 By Deby Morrison,
November 390th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
It is unacceptable to be rushing this Official Plan through Development and Committee tonight to head to Council for a vote when the public has been given 14 days to comment on such major and drastic changes to the future of this City. Defer the approval of the Official Plan to June, 2018. Defer approval of the Downtown Mobility Hub precinct plan and Official Plan policies until June, 2018.
 The Official Plan was released November 9, 2017 to the public, an email went out Nov 13/17 and the public was given 14 days to Nov 27/17 to comment. After only 14 days, why is this plan being considered today, November 30, 2017, at a Planning & Development committee meeting to be sent to Council for a vote? Noted, there were three public open house presentations of this plan from November 16 to 20th, 2017, 4 days, during which time I was out of the Country; I am sure that I am not alone in this situation. Many Burlington residents are still unaware that the Official Plan has been released.
This Plan is recommending drastic changes to the City and is going to forever change the landscape and culture of Burlington and our Downtown. This should not be rushed to Council prior to a specific, detailed design of the Downtown Core has been established and further public consultation and discussion. I haven’t had time to review the entire report, but I do not agree with raising heights to 17 to 25 storeys from 4 to 8 storeys in entire precincts and changing precinct borders without a more refined, detailed design of the Downtown Core.
 The fight is for what kind of growth there will be on Brant Street – the spine of the Downtown core. I am pro development, but I am NOT pro development of a canyon of 25 storey condo buildings up the entire length of Brant Street. What a sure way to kill the Downtown core for people and entrepreneurial business and encourage car traffic. What is being proposed would create a most unfriendly environment for people and create a congested traffic mess. This City is going to end up with what King Street in Toronto has become.
Toronto is spending millions trying to figure out how to end the daily traffic gridlock and bring people back to King Street at night. We have history and lessons close by to draw from, why would we do this to our Downtown Core? Who is benefiting from this type of Development and why are we in such a rush to move forward in this manner?
I attended many of the public sessions on developing the new official plan and the grow bold initiatives and was left with the impression that the majority of residents did not support this level of increased height and density in the core. The City is on target to meet their intensification targets of 200 people/jobs per hectare as we are already at 174 jobs/hectare, without this level of intensification in the Core.
It would be irresponsible to change these zoning laws without having a Downtown Design, Transit, Traffic and Infrastructure Plans in place. The traffic and construction time and effect of these buildings will gridlock the downtown in the near term and forever be a detriment to the appeal and draw to our downtown core. Any successful City needs a successful Downtown.
 Proposed Downtown Core precinct Making zoning law changes for Developers over these past years has led Developers to overpay for downtown properties as they gambled on whether or not they would be able to build 23 storeys vs. the zoned 4 to 8 storeys. These Developers have allowed the Downtown Core to become somewhat shoddy as they have not kept their properties in good repair nor have they allowed entrepreneurial business owners to sign long term leases. Developers wanted to be ready to go when “the height was right”. Should Developers be rewarded for these actions; driving up property prices and encouraging decaying property conditions. Why should the residents of the City have to pay the price because Developers are lamenting that they can’t make a profit on 4 to 8 storeys as a direct result of their own decision to overpay for property. Should Developers be driving the design and future of our Downtown Core? Or should the citizens of Burlington be the driving force behind the design of our Downtown?
A wonderful Downtown ‘culture’ has been emerging the past few years with interesting entrepreneurial businesses bringing residents and tourists alike to our Downtown Core. Kellys, a major draw for residents & young people from far and wide, Centro Garden Store & their Sunday Farmer’s market & Maker’s Markets, Tamp Coffee, a major meeting hub for business & residents, the Burro, draws a younger crowd from far and wide, just to name a few and none of these businesses will survive the higher rents these new high rise condos bring.
In fact, Kellys has been given their walking papers by a Developer, Centro is slated for a 17 storey development and we won’t get these businesses back. We should be nurturing and encouraging these business owners, as against all odds, they were building a culture and environment that was drawing young people, residents and tourists to the core. If there’s any doubt about that just look at the current businesses at ground level in the current high rise condo towers: real estate, bank, mortgage, franchise, medical, empty; absolutely no draw or culture to be found.
Sometimes what’s in the buildings is more important than the buildings and we have an opportunity to foster and create that environment in our City. Part of the Downtown Core should be developed into an area where these businesses can flourish, perhaps a Pedestrian Promenade. This should be designed prior to any change in the Official Plan. We only have one Downtown Core, there is no where else in our City for these businesses to relocate or this type of Pedestrian friendly area to be developed. I’m sure if this type of project was tendered to Developers, we’d see some wonderful plans.
We have a gem on the Lake, let’s be careful going forward and foster a thriving “Niagara-on-the-Lake” destination, not a “Toronto Queen’s Quay Nightmare” on the Lake.
I am pro development downtown, however, I am for reasonable, responsible development with a defined design plan prior to pushing forward.
Deby Morrison is a member of the Core Residents Association.
 By Staff
November 30th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
At approximately 7:45 PM yesterday police responded to a report in the area of Surrey Lane and Warwick Drive of a large group of male youths fighting.
When officers arrived the youths had already dispersed however a vehicle leaving the area was stopped and two of the occupants reported being stabbed during the fight. Both were transported to the Hamilton General Hospital by ambulance. The extent of their injuries is not yet known however they are not believed to be life threatening.
A third youth was located at the Joseph Brant Hospital where he was being treated for a cut to his right arm that occurred during the same fight.
Investigators were able to identify and arrest a 17-year-old male youth responsible for the stabbings. This youth cannot be identified because of his age. He was held for bail charged with the following offences:
• Aggravated assault
• Carry concealed weapon
• Possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose
• Assault with a weapon (Two counts)
• Breach of undertaking
Anyone with information regarding this incident is asked to contact Detective Phil Vandenbeukel of the Burlington Criminal Investigations Bureau at 905-825-4747 ext. 2343 . Tips can also be submitted to Crime Stoppers “See something, Hear something, Say something” at 1-800-222-8477 (TIPS), through the web at www.haltoncrimestoppers.ca, or by texting “Tip201” with your message to 274637 (crimes).
 By Staff
November 30th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
We appear to have attributed a comment made by Liz Benneian to John Was in the copy of the material from the Facebook page. Mr. Was is offended and has asked that we remove the comment attributed to him. He has asked for an apology – Sorry John – we certainly would not have you on the side of those who want to do something for the Trumpeter Swans
There are almost as many opinions on the usefulness of Facebook as there are people using the site. As a society we are still struggling with how to use it effectively, fairly and legally – without doing any harm. The Americans are still grappling with how the Russians intruded on their most recent presidential election.
Burlington is finding that its citizens have taken to Facebook to get their story out. The current story is the dis-satisfaction with the way city hall is rolling out an Official Plan and determining where growth can take place and what kind of growth can take place in various parts of the city.
The approval of a 23 storey tower opposite city hall was what set things off. Ward 2 city Councillor Marianne Meed Ward putt her views on what is known as the 421 Brant development on Facebook. Liz Benneian a well known and respected environmental advocate commented on the Meed Ward posting – and then things took off.
 Liz Benneian November 29 at 9:26am
All the people commenting on this thread, if you want to have any power over these decisions, you need to organize. Share your emails with each other. Organize a community meeting. Support each other in getting your views heard and delegating at Committee and then Council. Be prepared to be in it for the long-term. Organization and persistence are the key to having an impact.
Comments flowed in. If there was ever any doubt in your mind that social media works read on, and on – and on.
Phillip Wooster I don’t agree with this intensification by adding numerous tall buildings in the downtown core which will destroy the character of Burlington as we know it. But the question must be asked, “Why are the politicians, special interests/developers, bureaucrats supporting this type of development when as Marianne has noted we get NOTHING in return.”
Pam Casey I would like to register to speak at the meeting but before I do register, I want assurance that I will not be booed at. I would like to express my view. Can you make that happen Marianne?
Deborah Jukes I have lived in Burlington ALL of my life in the core as a child, then to north and four years ago, right sized back to the core! Hearing about this plan makes me want to leave Burlington…. this plan angers and saddens me! It shows no respect for our history or the life style we aspired to when we talk about a walking community! Be careful City Council- you about to pave paradise!!!
Candice Carson
There have been a few posts like this providing a bit of an “FYI” to residents but as our ward representative can you please share with us what actions you have taken to advocate on our behalf? From what I can…See More
MizTracy Ann
Some of the buildings that will be replaced by this plan look like they should have heritage designations. Do they? If there are appropriate places for higher rise buildings in the downtown, couldn’t a requirement be that they be designed with retail space at ground level?
MizTracy Ann If we were to distribute and place small signs on our property stating our opposition to the intensification. What do residents feel would be a good message to put on the signs? One clear statement we could all display. Thoughts?
Liz Benneian
Sorry for butting in again. Lawn signs are nice but the very best way to advocate for what you want is to contact your Council members. Phone them, write them, email them. Sign up to have your say at the relevant Council or committee meeting. Show up a…See More
Larissa Fenn
Participants on this thread may also be interested in the relevant background: https://www.burlington.ca/…/ser…/Official-Plan-Review.asp
Lisa Kane
Do we need to register to attend the meeting, or it is just for speaking?
Mark Sheehan
This video is disturbing to say the least. So in essence, the City planners and the “Rogue 5” Councillors are basically planning to tear down every one of the city’s historic/character buildings that make up Burlington’s charm and heritage and replace …See More
Lisa Quondamatteo Is there any kind of petition I can sign Marianne?
Liz Benneian
My two cents again. Usually petitions mean very little to politicians. Call, write, email, show up at Council. Organize your community. Make this an election issue.
Phil Garner
Awful
Thomas C. Riddell
Burlington fine the way it we don’t want to be Toronto lakeshore
David G. Denis
I want to register my disapproval of these plans. What is going on with the City of Burlington? I planned to retire here after living here for 30 years but the gridlock and lack of a downtown is going to make me leave. Is this a high density property t…See More
Michelle Sallows Preyde
Every city NEEDS to maintain a quaint, downtown core if the want to attract tourists, both local folks who shop and eat downtown for the experience and out of town folks who want to experience Burlington.
Leslie Clanachan
Burlington was one of the few cities that voted in favour of keeping the OMB so that should tell you where there priorities are. For shame councillors. I can’t imagine any resident in Burlington thinking this is positive and responsible growth plan. Li…See More
Geraldine Armitage
I think the Council has gone absolutely MAD. I would like to speak but will have trouble keeping civil.
Enid Donaldson
What a terrible idea. I thought what they allowed up at upper middle and Appleby was bad enough.
Ron Dennis
Back in the 1960s, when I covered Toronto Township, (Now Mississauga) for The South Peel Weekly, they had a tall building-loving planner known as Highrise Harry (Petschar). Looks like his ghost is lurking in Burlington city hall.
Iain Stubley Someone must be getting something in return some nice brown envelopes full of $$$$ and trips overseas … very sad how can those in power be so detached?
Linda Yvonne Johnson
How many historical buildings are going to be knocked over for this?? People from Oakville, Mississauga, Hamilton, Stoney Creek, Grimsby and beyond come to Burlington for our waterfront and the ambiance that exists in the downtown core. All of this w…See More
Frances C Iuticone
BIG NO. I live in the core. Traffic is unbearable now. I had no idea. Thanks for the info. I’m sharing to everyone
Barbara Hitsman
This is just terrible! I sure hope the city doesn’t let this plan go ahead! These are some lovely charming buildings!!😩😩😩👎🏼👎🏼👎🏼
Marie Grenier Davis
The same is happening in Aldershot, concrete and more concrete tall buildings are part of the plan.
Citizens will gather at city hall this afternoon and this evening to listen to the Planner defend the plans for the Downtown Mobility Hub and then listen to the council debate.
By Staff
November 29th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The Halton Regional Police want to identify two individuals involved in several thefts that have occurred in Oakville and Burlington. The individuals have attended grocery stores and stolen wallets and purses from unattended shopping carts.
On November 3, 2017, the two suspects attended the Whole Foods grocery store, located at 301 Cornwall Road, Oakville. While the victim left her buggy unattended for a brief period, the unknown female suspect stole the victim’s wallet. The unknown male suspect appeared to be acting as a look-out while the female committed the theft.
 It takes place in seconds – she wasn’t looking – he was. On November, 26, 2017, the same two suspects attended the Metro grocery store, located at 1521 Rebecca Street, Oakville. During this incident, the suspects stole the victim’s purse while she left her shopping cart unattended. The suspects quickly fled the store after committing the theft.
On November 27, 2017, the suspects attended the Food Basics grocery store, located at 3365 Fairview Street, Burlington. During this incident, the suspects stole the victim’s purse as she attended a cooler to select a carton of milk. Once again, the suspects fled the store immediately after the theft.
During this busy Holiday Season, Halton Regional Police are reminding residents to keep a close eye on their purses and wallets. Residents should be aware of their surroundings and be alert for distraction type thefts when shopping in the grocery stores, malls and other retail business.
Residents are reminded to only carry the necessary identification such as Driver’s Licence or Health Card, and should try to minimize this potential loss by leaving their SIN card, birth certificate and passports securely at home.
If you become a victim of a purse or wallet theft please contact your financial services providers, cancel your cards and then call the Halton Regional Police to file a report.
Anyone with information regarding this incident is asked to contact Detective Constable Derek Gray of the 3 District Criminal Investigations Bureau at 905-825-4747 ext: 2344. Tips can also be submitted to Crime Stoppers “See something, Hear something, Say something” at 1-800-222-8477 (TIPS), through the web at www.haltoncrimestoppers.ca, or by texting “Tip201” with your message to 274637 (crimes).
 By Pepper Parr
November 29th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
We got a message from Kwab Ako-Adjei, the Senior Manager, Government Relations & Strategic Communications for the city – he reports directly to the city manager, James Ridge.
The message:
I want to bring your attention to an article published last week which indicated that a group of residents were “banned” from using a city hall room. The article went on to say that “banning seems to have become a bit of a practice at city hall…”
“I have spoken with city staff and no one is aware of a situation where residents were “banned.” Can you please provide further information on what took place, who was “banned,” and where they were “banned” from?”
 Someone at city hall said yes – then someone else said No. Kwab Ako-Adjei, the Senior Manager, Government Relations & Strategic Communications wants to know who they are. We got in touch with our source and asked for clarification and got a pretty blunt response. “No comment Pepper, I am not going to say a word. We don’t want anyone to get into trouble. And do not use my name.”
It took some effort to keep the person on the line to probe a little more. It “appears” that permission was given at one level but as the request moved up the food chain the Ok got turned into a no.
The word “banned” came the source – it was sent to us in writing.
Our source would not even mention which department at city hall they had talked with.
The source did say that the early conversations with city hall “were done in good faith”.
Many of the people involved with the Engaged Citizens of Burlington (ECoB) are fed up with city hall. They have had it with Council members that do not listen and they want staff to reflect what the citizens desire of their city.
We were asked recently – “Where do these people live?
Director of Transportation – Hamilton
City Clerk – Hamilton
Director of Finance – Milton
City Solicitor – outside of Burlington.
Director of Parks and Recreation – Oakville.
We are not sure any of the Director’s actually live in Burlington.
The city manager does live in Burlington – Aldershot actually.
City hall bureaucrats will tell you that they are professionals and that it is their skills and experience that matter.
Civic government is to a large degree city building. Hard to understand and respect the people you are serving if you are not amongst them.
Hard to have their kids playing with your kids, their kids in the same school yard as your kids giving them an identity with the city. Do any of the city manager’s Leadership Team belong to any of the service clubs?
The citizens of the city don’t ‘know’ the senior levels of government and in Burlington they don’t seem to trust them either.
Related news story:
By Greg Woodruff
November 29th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Burlington released it’s “official plan” recently; a 500 plus paged tome with a plan to pass it as quickly as possible. They may as well have called it “Hi-rises and traffic jams.” Believers in this plan have two precepts. 1) That they have found “good” and efficient ways for people to live. 2) It’s the government’s job to enforce it on the unwilling. The result will be a cost free infinite growth utopia. Here is the net effect of Burlington’s official plan:
 Greg Woodruff First it’s designed to make it difficult for future councils or citizens to limit the construction of high buildings almost anywhere. High-rises are encouraged in the “down town” in the “up town” (Appleby and Highway 5) around the Aldershot GO, Appleby GO, Burlington GO, Walkers GO (if province builds) and any “intensification zone” which is basically along any major road.
If you want to build higher then specified – don’t worry plenty of underlying “denser is better” principles are sprinkled through to allow you to win a OMB or tribunal at the provincial level. Placing new heights into the official plan this way effectively overwhelms the original zoning on thousands of properties by writ.
 Walking is going to be one of the options in the forthcoming Master Transportation Plan. Second it’s designed to create city wide grid lock. You can stay tuned for the “master transit plan”, but I can pretty much tell you what it says, “don’t drive anywhere.” Because if you do stupefying city wide gridlock will take place. The city’s solution will then mainly be to hector the population into busing, walking, biking or abandoning travel. Secondarily will be a push to remove parking around stores and GO stations (yes GO stations) with heroic investments into park benches, speed bumps, stop signs and traffic signaling. The theory being the faster the road system is unworkable the faster people will “come to their senses” and be hostages for city provided alternatives.
Third it bakes in the idea of “infinite sustainable growth”. Burlington is set on a vision to first looking like Vancouver, then Manhattan, then eventually like that episode of Star Trek where people were trying to escape population density via fatal disease. No limits or systems on when over building has occurred in an area. The formula for infinite cost free population growth has been found; people will just have to ration.
Even if this all seems great to you the manner in which this is going on should trouble us all deeply. You would think a city which represents it’s citizens should would want a long serious debate on all these plans.
Instead they are trying to rush this massive change through lest it become a long serious debate during the 2018 election. I remember this answer in 2014 when I ran; “The official plan is done” becomes the response when you question the judgement of those involved. That’s the purpose of the rush; to limit the scrutiny of the less involved citizen that might tune in for the 2018 election.
 East side of Brant Street weeks days before Christmas 2013. Not a lot of vibrancy here – not much height either. This city does not yet know what it wants. This is not an attempt to make Copenhagen or any other livable European city. Those places have mainly strict 6 floor limits and specific building specifications. The problem from a city planning overlord perspective is that those places can’t “grow forever.” At a certain density – that’s it. They don’t let you come back and bulldoze down the 6 floor buildings cut down all the trees put up high-rises, because that affects the livability of the city.
This official plan in not an attempt to create some higher form of density that enriches the lives of the population with choices. It not about creating sustainable green transportation options or there would be some concrete proposals to do that. It’s a just magic voodoo to allow infinite sustainable “cost free” growth to be the operational policy of the government. And we will be left with the problems when the snake oil salesmen have moved on to the next town.
Greg Woodruff is an Aldershot resident who comments frequently on city wide issues. He ran for the office of Regional Chair in 2014 and suggests aqt times that he will run for Mayor of Burlington in 2018
By Pepper Parr
November 29th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The condo set along Lakeshore Road may not want high rise on their turf – but there is no NIMBY response along Fairview where the residential properties are more limited.
 Looking from the west: tower 1 is nearing completion with tower 2 not far behind. They are changing the skyline of the city. The Molinaro Group is in the process of erecting their Paradigm five structure development with the first ready for occupation in 2018.
The development, which will have the population of a small village, bigger than Burlington was in the early 1900’s, is changing the skyline.
 Looking from the east – Tower 1, nearing completion is tucked away on the left – Tower 2, well underway, is in the center, tower three is on the right and is now early stages. The development is on Fairview right next to the GO station. The east and west views of the development show where the development is today.
Interesting to note that the highest tower in the Paradigm tower is still lower than the Bridgewater condominium will be.
And while Fairview is wider than Brant Street it carries a lot more traffic – the GO station is right next to the Paradigm.
Some development projects slide through the public’s perception with not as much as a speed bump; if it is in the downtown core they have hurdles to get over.
By Pepper Parr
November 29th, 2107
BURLINGTON, ON
It was one of the good things that was done by the private sector.
It was needed, served a purpose but has had a really tough time growing and putting down the roots it needed.
The Hive started out in the downtown core – a parking lot away from city hall.
 The original Hive location on Elizabeth Street. It offered a service that everyone at city hall said was needed – the kind of thing a progressive city would have.
The Hive was a shared office space location focused on the emerging start-up entrepreneurial market that the city has wanted to attract for some time. Shaun Pennell held a bang-up launch party – it certainly looked good.
But in order for a new idea like this to take root it needed support from the commercial and public sectors.
It was being used – just not often enough.
 The signs tell the story – new location will certainly be different. After a couple of years Pennell decided to pull up the stakes he had put down and moved north to Guelph Line and Harvester.
Same service, same market and he again attracted enough in the way of a clientele to more than hold his own.
 The obligatory hockey table game for the hyper active entrepreneurial set to burn off some of the energy. But Pennell had a bigger dream – he wanted to be able to offer a “full” service; a place that had a coffee shop as part of the operation; maybe a day care and a barber shop. A small gym floor with some basketball hoops and certainly a table hockey game.
To be have administrative, marketing and accounting services available at the same location was part of the dream and the long term plan.
The Guelph Line location was pretty good but the landlord had bigger plans for the property. The construction work that was taking place didn’t help much either.
Finding space in Burlington was a bit of a challenge but – well the sign tells the story. The Hive was moving again – into a bigger and better location.
 Logo for Tech Place – an arms length Economic Development Corporation unit. Meanwhile the city put its eggs in a different basket – working through the Economic Development Corporation they created Tech Place which was basically the same concept as the Hive – a place where start-ups could locate at a cost that was more than manageable.
Tech Place had one significant advantage and that was a connection to AngelOne, a funding source from those in Burlington with deep pockets.
By Staff
November 28, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Eva Amos is pleased and happy knowing that she did her bit to prevent the New Street diet from becoming a fact that would have changed the way traffic moved along one of the more important roadways in the city.
“My biggest complaint” said Amos “was with the stats. The comment I kept hearing over and over again was there was an increase of 33% in cyclists from 60 pre diet to 80 post.
 “Do 80 cyclists warrant changing the road configuration for 15,000 to 20,000 drivers?” This is now. What will the vehicular traffic be when all the intensification is complete. Had there been 10 cyclist’s pre diet and then 20 post would we say the cyclists have doubled?
“Also there was little mention of the cyclists on the sidewalk. How many were actually on the road or crossing from the Centennial path?”
“I guess the numbers made a difference – our numbers. The 3282 signatures on the online petition with accompanying comments. The 675 signatures on a hard copy of a petition.
Articles in the papers, letters to the editors and the calls to Council members made a difference. And the hour long television feature on The Issue helped.
“Maybe numbers in the end did win out.”, said Amos
 By Pepper Parr
November 29, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The battle lines are being drawn for a fight that will get settled in October 2018 when the next municipal election takes place.
 Meed Ward with Mayor Goldring: she is more comfortable with herself as a speaker. In that race at this point in time are Ward 2 Councillor Marianne Meed Ward, Rick Goldring, the current Mayor and Mike Wallace, a former city Councillor and Member of Parliament for Burlington.
The only candidate that has actually declared is the Mayor who seemed to have found a way around the rules. Nomination can’t be filed until May 1, 2018
 George Wale, Director of Programs at the Art Centre, on the right, thanks Burlington MP Mike Wallace for the funding from the federal government. Between now and then it will be a battle royal with Meed Ward screaming from the roof tops that the end of the Burlington she believes most people want is in sight
Councillor Meed Ward, in a recent Newsletter said: “If this plan goes through as is, it will fundamentally change downtown, replacing the low-rise character and historic buildings with modern tall buildings.
“The magnitude of changes represents over intensification and high rise congestion with no clear reason – since we can meet our growth targets under existing plan limits.
“We’re giving away height and getting nothing, like negotiating affordable housing, family units, public parking or heritage protection in exchange for more floors.”
There are many who don’t have a problem with additional height. Meed Ward’s support seems to be concentrated in the downtown core – the people in that part of the city don’t want their part of the city to change. Traffic congestion is a big concern and losing much of the retail and commercial space is a concern.
The 421 Brant Carriage Gate development will go to the OMB if the resolve that was displayed at a meeting of citizens who have been cheeky enough to use the COB that city hall types like to use and added an E to it to come up with the acronym ECOB – Engaged Citizen of Burlington.
They should be incorporated by the end of the week and have their OMB appeal papers filed with city hall shortly after.
During a two hour meeting in the Party Room of Buntin’s Wharf on Saturday they elected a set of Officers and raised $5000 on the spot.
There are some impressive people behind this effort.
Meed Ward sets out where the changes will take place in the downtown core and her take on the impact all this will have.
She focuses on the “added congestion, loss of small town feel, and loss of key retailers in some of our older buildings, like Kelly’s Bake Shoppe” Kelly Childs is in the process of becoming the ‘poster girl’ for downtown Burlington. We could do worse.
Where Meed Ward is absolutely right is the timeline the city is working to: “This process is proceeding far too quickly. She “will ask for an extension of time before approval”.
The Official Plan review started six years ago, half way through, a newly appointed Director of Planning changed what was an update to a total rewrite.
The downtown policies were made public at the end of September; the revised version was made public two weeks ago. The Area Specific Policies were made public in June.
 Suzanne Mammel, Executive Officer of the Halton Hamilton Home Builders Association is less then impressed with the way the Planning department seems to be rushing the new Official Plan. “Three weeks is not enough time to review and digest these documents, much less invite public comment” said Meed Ward. “ We cannot rush. The Official Plan is the most important document in the city, setting the stage for development for decades.”
Meed Ward plans to ask for several amendments, including revisions to height permissions and deferring approval till June “when we can consider all policies at the same time, and allow more time for public review and comment”.
The Halton Hamilton Home Builders Association (HHHBA) are threatening to take the Official Plan to the OMB –just as soon as it is passed. They tool feel the process is being rushed and have complained about the way the Planning Department has responded to their issues.
The new plan, with the downtown policies, staff reports and “track changes” version is over 2000 pages of reading to be ready for a committee meeting next week.
That is about as irresponsible and as unaccountable as a bureaucrat can be. It smacks of insolence on the part of the men and the women in the Planning department who let things like this happen. Surely there is a planner in the department who would ask if the public has been given enough time to read the documents.
The proposed downtown precinct plan will be discussed at committee November. 30 at 1:00 pm and in the evening at 6:30 pm. It appears there is going to be plenty of time to debate a document that few will have been able to re3ad in its entirety.
The plan is expected to be approved in January, with more detailed Area Specific Plans coming in June 2018.
Meed Ward provided a lot of graphics that help people see and understand where the growth is going to take place in each of the 13 precincts(up from 8) that have been created.
There are boundaries within boundaries and then precincts – each of which has its own zoning criteria.
Growth centre boundaries:
The downtown is divided into 13 “precincts” (up from 8 in the current plan) each with their own height and zoning permissions. Where heights previously ranged up to 14 storeys (excluding specific sites granted more height through an application), they now include as-of-right heights up to 25 storeys. More details on the precincts are below.
 Map with different boundaries – see Index
Brant St from Pine to southern edge of No Frills Plaza: (Brant Main St Precinct orange area on map) up from 8 storeys to 11, and 17/23 at Brant/James (thatched orange area on map) Existing permissions are 4-8 storeys, will now be up to 11. The South-East corner of Brant & James is a special policy area (thatched orange) allowed to go to 17 storeys. The North-East corner across the street has already been approved for 23 storeys.
 St Luke Precinct on the west of Brant and Emerald precinct on the right – both are solid residential communities – that don’t want development moving into their part of town. The downtown urban growth centre boundaries have changed to include parts of the stable low density neighbourhoods in the Emerald and St. Luke’s precincts. This is very serious as it will put pressure on these neighbourhoods to meet the growth centre’s target of 200 people or jobs per hectare. This change was apparently done by the province and region in 2006 and has not been reflected in our current OP, nor even come to light until now.
 Upper Brant – the part of the Downtown core where a lot of people think the height should be located. • There are a number of heritage buildings in the Downtown Core Precinct where heights are projected to go from 4-8 storeys to 17
Upper Brant Precinct (royal blue area), from 6 storeys existing, up to 25 storeys
Brant St at Graham’s Lane/Prospect/Ghent/Olga/Blairholm (Upper Brant Precinct) from 6 storeys to 25 (blue area)
• Existing permissions are 6 storeys, will now be up to 25
Downtown core precinct – some are of the belief that every property is in the hands of a developer. John St, Lakeshore, Martha, Maria block: (Downtown Core Precinct) from 4-8 storeys up to 17 (light blue)
Existing permissions are 4-8 storeys, will now be up to 17. The block at Maria/Caroline/John/ Elizabeth has existing permission for a 17 storey condo (currently under construction), 6-8 storey parking garage and 6-8 storey medical centre.
There are a number of historic buildings in the Downtown Core Precinct, along James, Elizabeth Pearl, but heritage protection policies and site specific reviews won’t come till the Area Specific Plans are complete in June 2018. We’re giving height away without getting these protections in place, putting pressure on these sites to be developed to the max. It will be difficult to “downzone” development permissions after the fact where we want to protect heritage down the road.
 Cannery precinct – so named because at one point there was a tomato canning factory at the foot on the east side of Brant. Cannery Precinct, up to 22 storeys (salmon colour). Waterfront Hotel site marked with asterix.
This precinct includes two parcels: the existing Bridgewater Development at Lakeshore/Elizabeth/Pearl, currently under construction with a 22 storey condo, 8 storey hotel and 7 storey condo; and the foot of Brant/Lakeshore on the North East Side bounded by Brant, John, Pine and Lakeshore.
Understanding the scope and the scale of what the Planning department is proposing is close to mind boggling.
If what is being proposed had the enthusiastic support of at least half of the population this would be a great plan – it would indeed be Growing Bold.
But most people don’t even know what the city is planning. Those in the downtown core have begun to understand what is going on. Those north of Prospect are in the dark – getting little if any information from their city Councillors.
Whenever a developer asks for a change to the Official Plan people get upset and ask – ‘What is the point of having an Official Plan if all a developer has to do is assemble some land and trot over to the Planning department and propose a change to the Official Plan and the zoning’.
Now the public has a 1500 page + document that they are expected to read and absorb in a very tight time frame.
Someone has to show the leadership needed to explain what is happening and why – without that leadership the public will clue in at some point and vote in a council that listens.
Problem with this is that there isn’t exactly a line-up of people who have indicated that they want to be a city Councillor.
 By Pepper Parr
November 28th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The people who live along West Haven in Tyendaga will troop over to the Crossroads Centre for a third public meeting put on by Meridian Brick this Thursday.
As part of Meridian’s “good neighbour” policy they will update the community on the status of the many studies they have had done – the residents will ask questions and their environmental adviser will ask tough questions of the Meridian staff who will be out in force.
The Mayor may or may not show up. Same goes for the ward Councillor Rick Craven – they just want this issue to go away.
The issue for the residents is the shale mining the brick maker wants to do in the third piece of land – referred to as the eastern cell or Cell 3.
 Everyone knew how close the eatern quarry was going to be to the high end homes that were going to be built. Current owners claim the warning clause that was supposed to be registered on title doesn’t appear. They fear serious depression in the value of their homes and refer to an appraisers report that finds property value losses between 8% to 40% in proximity to pits and quarries.
The brick manufacturer has gone through several corporate mergers. Brick has been manufactured in Aldershot sine the early 1900’s. The current manufacturing plant was built in 2000.
 Meridian makes it very clear they are licensed to do what they do – the West Haven residents want to see limitations put on that license. The issue for Meridian is keeping the plant operational. To do that they will have to de-forest an area with a reported 9000 trees. Meridian points out that they do have a license (first issued in 1972) to mine for Queenston shale – that is used to make very good brick.
The residents point out that the community that exists today didn’t exist in 1972. It wasn’t until the end of 1998 that a development Plan was approved in principle by the Region.
The battle lines have been drawn.
The development was first put forward by Jannock Limited, a Mississauga based developer.
They sold their interest to Brant Haven Homes who built the high end residences.
Brant Haven has an excellent reputation for building fine high end homes.
In a 24 page Region of Halton document there are two references to a quarry operation that was yards away from where the homes were to be build
“The owner and the Region acknowledge and agree that this agreement shall be registered on title to the lands. To that effect, the owner hereby consents to the registration of this agreement on the title to the lands.”
The West Haven residents claim that the agreement is not registered on the title they have.
On the very last page of the agreement there is a second paragraph labelled as a Warning clause with the following:
“The following warning clause shall be registered on title and included in all development agreements and Offers of Sale and Purchase or Lease of all lots:
“The purchaser/ tenants acknowledge the presence of a future extractive industrial land use to the west and that extraction may take place during the day time only.”
Those were the words on the Application to Register Notice of Agreement Pursuant to Section 71 of the Land Titles Act that was signed by Jannock and the Region.
When the development was sold to Brant Haven were they aware of the Warning Clause? They should have been – they are not likely to get involved in the dispute – unless the Region begins to look into the matter.
This isn’t the kind of thing the Region does on its own; someone will have to delegate at the Region and ask some questions and then a member of Regional Council would have to ask some questions. Every member of Burlington city council is a member of the Regional Councillor; half of their income comes from the Region
 The residents close to the east quarry fear that the day the trees are cut down the value of their property could drop by as much as 40% When Brant Haven began to sell the houses – did they advise the purchasers that there was a warning clause? Not the kind of thing some real estate agents mention.
It is up to the lawyer who closes the purchase of the property to research the title and ensure that there are no liens or conditions involved.
None of the people involved in the dispute say that they were made aware of the warning clause and it appears that the warning was never entered onto the title.
Who is responsible for the oversight? Was it deliberate?
Where were the lawyers who did the closing for the buyers?
This all happened more than 18 years ago and no one remembers – or doesn’t want to remember.
It wouldn’t be difficult to look at the title document and get the name of the lawyer who did the closing paper work and collected a fee. Their name would be on the file.
Could be embarrassing for a number of Burlington based lawyers.
By Staff
November 27th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
What do you do when you get one of these?
Maybe, just maybe I did have a distant relative who was Greek – Dad did get around.
Do I take the chance – what’s the upside?
What’s the downside?
Look at the link we have provided on a school teacher here in Ontario who came close to getting wiped out and faces years of fixing her credit status.
I work as the head of audit within our bank’s account management team. It has come to our attention while in the process to a new digital banking system that a late family member of yours still has an active account within our bank, containing a significant amount of funds. We are bound by law to transfer the funds to any surviving family member as the beneficiary of the deceased account. Please respond at your earliest convenience so I can send you the details to get this process in motion.
Regards,
The email address it came from looks like a Greek bank – Marinos S. Yannopoulos <5ll3964l@hellenicbank.com Take a pass on this one.
How a teacher has had to fight to get back her financial identity.
By Pepper Parr
November 27th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
For all of December you will be able to park your car at a city parking meter in the downtown core FREE.
City hall seems to feel that is the benefit.
The real benefit is we won’t have to squint into that little screen to read the instructions when the sun makes it all but impossible to reads the instructions.
It is a Free P – in downtown Burlington for the fifth year
The parking is free in city lots and on-street parking spaces.
 Parking meter wrapped for the month of December – parking is free for the month.  Brian Dean with Councillor Marianne Meed Ward the day the new parking meters were installed. Free P allows vehicles to park in on-street parking spaces for free for up to three hours. For vehicles parked in municipal parking lots or the parking garage at 414 Locust St., there is no maximum time limit. Overnight parking in municipal lots is also allowed.
Motorists with downtown parking permits are reminded to continue to park in their assigned parking lot throughout the month of December in order to maximize the number of parking spaces available for visitors.
The City of Burlington provides 1,500 municipal parking spaces in downtown Burlington and offers free parking year-round in the downtown Monday to Friday after 6 p.m. and all day Saturday, Sunday and holidays.
Brian Dean, Executive Director of the Burlington Downtown Business Association and Chair of the Downtown Parking Committee explains that the “goal is to keep downtown’s unique shopping and dining experiences top of mind for residents and visitors this holiday season. We want to encourage patrons to explore even more of the services downtown by removing a parking fee from the equation this December.”
By Pepper Parr
November 27th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
What might turn out to be one of those pivotal events took place on Saturday when 25 people meeting in the Part Room of Buntin’s Wharf decided to put their money where their mouth is and raised $5000 in minutes to take an appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board asking that the 23 story tower that was approved by city council not be permitted to proceed as a tower that high.
The group took on the acronym ECOB – Engaged Citizens of Burlington and decided to incorporate and create a city wide citizen’s organization to keep city council both transparent and accountable.
 Do the citizen’s of a city like Burlington have it within them to create a city wide movement that will holds the men and women they elect to council accountable? Within hours of the news story published in the Gazette two comments were posted. The first wanted to know where to send money.
#1
Congratulations to this group for attempting to restore both democracy and planning/development sanity to Burlington. Once your group is legally incorporated, please let everyone know where we can send financial support. I applaud you for doing what our elected councillors (MMW excepted) refuse to do–represent the people of this city.
The second wanted to join.
#2
How can one join (and/or contribute to) this group?
 It will take some time to determine whether or not the group can achieve what it has set out to do. They are working within a very short time-frame.
Assuming they do manage to get all the paper work done – incorporate, get their bylaws in place, open the bank account, draft the first version of the OMB appeal and file it at city hall – the development of the tower comes to a screeching halt and will be in one of those OMB limbos waiting for a hearing to take place.
Something to watch.
Original news story:
 By Ray Rivers
November 27th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
2017 – The year harassment dominated our news! In an epidemic of outings, victims of harassment seemed to be popping out from the woodwork determined to slay their dragons – some of the very people we once respected. The truth is many of us, at one time or another, have been victims or perpetrators of this socially destructive wrong. There is that bully at school, the overzealous landlord or tenant, a supervisor at work or a subordinate or maybe even even a disgruntled life partner.
The Ontario Human Rights Commission defines harassment as “engaging in a course of vexatious comment or conduct that is known or ought to be known to be unwelcome.” Harassment is often related to the exercise of power where an unequal relationship exists, such as an employer threatening employees with job loss or demotion for something unrelated to their job descriptions. And of course harassment is often associated with racism, sexism and ageism. It’s the ugly side of human social interaction.
 Former Canadian radio host Jian Ghomeshi leaves court with his attorney Marie Henein (R), after an Ontario judge found him not guilty on four sexual assault charges and one count of choking in Toronto, March 24, 2016. Jenna Marie Wakani/Reuters Assault may be involved though not necessarily. We recall CBC personality, Jian Ghomeshi, who stunned his national radio audience when allegations of sexual harassment and assault filled the papers back a few years ago. It was hard to believe that such a mild mannered on-air persona, a Dr. Jekyll by day, could also be such a Mr. Hyde by night. His punishment was losing his job and watching his promising career vaporize as the complaints of sexual misconduct piled up around him.
And assault is at the heart of the allegations against Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey, Charlie Rose, Bill O’Reilly, Donald Trump and Alabama senatorial candidate Roy Moore. They have crossed a line which they either didn’t see or didn’t care was there. So they have met their comeuppance, except for Trump who despite something like 16 sexual accusations against him won the last federal election. He just denies everything and everybody as fake news and liars, with even more confidence than former president Bill Clinton.
 President Donald Trump in a video that captured his views on how a celebrity could relate to women. It should have cost him the election but America ignored it. Trump’s unwavering political support for religiously pious Alabama child predator Roy Moore is unconscionable. The irony of sexual predator Trump promoting another sexual predictor, Moore, while attacking former comedian Al Franken for his sexual harassment has obviously escaped him. One can only hope the voting public will place ethics and their own morality ahead of partisanship – but this is Alabama and this is an America in flux.
There is a cultural revolution taking place in our society. But the challenge, as with any revolution, is how to rein-in the overzealous and avoid over-reaction. Wilfred Laurier University (WLU) has hit the news over the matter of gender based personal pronouns and how they affect identity. The binary system of gender identification seems to be inadequate for some who cross over from one discrete gender to another.
One should always respect the wishes of how people want to be called, but it is difficult to understand why the terms ‘she’ and ‘her’ would be offensive to a person who has transgendered from a male body type to that of a female, for example. There is now a demand for the use of the gender-neutral terms like ‘they’ and ‘them’, or one of the new batch of pronouns, ‘ze, sie, hir, co, and ey’ and ‘Mx’ for Mr., Miss, Ms or Mrs.
 Students at Laurie r University supporting the rights of a Teaching Assistant. Of course the conflict at WLU is also about freedom of speech and the responsibility of educators to challenge their students to fully explore a subject’s matter. And that subject warns that the deliberate mis-use of an appropriate pronoun applied to someone could be seen as harassment. But looming in the distance is the concern that using the wrong pronoun might also be construed as discrimination under Canada’s recent law C-16. And that might lead to criminal penalties.
Country/pop singer Taylor Swift had been groped while doing a photo shoot with a radio personality back in 2013. After she complained to the station’s managers the creep lost his job and since he was out of work decided to sue her for damages. She’s the biggest star in music today, sings almost as well as me, and could afford the best lawyers money could buy, which I can’t. So Swift counter-sued and won as the judge threw his claim out the window.
Not everyone wants to end up in court on matters this personal, staring down aggressive legal beagles and exposing your innermost self to some fickle judge who might just deliver a bizarre judgement. Sexual harassment is a serious offence, was even before Canada’s government formalized its illegality, but so is libel and slander. And that puts more of the spot light on accusers to get it right – to be objective and fair.
Is the offense just a bad attempt at a joke or is someone genuinely out to hurt? As each new generation replaces the previous one, what was acceptable human behaviour continues to evolve. So jokes depicting racial or sexual topics and situations, once tolerated back in the day, are simply no longer acceptable. Still, the child is father of the man – people are captive to old habits and beliefs, even if those customs are no longer in fashion.
Tolerance cannot be a one way street. Some folks don’t understand that the world has moved on – they need help and education to wake up to reality. And education and conciliation may be a better pathway to peace than confrontation and litigation. That is true in cases of harassment, as in all things, despite the more recent trend to outing the culprits.
 And sometimes actions and words can be ambiguous. A victim needs to be sure that harassment is what it seems before crying out, in case that cry turns out to be ‘wolf’ and the situation between them becomes intolerable. To that end the Ontario’s Human Rights Commission cautions that harassment needs to be seen in the context of a process – when it comes to words a single vexatious comment is insufficient. Because in the end nobody wants to be victimized twice.
 Ray Rivers writes weekly on both federal and provincial politics, applying his more than 25 years as a federal bureaucrat to his thinking. Rivers was a candidate for provincial office in Burlington in 1995. He was the founder of the Burlington citizen committee on sustainability at a time when climate warming was a hotly debated subject. Tweet @rayzrivers
Background links:
Trump Sex Assault – More Trump –
Weinstein – OHRC – Gender Free –
Congress Pays – Rampant Congress– Charley Rose – Jian Ghomeshi –
Why do People Bully – More Harass – Even More Harass –
Peterson – Bill C-16 – Gender Pronouns –
Gender Queer – Taylor Swift – No Harassment in Russia –
By Pepper Parr
November 26th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Will the meeting in the Party Room at Buntin’s Wharf Saturday afternoon be seen as the event that changed the way Burlington citizens relate to their elected officials?
 Jim Young chairs the founding meeting of ECOB – Engaged Citizens of Burlington. Just 25 people – but they are determined to make a difference, Just over 25 people met in a building that changed the way the downtown core looked 15 years ago. Buntin’s Wharf, a 14 storey condominium was completed in 2004 – it is part of a collection of condominiums that changed Lakeshore. The people in those buildings – there are five of them don’t want to see much more in the way of high rise development in the downtown core – they would like to see it take place a little further up Brant Street.
It was a chilly afternoon with the Festive Season lights up in Spencer Smith Park. Many of the people who attended were there to find out if this group was real. “I’m here and will be reporting back to my friends who care about what happens downtown”. The people who attended take great exception to the city saying that they truly engage the citizens – they see what the city does as “something of a disgrace”. “When we delegate they just sit there and listen – and seldom ask questions of us. It’s insulting was the way one person described what she had gone through.
 The wrong height and in the wrong place was the view of a group – ECOB – that plans to appeal the 5-2 city council approval of a 23 storey tower opposite city hall. It didn’t take long for the direction this group wanted to go in – they had named themselves Engaged Citizen of Burlington – took on the acronym ECOB – elected a set of officers – there will be seven of them.
Resolved to be incorporated by the end of the week, open a bank account and deposit the $5000 they raised on the spot in less than ten minutes.
They put in place a social media pro who headed up the very successful drive Central high school parent drive to keep their school of the to be closed list.
They set up three sub committees – one to take the 421 Brant Street development to the OMB – they expect to file papers at city hall for that initiative very soon – they are fully aware of the ticking clock.
The ECOB people have a bigger agenda – they want to create a city wide residents association that wants to change the way city hall makes development decisions and be a force that holds city council accountable to the people that elected.
This group has had it with this council. “They don’t listen” was the refrain heard again and again.
This is not a group of wild eyed NIMBY types.
There was some very smart talent in the room. When discussion on the incorporation was going on – one of the participants was on the phone to a local lawyer – “he’s in” she said and with that the process of incorporation had begun.
They had financial commitments before they had a treasurer in place. One participant said he came to the meeting with a cheque in his pocket – he just wanted to know who to make it out to.
One of the team briefed them on the “Bay Street lawyer” who was in the process of doing a “conflict review” to ensure that they could represent the group before signing on.
What is it going to take financially – they seemed comfortable with raising $100,000. One of the sharper minds in the room told the group that money wasn’t the issue – that will come – setting out what it is we want is where the attention has to be paid.
Another participant asked: What is it we want the OMB to do – no point in taking our argument to them until we are focused on the objective.
“We can’t just ask the OMB to stop the development” said one participant.
The developer has a 12 story approval on one piece of the properties assembled – “we aren’t going to see anything less than that.
Mediation got talked about – arbitration got talked about. They all realized they had a tough row to hoe – but they were in for the long haul.
The ward Councillor who was not in the room – they didn’t want here there. They don’t want their organization to be seen as a front for a member of council.
There were some very savvy people in the room – they asked that they not be individually identified at this point.
The discussion between the 25 people was a model that city council could emulate.
 Jim Young – the man who did one of the best delegations this city has ever heard. Jim Young, an Aldershot resident chaired the meeting, filling in for Susan Goyer who appears to be the one who got the ball rolling a number of weeks ago. She was in Florida.
Assuming these people get their OMB appeal filed within the deadline – development decisions downtown are going to be different.
By Staff
November 25th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
An entire Grade 9 class spent the day handing out kindness cards in Burlington, spreading smiles throughout their school and neighbourhood.
You had to see it to believe it and to pick up on the delighted comments that come across on the video.
Look carefully at the students in the high school handing out the cards to their fellow students.
And look carefully at the school – it is scheduled to be closed in June of 2018.
The Halton District School Board voted to shut down two high schools – Pearson is one of them.
The parents have asked for and were given the opportunity for an Administrative Review to take place. That review is ongoing and a report will be made to the Minister of Education on whether or not the process used by the board was in accordance with Board policies.
Margaret Wilson, the independent Reviewer brought in to look at all the documents and to listen to the parents cannot order that the School Board change its decision – but she can say if the process met all the provincial requirements.
If the process was flawed the Ministry could order that the School Board revisit the Program Accommodation Review (PAC) and maybe hold that PAC a second time.
The video of the students is a delight; click on the link.
By Staff
November 26, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
Tony Brecknock, a parent with children who graduated from Pearson high school, the school he once attended came out of the gate swinging at the Administrative Review meeting held to hear the views of parents on a school board vote that closed the high school. He didn’t choose to thank the chair for allowing him to speak – he went straight to his main point.
“The HDSB policy clearly states that “There must be no fewer than ten (10) business days between the public delegations and the final decision of the Board of Trustees” , this simply did not happen on June 7, 2017.
 Tony Brecknock, male figure in the centre, attended the PARC meetings and delegated the evening the vote to close the schools was taken “I was notified of my delegation on June 6th, the day before I was expected to present and it was received and presented on the same day of the vote, June 7th, which means there was a failure of the board’s own policy, namely to provide the Trustees with the sufficient time needed to fully process any and all information before voting.
“This lack of due process, negatively and directly impacted the final decision to close two schools in Burlington.
“My delegation was to be a strictly timed, one shot presentation – I had submitted over 13 pages full of data – so I made sure to include the documents as attachments in my submission, of which a receipt was confirmed by the Board – at noon on the day of the vote.
“There is simply no way that all of my information was clearly ingested.
 It became painfully clear that Chair Amos, on the left and the vice chair, Kim Graves did not know how to manage the confusing flow of motions that were before the meeting. “On the night of the vote it was also apparent there was a lack of understanding of how to proceed.
“It seemed that the possibility of not being done, prior to a summer break, pressured decisions to be made ad hoc – not because of clear judicial thinking, but because of the clock ticking,
“During the meeting, the Trustees constantly bounced back and forth amongst specialists in the room, trying desperately to decipher the rules of engagement that they should have studied in advance.
“From that chaos, random recess’ started to happen – one of which was conducted, strategically prior to the final vote.
“The meeting should have been stopped right there, with everyone regrouping.
 The vote was taken to close two of the city’s seven high schools so late in the evening (after midnight) that the electronic vote software had shut down. The trustees voted by a show of hands. “This decision was made during the very late evening hours, after listening to an overabundance of information – it was a vote made under mental, emotional and physical duress, that in the end was pushed through.
“The prudent course of action would have been to wait 10 business days, as policy dictates, to allow for a period of reflection before a final vote.
“It needs to be mandated at a higher level, that the Boards are fulfilling their due diligence. They need to ensure they are delivering the best educational experience to ALL students.
“A Provincial moratorium on school closures, was put into effect, just two weeks after the vote for a reason – the realization of a flawed process.
“Had the Board adhered to their own policy, this vote would have been deferred to a time of better and calm understanding.
“This committee and by extension the Board, needs to take this review and adhere to the many key components within their own guidelines.
“They need to listen to those that continue to express dissatisfaction with the result, and re-vote to pause the closures – until they have fixed the process.”
By Staff
November 25th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
The next scheduled meeting of the Halton Regional Police Services Board will take place on Thursday, November 30, 2017 at 9:00 a.m. in Resource Room 305/307 at Burlington City Hall.
 Ward 1 Councillor Craven is Burlington’s representative on the Police Services Board. Copies of the agenda and reports are available from the Board office and on our website at www.haltonpolice.ca.
The Police Services Board oversees the role of the Regional Police – they approve the police budget and are the group that interviews and makes a recommendation to Regional Council on who should be hired to serve as Police Chief.
Community members are encouraged to attend meetings, make a presentation to the Board, or invite a member of the Board to an event.
By Pepper Parr
November 25th, 2017
BURLINGTON, ON
It was dramatic!
Diane Miller, a parent with children in both Lester B. Pearson (LBP) high school and the Robert Bateman high school stood before Margaret Miller, the provincially appointed Reviewer to conduct a review of the process the Halton District School Board used to decide to close two of the seven high schools in Burlington.
“I was going to use my three minutes to stand in complete silence” she said.
“Why you might ask given the importance of our time with you and this Accommodation Review?
 Diane Miller, a Lester B. Pearson high school parent, reading her delegation to provincially appointed Reviewer Margaret Wilson. “Because I wanted my silence to represent how much weight, importance, and consideration that I felt my correspondence to the HDSB, Trustees, Local MPP, Ministry of Education & Premier meant. No matter what came out of my mouth or via email, I felt it wasn’t heard or listened to.
“No matter how much research, how many logical facts, how many ideas either myself or our LBP group or Bateman group presented, they were discarded. The five minute delegation, which I spent hours on, was discounted and forgotten by the time the next person came up to speak. I might as well have said nothing at all. That is how I felt.
“Today I am hoping you will hear me and that this terrible flawed decision, based on a flawed process, will result in a call for this decision to be revisited.
“Communication by definition is an of exchange of ideas. It is a means of connection between people.
“During the Program Accommodation Review Committee (PARC) review process there was no direct communication between the PARC representatives and the school trustees. The information was filtered or directed to/from the HDSB. While the trustees could attend PARC meetings or public meetings there was no discussion or Q & A with them.
“The public is unaware if there was ever a time when the trustees met to discuss the ideas presented other than at the public HDSB meetings. Trustees seemed to be discouraged from engagement.
“How is this meaningful?
“As delegates we were given five minutes to rush through our presentations. If the trustees had questions then one had the ability to expand on their topic. If not, that was all. No feedback. Nothing.
“The trustees indicated they read through 700 emails (so someone – HDSB? perhaps) was keeping track of that number. Good to know as only two or three trustees ever responded to my correspondence and then only one or two provided more than the automated, I have received your message response.
 During the first public meeting in December 2016 parents were asked to answer questions put up on a screen using hand held clickers. The school board was gathering data – the parents thought they were at a meeting where they could ask questions. “During the first public meeting in December, which most participants seemed to think was a Q & A meeting, the discussion, led by the consultant, appeared to be one way. The audience was given clickers, very slanted questions were put up on a screen and the audience was instructed to click on one of the answers.
“Any questions were met with either silence or that the information was being collected. It was highly frustrating. The process got off to a very bad start.
“It was difficult to get information about the PAR / PARC process to the general public who were not online.
“The information on the HDSB took a bit of searching for some to get updates. It wasn’t until the second PARC meeting in January (2017) that the LBP PARC representatives contact information went up on the LBP website. Principals were under the impression that meeting space and other resources were to be made available. In fact, when I called to ask if a student council meeting, where our trustee would be attending, would allow for Q & A, the principal said she did not know and for me to contact the trustee.
“Community members, at their own cost, and during their own time distributed literature, held meetings, and tried to get information to the students that someone was fighting for their school and for them. It was difficult. The HDSB had all the contact information; the resources to disseminate their information. It was a tilted playing field.
“Is this what the board determines is “communication”?
“Community members were not the only ones who were led to believe that their input would be of value. Students also had that impression.
“In December, before the 1st PARC meeting, a student survey was sent out. The PARC members had no input into the questionnaire. The results of this survey were shared with parents, with the PARC members.
“However, while it is an appendix in Mr. Miller’s report, the contents do not appear to have shaped the decisions made. For example, LBP students marked the fact that teachers knew them; they were there to help them by a large percentage. They were known.
“That is important and impacts learning. It impacts social interactions and mental wellness. LBP is a smaller school. Yet at a HDSB meeting, when asked if he had considered a smaller school within the HDSB parameters moving forward (and I paraphrase here) Mr. Miller said, “no he had not considered a smaller school”. Students were told there would be interaction, yet none seemed to appear during the execution of the PARC phase.
 Survey stations were set up at one of the public meetings. “Question – Why do a survey if you are going to ignore the data? Especially by the group that you say you are most interested in – the students.
“Teachers who have first hand knowledge into the learning behaviours of their students and interact with them the most had no seat at the PARC table. A survey to capture teacher input was done but with seeming reluctance by the HDSB. The information was given to the trustees but not to PARC members. The rationale was that much would have to be redacted as there would be personal identifying factors. Yet, even redacted, it was not made available to the public. One wonders if the responses did not fit the HDSB narrative.
“The PARC members met seven times yet it was just at the end they felt a positive discussion on innovative ideas was happening. The public, some of whom felt this was a done deal, was left wondering with a variety of both rumours and facts, as to what was going on.
“In a city that is growing why were two schools being targeted for closure? Given that LBP was on 12 of the proposals for closure is it any wonder that the population felt targeted. One still wonders if this process was done in good faith. Why do I ask that?
“a) Our school population, along with Bateman was left to starve of students with the reduction in the number of feeder schools
b) During the PARC a boundary review of a new build happened without LBP (the closer school) even being considered
c) Rumours abound that LBP is to be the home of the HDSB Administrative buildings – I have yet to hear an out and out denial of this rumour. If true, one wants to know when this decision was made. If made prior to the PAR/PARC review or during the review then this process was not entered into in good faith.
e) Bateman is a one of a kind school – yet was put on last minute as a closure and is slated to cost $12 M to replicate at Nelson (everyone knows this figure will balloon)
 The PARC consisted of two representatives from the seven high schools; a trustee representative and a city of Burlington representative. The debated issues on one side of a room while the public sat on the other side. There wasn’t any “PARC was going to be an island. Only selected participants were going to be allowed onto the island. Communications were to be minimal if non-existent at best. The HDSB wanted to meet the “minimum” requirements to say they went through the process.
 “On June 7th, delegations were heard, prepared speeches were read, a vote was held. Two schools were to close. Tell me did those delegations mean anything at all? Especially given the prepared statements that were read that night of why trustees were voting in favour of closure. Did the 10 day between delegations and a vote violation mean anything to the HDSB or the trustees?
“Communication is actively listening, speaking, considering, answering and responding. It is two way. This did not happen.
“The end result. The closing of two schools in a growing community. Schools that are overpopulated; schools that will be thrown into overcapacity with the two school closures.
“A flawed process resulted in flawed decisions.
“Revisit this decision.”
Margaret Wilson listened carefully – took copious notes and at the end of the evening, after listening to everyone who wanted to speak she said the the audience: “I have heard what you had to say.”
|
|
