By Pepper Parr
June 20, 2014
BURLINGTON, ON.
It takes time to get anything done when the wheels of justice are required to move. The making of a judicial system is not a simple or easy process. It is based on years of precedent and the need to adhere to changes in social mores. And they don’t always get it right the first time. It took the city of Burlington a bit of time to get a grip in just what was going on when local residents reports hundreds of trucks rumbling along the northern part of Appleby Line filled with earth that was being dumped on the air park property. Was this a land fill site many wondered.
The air park was seen by almost everyone as a sleepy little rural airport, owned by a local family. But it got sold for a reported $3.1 million to Vince Rossi who had some very big ideas and what he thought was a shield that would protect him from such meddlesome things as municipal bylaws. It was an air park declared Mr. Rossi and regulated by the federal government and anyone at the municipal or Regional government s could basically take a hike and keep out of Rossi’s business.
This photograph depicts a seminal point in the evolution of public engagement for the city of Burlington. City general manager Scott Stewart talks to members of the Rural Burlington Greenbelt Coalition, two of whom are bing sued for $100,000 bu the Burlington Air Park. Top the left at the rear is Blake Hurley, city lawyer who handled the city side of the two air park court cases. Seated on the left is the lawyer the city hired to argue the court cases and advise the city.
Rossi got away with that kind of behaviour for quite some time – but there was a higher quality of civic government at city hall and they wanted to take a look at that “federally regulated” argument – and they found that it really didn’t hold all that much water.
Orders to cease and desist and all the options available to the city were used but when it became very clear that the air park was going to stick to its federally regulated position – off to a court room they all went. The city won the first round – Justice John Murray said the air park had to adhere to the city’s site plan by law.
It took the air park legal counsel less than five days to file an appeal of the Murray decision. The decision of the Appeal Court was even swifter – three hours after proceedings had begun the three Justice appeal panel said the Justice Murray was right – the air park has to comply with the city site plan by law. At some point in the very near future – the city will begin to press its case and demand that the air park present a site plan for work that has been going on for more than five years.
The Region recently hired AMEC, the former Phillips Environmental, to do an assessment of the storm water systems at the air park. Apparently AMEC had some difficulty getting on the site, but we have not been able to confirm that. The heavy rains of a few weeks ago saw small rivers of water running south along Appleby Line that did enough damage to require the Region to come in and repair the road shoulders. The Region now wants to be assured that storm water from the site can be effectively handled.
The local residents want to know ho is going to pay for the road repairs The Rural Burlington Greenbelt Coalition, the organization the air park lawyers call an “unincorporated collection of citizens” has gone public again and asked the city to re-double their efforts and begin ensuring that the soil on that 200 acre air park property be fully and properly inspected – and no more of this fighting tooth and nail to get inspection reports that the air park appears to want kept secret.
In an Open Letter to Mayor Goldring and Regional Chair Gary Carr, Vanessa Warren, a candidate for the ward 6 seat, home to the air park, said the following:
On behalf of the residents of rural north Burlington, the members of the Rural Burlington Greenbelt Coalition and I would like to congratulate you on your enormous victory at the Ontario Court of Appeal. Thank you and City Staff for all your work and leadership on this precedent-setting case. Because of your commitment to protect our rural north and its protected countryside, the City of Burlington now stands as an example to other Ontario communities dealing with airpark fill operations.
The summary nature of the Appeal Court’s dismissal was, for our community, both gladdening and concerning. Gladdening because the City was so clearly vindicated and can now proceed to test and control fill quality on Airpark property through its Site Alteration bylaw, protecting our lands and water table from environmental damage. Concerning because it affirmed our beliefs that the Burlington Airpark and its legal team are unreasonably litigious. Our community continues to be under serious threat from the Burlington Airpark, this time through the use of Ontario’s onerous defamation laws against local advocates.
Their counsel, Brian Rogers, a leading libel lawyer and member of the Attorney General’s Anti-SLAPP Advisory Panel, intends to defend them on the basis this lawsuit is no more than a SLAPP suit (Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation). In short, it is another legal action, without merit, brought to intimidate, silence and exhaust – both emotionally and financially – its opponents.
The north Burlington citizen’s fight to defend their rights and their property was seen important enough bu the CBC National News to be given some coverage.
So, while we are elated with the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal today, and grateful for the City’s commitment to environmental protection, we need your support now more than ever. We need to defend public engagement and public advocacy – the cornerstones of our democratic system – from the Burlington Airpark’s SLAPP suit, so that this type of legal coercion does not silence the citizens of Burlington.
Councillors Paul Sharman and Blair Lancaster, both serving their first term on city council were both members of the committee that wrote the Shape Burlington report, the document that marked the beginning of significant community participation. Unfortunately, neither Sharman or Lancaster have been strong advocates for community involvement and while there is an Engagement Charter it is a document that doesn’t get much use.
Expecting Burlington to defend public engagement is a bit of a stretch. The city has yet to truly put its engagement charter into the hands of the public. But a public plea is better than nothing – at some point Burlington will get a city council that is attentive and responsive to it electors. We just aren’t there yet.
Unfortunately we tend to elect canditates with the deeepest pockets that can put forward a strong campaign. I truly believe that there are canditates out there that receive super support from business and council members that want a council with people ready to agree with development reather that what is best for the community.
“Sharman or Lancaster have been strong advocates for community involvement” – this would be an overstatement – Councillor Sharman has often said the issues are far to complicated for public consumption. I guess we are the great unwashed and uneducated of Burlington. Their have been more closed door meetings – more discussed in committee then council. I would suggest the Engagement Charter is better printed and folded to balance a kitchen table versus the value the city puts in it. As for certian members of Shape Burlington – my thought would be – since you have been elected – have you really forgotten or just choose not to act on what you promised.