced to the public, the public perceives it to already have that substantiation and justification complete and available. And it isn’t.
“We are asked to comment and consult, yet the information we require to do a proper job isn’t available to us. It puts us in a very difficult position. And it is making our members feel that their input and comments are irrelevant – because the end product is made public before that background information can be reviewed and vetted.”
In summary, “while we applaud the efforts to have a new Official Plan that meets the needs of all parties, this isn’t it. We are not able to support a document that has the significant gaps and concerns this one currently does.”
Mammel is pleased that there is going to be a second draft – “today is the first time I heard that – we’d previously been told the next step is intended to be the final document”
The only firm date is that the final version is to be approved is November 28th.
Not only is the HHHBA not prepared to support the OP as it stands – she advised council that, her association would appeal the plan unless considerable amendments are made in advance of it being approved by this committee and council.
That would be a line drawn in the sand.
By Staff
September 8th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The kids figured out Social Media years ago – our Regional Chair has decided this is a train he can now climb aboard.
Regional Chair Gary Carr wants people to know that he is out there and available and wants to hear from you.
 Connect with me on social media
Learn about Regional initiatives and discover events in your community when you connect with me on social media. Receive timely updates on Council’s work as I provide an inside perspective on how our projects reflect resident priorities.
You can find me on the following channels:
Twitter: @garycarrhalton
Facebook: gary.carr.50
LinkedIn: garycarrhalton
You can also share your thoughts and feedback by emailing gary.carr@halton.ca. I look forward to connecting with you—by working together, we help keep Halton a great place to live, work, raise a family and retire.
By Pepper Parr
September 8th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
There isn’t going to be just the one Administrative Review – there will be separate reviews for each of the two high schools that took exception to the Board of Education to close them.
A response from the Ministry said they have “approved two separate requests for administrative reviews of the Halton DSB’s Burlington Secondary Program and Pupil Accommodation Review (PAR) involving Robert Bateman High School and Lester B. Pearson High School.
“The ministry reviewed the requests and determined that both met the criteria for the appointment of a facilitator to undertake an administrative review.
 Pearson was at risk from the very beginning. They further advised that the “selection process for the facilitator to lead this review is underway and the successful candidate will be appointed as soon as possible. Once appointed, the ministry informs the lead petitioner and the board.
“The facilitator will be focused on reviewing the board’s accommodation review process and its consistency with the board’s accommodation review policy. Upon selection, it will be up to the facilitator to determine the overall course and structure of the review.
Timelines will depend on the circumstances in each review and the findings of the reviewers.
 Bateman high school had a very tough time overcoming the time they lost during the early stages of the PAR – Program Accommodation Review. They had a strong story – it just wasn’t being told. Sources within the Board of Education said that their role is to comply with the direction from the facilitator and that from past experience that person is usually wither a former Director of Education or a lawyer with experience in administrative law.
There are no public hearings – the facilitator will meet with the parent group from each school and the appropriate people at the Board level.
The facilitator chosen has a considerable amount of leeway in deciding how to proceed.
We are told that these reviews “tend to be paper heavy.
The report prepared usually has two parts: A recommendation as to what if any action should be taken and some commentary on what the facilitator believes actually happened.
One of the concerns coming out of the Board of Education is that the Ministry of Education may be dealing with bigger issues and that the Halton matter might get tangled up in those political machinations.
 Few parents feel the Burlington MPP Eleanor McMahon did all that much to advance their cause – something that might be regretted come next June. The Ministry has put a pause on any future PAR’s until there is an internal review of that process which is seen as “fundamentally flawed”. The pause was put in place 22 days after the Halton decision was made.
The timing of the Administrative Reviews could become a concern with a provincial election due in June.
The last Administrative Review hat Halton had to deal with was referred to as a “truncated” event which took just the months.
The Burlington situation is not going to get resolved in two months – six to eight is seen as the more likely time frame which gets perilously close to the election date.
The Ministry might choose to let the election take place and then deliver whatever there is going to be in the way of a recommendation.
 Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne speaks at the hearings into the gas plant cancellations at Queen’s Park in Toronto on December 3, 2013. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Mark Blinch There are parents that like that idea – hoping they will be able to impact the provincial election in June to change the provincial member for Burlington – which is a very wild stretch of imagination – except that the Premier is in the middle of two rather messy criminal trials that have the potential to change the way the wind blows.
There are parents who believe that if a decision can be put off until the municipal election in October of 2018 they can elect different trustees who could theoretically reverse the decision.
There are people who have already decided to contest several of the Board of Trustee seats.
Sticky wickets indeed.
 By Staff
September 7th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
What did we think of this one?
 Not much – we don’t deal with the TD Bank – we didn’t open the pdf either.
Here is what we got:
This Consent to Electronic Delivery of Documents applies to the electronic delivery to you of the statements and other important eDocuments for the accounts listed within your (Web Business Banking) and any extension, renewal, amendment and replacement of any of these accounts.
You must access our Digital Banking Service to review eDocuments. Open the attached eDocument and follow the instructions to access our Web Business Banking Service.
Failure to consent to the electronic delivery of the eDocuments as described in our Digital Banking Service will revoke your access to TD Commercial Banking.
Note: eDocuments are available in Portable Document Format (PDF) and can only be viewed using Adobe Acrobat Reader Software.
We thank you and appreciate your prompt response.
Relationship Manager; The Toronto-Dominion Bank
Remember and follow the rule – If in doubt, don’t. And ask questions.
The Gazette will be doing a feature length article on the how email like this gets sent to you. Someone bought your email address and sends you email they think will pull you into their web.
 By Staff
September 6, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The Halton Regional Police have arrested a 52 year old Burlington man for indecent act.
 The 52 year old man is alleged to have exposed himself while shopping at the Piggymart convenience store located at 2290 Lakeshore Road West, Oakville, on August 23, 2017.
The Halton Regional Police would like to thank the public for their assistance in identifying the suspect.
Tips can be forwarded to Crime Stoppers; “See Something, Hear Something, Say Something” at 1-800-222-8477 (TIPS), through the web at www.crimestoppers.ca or by texting “Tip201” with your message to 274637 (crimes).
No names released – interesting.
Pepper Parr
September 6, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
It was one of those Receive and File reports – it was hundreds of pages long and it focused on the new Official Plan that is being created by the Planning department with input from anyone in the city who has a comment.
The Tuesday meeting was time for the building industry to speak along with Burlington’s Sustainability Committee that is made up of citizens who advise city Council.
The time frames that have been put in place are extremely tight; the planners want city council to pass whatever the Official Plan is going to be done by the end of November.
The development industry thinks there is some information that should be in the document – specifically, what the population of the city is going to be and where those people are to be housed.
The population of the city is determined by the province – and they are telling us that Burlington has to grow. The province gives the Regional government a number – the Region decides how that number is going to be divided between Burlington, Oakville, Milton and Halton Hills.
Region Official Plan allocates 8,086 new units to be achieved in the built-up area of Burlington over the 2017 to 2031 period. The breakdown is 2,758 new units over the 2017 to 2021 period, 2,669 new units over the 2022 to 2026 period and 2,659 units over the 2027 to 2031 period
 This is where growth can take place in the downtown core.. The development community thinks that growth should take place along Brant street. In the Adi Development report “Staff recognized that the Urban Growth Centre needs to accommodate a total of 22,800 people and jobs by 2031 in order to reach the minimum target set out by the Growth Plan.”
The staff report goes on to say that: “When the estimated 15,417 residents in the Urban Growth Centre as of 2013 are added to the 736 anticipated residents and 702 estimated jobs resulting from recently approved and upcoming developments, the estimated number of people and jobs in the Urban Growth Centre within the next several years is 16,855.
This figure is 5,945 short of the minimum density target. (22,800 – 16,885 = 5,945)
The Places to Grow Growth Plan was put in place ten years ago. Planning staff calculates that, with developments in the approval pipeline included, the Urban Growth is approaching 74% of the minimum density target for 2031.
If we divide the approximate 5,945 people and jobs by the 17 years remaining to reach the target of 22,800 we get an average annual target of approximately 350 people and or jobs per year that will have to be created for each of the 17 years remaining between now and 2031.
Some members of city council will tell you that we are at the 75% point of that growth target. Some in the development community say the number is at the 66% level.
With the need to grow very clear the developers are beavering away at what they do – building housing. What kind of housing – not single family detached homes – the city managers claims we aren’t going to see a net increase in single family dwellings – for a number of reasons.
One – we have no more land on which to build and the cost of those homes is getting to be well beyond the ability of young families to be able to afford.
 Upper Middle Road looking east towards Burloak – prime commercial. No takers. Developer wants some of the land converted to residential use. Add to that the – the tussle over land in the city that is zoned employment lands which the developers want to build houses on. That stretch of land along upper middle Road where it curves into Burloak is seen as land that should have residential land.
If not single family detached homes then apartments or condominiums.
Mark Bales, one of the decision makers at Carriage Gate, the company that is currently building the Berkeley at the corner of Maria and John street where there 17 storey condominium, is part of a development that is to include a parking garage and Medical Centre.
Bales told council that Carriage Gate wanted to support the draft Official Plan but couldn’t do so because it wasn’t complete enough.
 Graphic of the downtown core boundaries. City Council recognizes that new growth is to be directed to a series of nodes (especially the Downtown) and along important transportation corridors within the Built-Up area.
The new Draft Official Plan is in many respects a characteristic urban structure plan with growth being focused to a series of nodes that are knit together by connecting corridors. The success of the plan will be contingent upon the ability of the Urban Growth Centre, the other mobility hubs and transportation corridors to accommodate assigned amounts of growth by 2031. “We agree with this focus” said Bales, but the draft of the Official Plan fails to propose effective growth management strategies and the policy framework necessary to bring the Plan to life.
Bales added that the draft was released in March and that Carriage Gate has submitted comments. Staff said we would receive responses yet to-date we have not received a response, said Bales.
During the council meeting the planers did say that answers would be forthcoming.
 Mark Bales Bales wants to see a plan that does more than simply paint a pretty picture of what the City might generally like to achieve. He said: “Municipalities are required to encourage and facilitate residential intensification.”
For Bales and other delegations the draft of the Official Plan fails to assign population and employment distribution targets to each of the Mobility Hubs and the Downtown Urban Growth Centre in particular.
“No one can figure out how much of what is intended to go where. Even if we knew, the guts in the Plan to make it happen are missing” said Bales.
“Without assigned population and employment targets for each of the mobility hubs and the corridors, it is impossible to determine whether or not the underlying principles and policies of the Plan are appropriate or if success can be reasonably achieved.”
Bales went on: “We recognize that redevelopment and intensification projects within existing urban areas can be some of the most challenging that a city will experience. This is precisely the reason that new planning policies must focus on matters of “fit” and not sameness. “The current Draft Official Plan fails in this regard” he said.
“To be successful, the new Official Plan must not only provide clear policy directions for new development but must also foster an environment that will bring it to life.”
Bales brought to the attention of council that city planners said at a recent Ontario Municipal Board hearing that Burlington is 66 percent of the way towards meeting its required minimum target for 2031. Staff also confirmed that the existing planning policies for the Downtown will not enable the City to reach its required minimum population and employment targets by 2031.
Ward 2 Councillor Meed Ward said she believed the city has “blown past” what it needs to have achieved in terms of meeting the 2031 target.
Bales is concerned that the city’s incorrect messaging continues and that the city’s additional growth requirements have yet to be presented to Council and the public.
“You may ask why this is so important” said Bales. “It is important because not only are appropriate planning policies required for the Downtown, but these policies may impact other Official Plan policies and those being developed for other mobility hubs, nodes and corridors – in other words, the policy framework being prepared for the entire Plan may be flawed.”
Flawed or not – the construction of the high rise in the downtown core is well underway. Set out below are the projects underway,before the planners or in front of the OMB.
 The Bridgewater development is under construction – it is a done deal approved in 1995.  The Berkeley is under construction. Another done deal.  421 Brant – in the hands of the planners who will issue a report in the near future.  The Nautique – the OMB hearing has taken place – report might be seen before the end of the year. Council and the planners appear to be prepared to settle for an 11 storey structure – developer wanted 28. Bales made reference to a consulting report Carriage Gate had done that sets out some mind boggling numbers. The Gazette will report in detail on that document. To give you a sense as to what it had to say Bales told council the report concludes that within the Built-Up area, 45 new tall buildings are required between now and 2031 with 23 of those to be located within the Urban Growth Centre/the Downtown.
To put this into perspective, said Bales, the residential housing supply in the Downtown is required to expand by over 40% between now and 2031.
The report adds that “In addition, we are challenged to find any locations in the Urban Growth Centre that are currently designated and zoned to reasonably accommodate this scale of redevelopment.”
23 new tall buildings – you can guess what that is going to do to the look and feel of Burlington.
Looks like an election issue to us.
 By Pepper Parr
September 6th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Ken, an intelligent citizen who comments in the Gazette from time to time, made an interesting comment earlier this week.
Burlington Citizens are in charge of their future, he said. “If the people of Burlington want to build to accommodate more people then let’s see how the voting goes in 2018.”
That election is more than a year away but some of the ducks are already being lined up.
 Cute – why doesn’t the man just come out and say that on May 1, 2018 he expect to file nomination papers. There are three who covet the Mayor’s chain of office: The current occupant who has said in a very coy way that he is in the race.
Mike Wallace has been telling anyone who will give him 15 seconds of their time that he too is in the race.
And we assume the ward 2 council member Marianne Meed Ward is still in the race. She was running for Mayor when she ran in 2010. Meed Ward had run previously in Ward 1 against Councillor Craven.
Mike Wallace was a member of council for a number of years and expected to be the Mayoral candidate but found himself in a federal election where he won and was off to Ottawa.
Greg Woodruff, an Aldershot resident, has run some numbers based on the votes he got when he ran against Regional Chair Gary Carr and figured out that he has a chance of winning. Will he toss his hat in the ring? Who knows?
 Meed Ward loves her job; she revels in pulling people together. During her first term of office she spent her annual postage allotment in a couple of months – she was mailing everything to almost everyone. At the Mayoral level there is an interesting situation. Meed Ward has her tribe’ they will stand by her – the question is – does she have enough people in the other five wards that will be with her?. If she has – and she seems to believe she does – then the question becomes this – is her vote bigger than what Wallace and the Mayor have to split?
The Meed Ward vote is not going to go to either Wallace or the Mayor. Those two will have to share what Meed Ward doesn’t get.
 The Mayor spent the night of the federal election watching he vote come in at Mike Wallace’s headquarters. Mike must feel that he can pull in more of the vote that Meed Ward doesn’t get than the Mayor can.
 Wallace congratulating Gould on her defeating him for the Burlington federal seat – it will be interesting if Wallace becomes Mayor and has to deal regularly with the woman that beat him. Mike has profile, he has been around a long time and he wants the job – close to desperately.
The Mayor chose to go the photo op route – he couldn’t sustain the approach his Chief of Staff Frank McKeough developed for him during his first term.
The Mayor has gone through four Staff Chief’s. He hasn’t delivered on any of his environmental issues – still no private tree bylaw – and he hasn’t been identified with an issue that the public is fully in support of. And he seems to have to cling to the New Street Road diet.
Meed Ward is described as “divisive” – she is focused. She knows where she stands and sticks by her decisions. There isn’t the understanding of the economics of land values that the job needs.
 Often, whenever ward 1 Councillor Marianne Meed Ward appears at events with the Mayor she sounds more “mayoral” than the man who wears the chain of office. Should she win her first two years will be hectic – she will want to do everything at the same time. Meed Ward believes she will be a great Mayor. Whether she is not will become evident in the third and fourth year of her first term.
At the council level – no one is going to beat Craven in Ward 1; Leah Reynolds was being primed for the ward 2 seat by Meed Ward but the fiasco with the texts sent between the two during the school closing debate might put a wrinkle in those plans
There is a credible candidate for ward 3 – the issue there is whether or not John Taylor is ready to retire. He has deep deep support in the community but 30 years is a long time. At some point the harness has to be put away – and if Taylor likes the look of the candidate he might decide to support the person and mentor him during the first term.
The potential candidate was raised in the ward and currently holds a very important job at another level of government.
 Jack Dennison the day he announced the sale of Cedar Spring. his health club operation. Ward 4? Can Dennison be beaten – Of course he can but not by a candidate who comes into the race late in the game and doesn’t have a team or the funding. Dennison has name recognition – some think the recognition is past its best before date.
Ward 5 – Sharman holds sway there and there doesn’t appear to be any one in the trenches prepared to do the work to take him on.
There is hope for a change in ward 6 – there is at least one very credible candidate who would do a superb job of representing the residents. Career options are a family issue there.
Do a head count at the council level: Craven, Dennison and Sharman are close to a given. If the right people are elected in wards 2, 3 and 6 – and Meed Ward is Mayor – Burlington will be a much different city.
We thought we saw it that way in 2014 and we were dead wrong. No predictions at this point – but the possibilities are intriguing.
Salt with Pepper is an opinion column written by the publisher.
By Staff
September 5th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
“The Halton District School Board received notification today from the Ministry of Education, granting Administrative Reviews of the Burlington Secondary School Program and Accommodation Review (PAR) undertaken by the Halton District School Board during the 2016-2017 school year. Requests for these reviews were submitted to the Ministry of Education by the Lester B. Pearson High School and the Robert Bateman High School communities.
“According to Ministry Guidelines, an administrative review is a process by which an independent, impartial facilitator reviews that the Board has followed it’s pupil accommodation review policy. An administrative review is not an assessment of the decisions made by the Board of Trustees. In the near future, a facilitator will be appointed by the Ministry of Education.
 Halton Director of Education Stuart Miller “We welcome an independent review of our process,” says Stuart Miller, Director of Education for the Halton District School Board. “Having an independent third party review of our Program and Accommodation Review Policy and the Burlington PAR ensures that we have followed our processes and provides an opportunity to address community concerns. It is important for the HDSB, the community and the Ministry of Education that the process is thoroughly examined and reviewed.
“During this review period, the Halton District School Board will continue to keep student needs at the forefront. As such, we will continue to collaboratively plan for and implement the Board’s decisions made in June 2017. We will, however, be cognizant of minimizing the expenditures of the implementation during the review process.”
What does this mean?
It does not mean that the decision to close two of the seven high schools in the city is now reversed.
The review is a review of the process that was used and followed by the Board. One of the decisions could be a requirement that the Board do the PAR all over again because the view of the facilitator is that the process was badly flawed.
 Will the 14 members of the PAR get called back to do the job all over again? Nope. That is a stretch but it has happened to Halton before. Given that the province has sort of admitted that the new PAR process, which was revised considerably, has some serious flaws there is an outside chance that the facilitator might send everyone back to square one.
There may be a number of people asking that they not rush into this and give some time to elect some new trustees.
What the two parent groups now have to do is lobby effectively at several levels.
Related news story:
Director of Education has been through a review before.
By Pepper Parr
September 5th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
“We are done!”, said the city manager.
 City manager James Ridge In addressing the Planning and Development Committee City manager James Ridge said that in his talks with people he points out three facts that Burlington is up against.
The city is not only going to grow – it has to grow- “we are mandated to do that” he said.
We are looking at between 15,000 and 18,000 new people every decade.
There is not going to be any net new supply of single family homes
And there are not going to be any new roads built for the next hundred years.
Ridge then said that this could put an additional 50,000 cars on the existing roads at some point – and if that happen “We are done!”
Ridge seldom gets excited about anything – but there was a sense of foreboding in his voice.
 Even in their wildest imaginations – the Alton family would never have thought those farm fields would look like this – imagine the increase in value. He could see the apocalypse coming and he knew what the impact would be – but he wasn’t sure that the public he has to deal with can see or wants to see what our future as a city is going to look like.
Ridge was speaking at meeting that had more than 250 pages of material to wade through.
Much more to write about.
Question we have is: Is there a difference between “we are done” and “we are toast” and if there is which is the more serious?
Sounded like done to me.
By Staff
September 5th 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
On Sunday September 3rd 2017 shortly after 2:00 AM, police were called to the Maria and Elizabeth intersection in response to a report of a stabbing.
On arrival, police located a 23-year old male victim from Burlington with a laceration to his left bicep. The victim went to Joseph Brant Hospital where he received 10 stitches to close the wound.
Police learned that the victim and his girlfriend were walking home after having attended a downtown bar when they came across a group of 3-4 males and a female.
One of the males was alleged to have made an insulting remark to the victim which started a fight between the victim and the group of males.
During the fight, the victim was stabbed by one of the males who brandished what was described as a black handled knife.
The only descriptions at this time are that the males were all white in their twenties and the female was white with long dark hair, thin build and a half or full sleeve tattoo.
Police are asking for anyone with information to contact D/Cst. Erin Toth of the Burlington Criminal Investigations Bureau at 905-825-4747 Ext. 2313 or Crime Stoppers “See something, Hear something, Say something” at 1-800-222-8477 (TIPS, through the web at www.haltoncrimestoppers.ca or by texting “Tip 201” with your message to 274637 (crimes).
By Staff
September 5th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
For the most part the students who rely on school buses to get them to the class worked smoothly.
 The consortium that runs the school bus service for the two school boards reports that: “The vast majority of delays this morning were caused by high traffic around schools, construction and some mechanical issues with buses which is typical for the first few days in September.
“Minimal delays were a result of school bus drivers not being available.
“Thirteen of the of HSTS’s 860 runs, which include runs for both the Halton District School Board and the Halton Catholic District School Board, that were late this morning (approximately 1.5 %) could be attributed to a shortage of school bus drivers. ”
 By Pepper Parr
September 5th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The Art Gallery of Burlington, in collaboration with Craft Ontario, are presenting the first Canadian Craft Biennial. It is open now and will run until October 29, 2017. The launch of this inaugural event during Canada’s 150th anniversary will serve as a spotlight to celebrate and educate on the importance of contemporary craft throughout Canada’s diverse history and future. Under the theme Can Craft? Craft Can! the Biennial will explore What and Who is ‘Canadian Craft’?; the Biennial will analyze ideas regarding the agency of craft.
 This piece needs a slow look – see if you can see what the artists wants you to see. The Opening Celebrations are being held on Friday, September 15, 2017; 6:00pm-9:00pm in the Lee-Chin Family Gallery at the AGB
This Biennial is made up of several events:
 A Craft Symposium taking place on Friday, September 15 (Holiday Inn, Burlington) & Saturday, September 16 (OCAD University, Toronto)
Eleven sessions covering a variety of themes and approaches will be presented by forty-four scholars and makers from around the world.
Professional Ceramics Workshop being given by Anton Reijnders.
September 11-14, 2017; 9:00am-5:00pm/day
This event is open to professional ceramists only. Participation is closed at this point. Prospective participants were asked to submit a one-page letter of interest outlining what they intend to gain from their experience.
Exhibitions
 National Craft Exhibition: Can Craft? Craft Can!; August 19-October 29, 2017
Bringing together seventy makers from across Canada, Can Craft? Craft Can! will present works in glass, ceramics, wood, metal and fibre that address three sub-themes exploring ideas of Identity, Sustainability and Materiality.
Craft Ontario Provincial Exhibition: Nothing is Newer than Tradition; August 19-October 29, 2017
Craft Ontario’s Nothing is Newer than Tradition will present the work of emerging Ontario makers that reflect a dedicated engagement with specialized skills and materials. The exhibition will explore how craft materials, tools and processes are creatively reiterated through the hands of a new generation of makers.
 Mason jars put to a different use. AGB Provincial Exhibition – Setting Ontario’s Table: Once Upon a Time; August 19-December 31, 2017
Drawing from the Art Gallery of Burlington’s Permanent Collection of Contemporary Canadian Ceramics, Once Upon a Time will present a special exhibition exploring functional ware from Ontario ceramists. Each artist selected will be represented through both a piece from their early years, juxtaposed against a recent work to explore the progression in their practice.
 Anton Reijnders International Ceramic Exhibition – Anton Reijnders; September 9-October 29, 2017
Dutch ceramist Anton Reijnders will present his new work in a solo exhibition. Anton Reijnders graduated at the Fine Art Academy in Hertogenbosh in 1981. He participated in exhibitions throughout the world and contributed to conferences and symposia and has given lectures in Europe, Asia, Australia and the USA. He has contributed to the creation of what in 1991 was to become the European Ceramic Work Center (EKWC)—Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands.
He has been the visiting professor at the New York State College of Ceramics at Alfred University three times.
By Pepper Parr
September 5th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The debate on the construction of a 26 storey mixed-use development at the corner of John and Brant Street opposite city hall is getting tied up in the debate over the Grow Bold discussions that are ongoing.
There is a meeting Thursday evening at the AGB, that will look at the public reaction to the plans for what gets done with the downtown mobility hub.
The city prepares the 3D renderings as part of its engaging the citizen’s program. The 3D renderings give viewers a sense as to what a community would look like when a development is completed.
The view is close to what you would expect from a drone that was flown over a community. It will take several viewings to see what is being proposed.
Click for a fascinating view of what is being proposed.
 By Pepper Parr
September 3, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Construction cranes in the downtown core – a welcome sign of growth to some, and intensification that isn’t welcome to others.
The provincial government has said we are going to grow and that the population of Burlington is going to rise – those are facts that we have to live with.
While construction crews put rebar in place and pour concrete the citizens gather in meetings across the city to give their views on the Grow BOLD initiative the city has undertaken to create four mobility hubs in the city around which the growth is to be contained.
There is a public that is concerned about what is going to happen to their community and a Mayor who does his best to soothe the concerns and explain that intensification will only impact 5% of the city.
 In the meantime the Bridgewater project rises out of the ground – a 22 story condominium; an 8 story hotel and a seven storey condominium tucked in behind the hotel – and the Berkeley on John Street become visible as it rises to the 28 storey height that was permitted.
That John Street construction site is to include a public garage and a medical centre – they will follow the construction of the condominium.
 Medica One or the Carriage Gate project – pick the name you like best – will go up at the top of John Street and consist of a medical offices building, an above ground garage and an apartment/condo complex. It will bring significant change to the intersection and drive redevelopment of the plaza to the immediate north, A transit hub a couple of blocks to the south then makes a lot of sense. This rendering is from the Caroline – Elizabeth Street intersection. The city expected all three projects to rise at the same time – and were worried enough about the construction actually taking place that they had the developer commit to coughing up $300,000 if the project doesn’t proceed by March of 2020.
City hall does appear to fully appreciate the market forces the developer has to contend with.
 The utility poles will disappear – all the cable will be underground. Getting that decision in place was no simple matter.  Maria Street, currently closed to the public, will be the entrance to the Berkley condominium. Carriage Gate, the developer, has had their share of grief with both the city and Burlington Hydro over the existence of utility poles on John Street. A hydro line had to be pulled in from Lakeshore Road to the site – an expensive job. There was much discussion over whether or not all the hydro wires would be underground.
The developer was prepared to pay for the cost of burying the cable in front of their project but wasn’t prepared to pay for the cost of burying the cable for every foot of the distance from Lakeshore Road.
And they didn’t like the price for doing the work that Burlington Hydro had put on the table.
It’s getting resolved – with the developer trying hard to keep the lawyers out of the room.
When completed John Street will take on a much different look. Other developers have already begun to acquire and assemble property on the street.
As construction continues the planners are looking for ways to improve the look of the rest of the street and bring more activity to the area.
There are parts of John Street that are really the back alley of some of the properties on Brant Street – the top end of John Street isn’t even a street – it is designated a lane-way that leads to a supermarket.
 By Pepper Parr
September 3, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Households throughout the city begin to get into the routines that are part of getting the kids back into the classrooms.
How well did they do last year and how can parents help their children improve? Just how did your child do last year is a question some parents don’t really know.
 Are the students in the Halton Region measuring up to the needed standard? EQAO – the acronym for the Education Quality and Accountability Office has published the provincial-level results of the primary- and junior-division 2016–2017 Assessments of Reading, Writing and Mathematics written by students in Grades 3 and 6, and of the Grade 9 Assessment of Mathematics.
For the second year in a row, 50% of Grade 6 students met the provincial standard in math. Among Grade 3 students, 62% met the provincial standard—a one-percentage-point decrease since last year.
Not quite sure why that 50% seems acceptable – the number has to be a lot closer to 70% if those students are going to get jobs in the world they are going into.
The breakdown of the numbers by Board of Education get released September 20th – we are told by a source that should know that Halton has done very well – which we hope doesn’t get translated into the complacency that tends to prevail in this part of the world.
 Results at a glance – are they good enough? Are the best we can do? Elementary school reading results for Grade 3 students have increased to 74%, an increase of two percentage points since last year, and reading results for Grade 6 students have remained at 81% for the second year in a row.
Those are good numbers; the minimal decline in writing at the elementary level should be noted and then produce different ways to keep the number at the earlier levels.
Achievement results in writing at the elementary school level have declined since last year by one percentage point for both Grades 3 and 6, and stand at 73% and 79% respectively.
Eighty-three percent of Grade 9 students enrolled in the academic course were successful on the assessment, a result that is identical to last year.
Meanwhile, 44% of Grade 9 students enrolled in the applied math course were successful on the math assessment, marking a one-percentage-point decrease since last year, and continuing the trend over the last five years whereby less than half of students enrolled in the applied math course met the provincial standard.
Applied mathematics are critical for many of the jobs that are going to solve the problem we have as a society. The academic course is producing the needed results – someone wants to be looking at what needs to be done at the applied level.
Some facts to worry about and the focus on finding solutions:
In math at the elementary level, 62% (82 928) of Grade 3 students met the provincial standard, compared to the 67% who did on the 2013 assessment. Of Grade 6 students, 50% (64 686) met the provincial math standard, compared to the 57% who did on the 2013 assessment.
Results from EQAO’s student questionnaire show that a large number of students in Grades 3 and 6 (77%) are motivated to do their best when they undertake math activities in class. Despite this high motivation, only 56% of Grade 3 students and 53% of Grade 6 students believe they are good at math. It is encouraging that motivation remains high, now to translate that into better results.
The gap between motivation and results suggests different approaches might be needed by dthe teachers.
The majority of students who had not met the math standard in Grade 3, but who were able to meet it in Grade 6, carried that success forward into Grade 9.
In math at the secondary level, 83% (80 350) of Grade 9 students enrolled in the academic math course met the provincial standard, compared to the 84% who did on the 2013 assessment. Of Grade 9 students enrolled in the applied math course, 44% (15 321) met the standard, the same percentage of students who did in 2013.
In elementary-school reading, 74% (93 130) of Grade 3 students met the provincial standard, compared to the 68% who did in 2013. Of Grade 6 students, 81% (106 135) met the provincial reading standard for the second year in a row, compared to the 77% who did on the 2013 assessment.
In elementary-school writing, 73% (92 372) of Grade 3 students met the provincial writing standard, compared to the 77% who did in 2013. Of Grade 6 students, 79% (103 450) met the provincial writing standard, up from 76% in 2013.
EQAO is an independent agency that creates and administers large-scale assessments to measure Ontario students’ achievement in reading, writing and math at key stages of their education. All EQAO assessments are developed by Ontario educators to align with The Ontario Curriculum.
 Some of the conclusions on the grade 9 literacy testing made by the EQAO researchers The assessments evaluate student achievement objectively and in relation to a common provincial standard. EQAO is undertaking a multi-year project to move the provincial assessments online.
EQAO provides results to each student who writes an assessment. Its personalized reports help support individual student learning. The agency provides schools and school boards with detailed reports about their students’ achievement, as well as contextual, attitudinal and behavioural information from questionnaires, in an interactive online reporting tool. These data are used to improve school programming and classroom instruction.
EQAO also reports the results of the provincial assessments publicly. This helps keep the public education system accountable to taxpayers.
|
|
