The redevelopment proposals for the small site at Orchard View and Duplex first appeared in 2002. The plans were rejected by the Planning Department and no other plans appeared until 2008. At that time a Working Group was struck. It was comprised of representatives from two local community associations, the Stanley Knowles Cooperative and local residents. The Working Group didn't have much to do since nothing new appeared again until April 2010. That's when things were speeded-up.
A new plan was presented to the Working Group on May 20th but rejected by all the members. The Application was scheduled for the June 22nd North York Community Council. Things were going very fast now. So fast that the item was pulled from the Agenda due to community anger at the speed of "the process". On July 13th the Planning Department met the community to hear its concerns and, miraculously, a new plan emerged on July 18th. This was set down for hearing at the August 17th Community Council.
The plan had all markings of a "done deal".
This link will take you to Ann King's presentation to the North York Community Council meeting of August 17th. Notice the number of empty chairs? This is typical of Community Council meetings. Citizens make their way to these meetings thinking they can make a difference but that's just not true. Decisions among the councillors are made before the meeting. Few, if any, are told about this and it always leads to disappointment and frustration. This contributes to the low turnouts we get at Municipal Elections.
It's called "Ward Politics" which refers to councillors trading votes behind the scenes. For example, a councillor wanting a particular matter approved at Community Council will ask their fellow councillors to back them. That councillor then owes a debt of a promise to vote. It means items pass Council based on votes promised but not on the issues.
It's how Ward Councillors get proposals approved even if there is widespread objection from constituents. It's what happened at Orchard View and Duplex, 1066 Avenue Road and the Open Space at the Yonge Centre.
It's what must change if we are ever to improve local democracy.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Monday, September 27, 2010
The overwhelming Orchard View and Duplex development proposal.
The Orchard View and Duplex saga started in 2002 but didn't make it to Toronto Council until August 27th, 2010. In the final minutes of that last four year Council meeting, in fact. That's a story worth telling too but here's a shorter one. One that's just as enlightening as to what's wrong in Ward 16.
Why Councillor Stintz didn't deal with the Orchard View and Duplex item in the first few minutes of Council on August 25th is a startling story. Over the course of the 3 day Council, the Ward 16 Councillor looked visibly agitated. She was reluctant to deal with the Motion she had committed to present.
This was quite understandable of course. Nobody in the Orchard View and Duplex community supported the proposal but she had yet to do the final deed. What they did support was a set of amendments to the development application that the community had unanimously agreed on.
Here's a link to Terry Mills's presentation to the Community Council on August 17th. It's about 14 minutes long but the other three presentations are less than five minutes each and clearly show how united the community was on the issue.
Terry Mills - presents the Community Solution -
www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0FJ_IxaIB0&feature=related
Tom Cohen - a Board Member in one of the two local community associations that strongly objected to a building that is more dense than any in the Yonge-Eglinton Growth Centre -
www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIabYXGZd-4&feature=related
Lydia Levine - another EPRA Board Member also supporting Terry Mills -
www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gNk611Uwe8&feature=related
These deputations lasted for about 90 minutes after which Councillor Stintz presented her own version of the amendments. Ones she had agreed with the developer days before the Community Council but forgot to mention to the community or the Working Group.
Why Councillor Stintz didn't deal with the Orchard View and Duplex item in the first few minutes of Council on August 25th is a startling story. Over the course of the 3 day Council, the Ward 16 Councillor looked visibly agitated. She was reluctant to deal with the Motion she had committed to present.
This was quite understandable of course. Nobody in the Orchard View and Duplex community supported the proposal but she had yet to do the final deed. What they did support was a set of amendments to the development application that the community had unanimously agreed on.
Here's a link to Terry Mills's presentation to the Community Council on August 17th. It's about 14 minutes long but the other three presentations are less than five minutes each and clearly show how united the community was on the issue.
Terry Mills - presents the Community Solution -
www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0FJ_IxaIB0&feature=related
Tom Cohen - a Board Member in one of the two local community associations that strongly objected to a building that is more dense than any in the Yonge-Eglinton Growth Centre -
www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIabYXGZd-4&feature=related
Lydia Levine - another EPRA Board Member also supporting Terry Mills -
www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gNk611Uwe8&feature=related
These deputations lasted for about 90 minutes after which Councillor Stintz presented her own version of the amendments. Ones she had agreed with the developer days before the Community Council but forgot to mention to the community or the Working Group.
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Remember the CMC?
The Coalition for Municipal Change (CMC) is nowhere to be seen in the 2010 Toronto Municipal Election. We have it on good authority they won't be heard from either.
That's because the group of Ward 16 residents who formed the CMC aren't backing Karen Stintz this time. It's ironic that Karen Stintz could one day go the way of Anne Johnston. And, the similarities are worth noting. Word has it she turned her back on the CMC in much the same way as she does to many of Ward 16 constituents.
They must of course, and what were they thinking anyway? The CMC selected a 30 something administrator with a thin resume to run for public office as Councillor for Ward 16. In essence, Karen Stintz was parachuted into an organisation where she had no experience and where she had no boss. In her new position as one of 45 Directors she participated in the running of a $6.8 billion corporation. Other than a brief orientation, she was immediately expected to vote on everything from pot holes to penthouses. She was not expected to attend performance reviews. She was not required to establish mutually agreed goals. It seems it was assumed she was golden from the get-go.
That was a bit odd, CMC, don't you think?
That's because the group of Ward 16 residents who formed the CMC aren't backing Karen Stintz this time. It's ironic that Karen Stintz could one day go the way of Anne Johnston. And, the similarities are worth noting. Word has it she turned her back on the CMC in much the same way as she does to many of Ward 16 constituents.
Like Anne Johnston, Karen Stintz has ignored large swaths of the community she is supposed to be representing. Anne Johnston was targeted by the CMC after years of declining representation and shortly after her vote in favour of the Minto Towers development. In Karen Stintz's case it has been the handling of the development at Orchard View and Duplex that has been "the straw that broke the camel's back".
One wonders if the CMC regrets its involvement with Karen Stintz?
They must of course, and what were they thinking anyway? The CMC selected a 30 something administrator with a thin resume to run for public office as Councillor for Ward 16. In essence, Karen Stintz was parachuted into an organisation where she had no experience and where she had no boss. In her new position as one of 45 Directors she participated in the running of a $6.8 billion corporation. Other than a brief orientation, she was immediately expected to vote on everything from pot holes to penthouses. She was not expected to attend performance reviews. She was not required to establish mutually agreed goals. It seems it was assumed she was golden from the get-go.
That was a bit odd, CMC, don't you think?
The CMC did have some good ideas. Like when they paid for this advertisement.
Karen Stintz was meant to champion the cause for higher charges to developers but we suspect the rot had set in by then. That's when anybody close to what was happening in Ward 16 realised she didn't care for the Official Plan. She didn't appear interested in applying it to protect our neighbourhoods. Her mission had switched to raising her own profile with an eye on a political career.
And that's when things really started to go downhill. Now look at the current slate of advertisements involving Karen Stintz!
And to think the CMC was electing a councillor to protect our neighbourhoods. Instead, what we got was a councillor who protects DEVELOPERS!
Thursday, September 23, 2010
The smell of power stinks.
Rob Ford is the clear leader now in the race for the Mayor's office. Very soon we'll see more doing the same as Karen Stintz - trying to follow the scent of power and worrying about the $100,000 a year job.
"Let’s face it — based on the polling and lots of street chatter, people just aren’t into any of the others, and as outgoing veteran councillor Brian Ashton said to me on the air a few weeks ago, “when councillors get a whiff of the power, their nostrils flare wide open.” You can be sure that as we speak, Ford is spraying his scent under the noses of more than 23 councillors running for re-election or for the first time. Anybody wanna be deputy mayor? How about chair of a committee or executive council?" John Stall, 680 News
http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/johnstall/2010/09/22/who-says-rob-ford-cant-get-support-on-council/
At its2big we don't think Mr. Ford will be attracted to Stintz. He's been well warned to look out for opportunists and the last thing he wants are any of the corporate conservatives who belittled him on Council. To even a casual observer of Council or Community Council, Stintz was in the same clique as Shiner, Minnan-Wong and Ootes - the leaders in the failed Responsible Right Movement. They shunned Rob Ford.
In Stintz's case, she spent the last 7 years on Council with little to do. She was outside the power block and ignored for any meaningful role on committees. Not a bad part-time job really, when you have other personal things to take care of, while collecting a pretty decent salary. Her greatest profile came from the constant bitching about David Miller. We expect it is that which she is hoping will endear her to Mr Ford.
Yesterday, we noticed a tweet on Twitter where it was noted that Karen Stintz wanted to be "leader of the TTC". The tweet wondered if she would use her office budget to send street cars for "screech training". This reminds us at its2big of the sense of entitlement Karen Stintz so quickly acquired after being given the trust of Ward 16 voters.
We didn't elect her to complain about David Miller.
We didn't give her any mandate to sell off Toronto Hydro.
We wanted her to speak to us not the Economic Club of Canada.
She didn't ask us if she could spend our money getting ready for a mayoralty race.
We wanted our voice heard on Council.
Karen Stintz was supposed to uphold the Official Plan.
She was supposed to protect the stability of our neighbourhoods.
She promised to provide "strong support for community".
None of that happened and what she did wasn't lost on us. We're positive too it won't be lost on Mr. Ford. He has a keener sense of customer service and, unlike Karen Stintz, intends to live up to his promises. If he is elected it will be a shock to the kind of culture we set out to change in 2003.
And, whether you like his policies or not, we like it that he intends to shine a light on what's wrong on Toronto Council.
"Let’s face it — based on the polling and lots of street chatter, people just aren’t into any of the others, and as outgoing veteran councillor Brian Ashton said to me on the air a few weeks ago, “when councillors get a whiff of the power, their nostrils flare wide open.” You can be sure that as we speak, Ford is spraying his scent under the noses of more than 23 councillors running for re-election or for the first time. Anybody wanna be deputy mayor? How about chair of a committee or executive council?" John Stall, 680 News
http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/johnstall/2010/09/22/who-says-rob-ford-cant-get-support-on-council/
At its2big we don't think Mr. Ford will be attracted to Stintz. He's been well warned to look out for opportunists and the last thing he wants are any of the corporate conservatives who belittled him on Council. To even a casual observer of Council or Community Council, Stintz was in the same clique as Shiner, Minnan-Wong and Ootes - the leaders in the failed Responsible Right Movement. They shunned Rob Ford.
In Stintz's case, she spent the last 7 years on Council with little to do. She was outside the power block and ignored for any meaningful role on committees. Not a bad part-time job really, when you have other personal things to take care of, while collecting a pretty decent salary. Her greatest profile came from the constant bitching about David Miller. We expect it is that which she is hoping will endear her to Mr Ford.
Yesterday, we noticed a tweet on Twitter where it was noted that Karen Stintz wanted to be "leader of the TTC". The tweet wondered if she would use her office budget to send street cars for "screech training". This reminds us at its2big of the sense of entitlement Karen Stintz so quickly acquired after being given the trust of Ward 16 voters.
We didn't elect her to complain about David Miller.
We didn't give her any mandate to sell off Toronto Hydro.
We wanted her to speak to us not the Economic Club of Canada.
She didn't ask us if she could spend our money getting ready for a mayoralty race.
We wanted our voice heard on Council.
Karen Stintz was supposed to uphold the Official Plan.
She was supposed to protect the stability of our neighbourhoods.
She promised to provide "strong support for community".
None of that happened and what she did wasn't lost on us. We're positive too it won't be lost on Mr. Ford. He has a keener sense of customer service and, unlike Karen Stintz, intends to live up to his promises. If he is elected it will be a shock to the kind of culture we set out to change in 2003.
And, whether you like his policies or not, we like it that he intends to shine a light on what's wrong on Toronto Council.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Council didn't work! We need a change of culture.
I listened to Adam Vaughan on the John Tory Show last night. Mr. Vaughan, as councillor, reckoned it was his sole responsibility to represent his Ward. He wasn't interested in representing the Mayor or joining forces with any other councillor unless it was in his Ward's best interest.
That's all very well and fine but where does that leave constituents from other Wards in the city? In effect he was saying if something came before him that might be detrimental to the best interests of constituents in another Ward he felt justified in ignoring the issue.
This explains Mr. Vaughan's actions during the last Council Meeting and explains what goes on down at City Hall.
You see, the way things were meant to work, local issues were supposed to be ironed-out at Community Councils before they came to full Council, for basically a rubber stamp. The Community Council was intended to be a Public Meeting where constituents could attend to inform and to voice concerns about, or support for, items on the Agenda. The assumption was that open debate would protect against things going terribly wrong.
What actually happened at Community Councils was nothing like that at all. In reality, councillors, and lobbyists, would secure the votes of Council members before the Public Meeting. When it came time for the constituents the outcome was already decided. Much of the time councillors were not in their seats and deputants would be speaking to empty chairs or over other conversations. . Nobody paid a blind bit of attention. This happened regularly at the North York Community Council. If a Ward Councillor wanted to ignore community unrest on a particular item, by virtue of this corrupt culture, it required only a devious manipulation to overcome their protests.
Hardly any way to conduct local democracy, eh? It's what Rob Ford speaks to when he says he wants to improve customer service at City Hall. "Ford is explaining the horse-trading of votes at City Hall. Recorded votes publicly available on a website would prevent that, he argues." http://live.nationalpost.com/Event/Live_coverage_Toronto_mayoral_candidate_Rob_Fords_meeting_with_the_Post_editorial_board?Page=1#ixzz10I73he1y
Maybe Mr. Vaughan would care to comment?
That's all very well and fine but where does that leave constituents from other Wards in the city? In effect he was saying if something came before him that might be detrimental to the best interests of constituents in another Ward he felt justified in ignoring the issue.
This explains Mr. Vaughan's actions during the last Council Meeting and explains what goes on down at City Hall.
You see, the way things were meant to work, local issues were supposed to be ironed-out at Community Councils before they came to full Council, for basically a rubber stamp. The Community Council was intended to be a Public Meeting where constituents could attend to inform and to voice concerns about, or support for, items on the Agenda. The assumption was that open debate would protect against things going terribly wrong.
What actually happened at Community Councils was nothing like that at all. In reality, councillors, and lobbyists, would secure the votes of Council members before the Public Meeting. When it came time for the constituents the outcome was already decided. Much of the time councillors were not in their seats and deputants would be speaking to empty chairs or over other conversations. . Nobody paid a blind bit of attention. This happened regularly at the North York Community Council. If a Ward Councillor wanted to ignore community unrest on a particular item, by virtue of this corrupt culture, it required only a devious manipulation to overcome their protests.
Hardly any way to conduct local democracy, eh? It's what Rob Ford speaks to when he says he wants to improve customer service at City Hall. "Ford is explaining the horse-trading of votes at City Hall. Recorded votes publicly available on a website would prevent that, he argues." http://live.nationalpost.com/Event/Live_coverage_Toronto_mayoral_candidate_Rob_Fords_meeting_with_the_Post_editorial_board?Page=1#ixzz10I73he1y
Maybe Mr. Vaughan would care to comment?
Monday, September 20, 2010
So, what's wrong with all this?
What's wrong is that Karen Stintz seems to have all the time in the world for making a career in politics and little time for making Ward 16 a better place for residents.
Ward 16 is popular with the development sector but it's also popular with the outside advertising business too.
Here, Councillor Stintz enjoys a good old time with the boys who spend their time defeating our By-laws on outdoor advertising signs. "City Councillor Karen Stintz is caught on camera laughing it up with four lobbyists for the Billboard Industry." www.illegalsigns.ca
"From time to time, City Councillors would chat with members of the public as well as the industry’s paid lobbyists. But one City Councillor only spoke to the lobbyists. Her name is Karen Stintz. And we have the video to prove it: The silent video hits high drama at 0:33, when Stintz’ animation gets a tad wild." www.illegalsigns.ca
"Karen Stintz is the worst of a very questionable bunch. She may be the most articulate and witty member of Council’s unofficial opposition (goodness knows she doesn’t have much competition), but her positions rarely seem authentically her own but rather products of ideology or focused lobbying efforts. (Almost every time I have attended a Council meeting, I have seen her at the back of the gallery chatting away with lobbyists.)" Torontoist December 2006
What's wrong is that Councillor Stintz appears to be more interested in helping these guys get their signs erected, rejigged or illuminated than listening to the concerns of residents.
Ward 16 is popular with the development sector but it's also popular with the outside advertising business too.
Here, Councillor Stintz enjoys a good old time with the boys who spend their time defeating our By-laws on outdoor advertising signs. "City Councillor Karen Stintz is caught on camera laughing it up with four lobbyists for the Billboard Industry." www.illegalsigns.ca
"From time to time, City Councillors would chat with members of the public as well as the industry’s paid lobbyists. But one City Councillor only spoke to the lobbyists. Her name is Karen Stintz. And we have the video to prove it: The silent video hits high drama at 0:33, when Stintz’ animation gets a tad wild." www.illegalsigns.ca
"Karen Stintz is the worst of a very questionable bunch. She may be the most articulate and witty member of Council’s unofficial opposition (goodness knows she doesn’t have much competition), but her positions rarely seem authentically her own but rather products of ideology or focused lobbying efforts. (Almost every time I have attended a Council meeting, I have seen her at the back of the gallery chatting away with lobbyists.)" Torontoist December 2006
What's wrong is that Councillor Stintz appears to be more interested in helping these guys get their signs erected, rejigged or illuminated than listening to the concerns of residents.
Sunday, September 19, 2010
What was in it for Ward 16?
It's been 7 years now and we can't see what the residents of Ward 16 got for the millions of dollars it has cost to finance our local councillor and office. It seems we're no better off. We're still fighting against big property owners, illegal signs, noise and light pollution. It doesn't stop there either. It seems we're still looking to improve public safety along Avenue Road.
But, more of that one later.
Ward 16 is angry too about the spending habits of Toronto councillors. For example, many in the Ward took exception to Councillor Stintz spending our money to improve her speaking habits. (Check out the video too.) At the time we wrote to the councillor and got this reply -
"All expenditures are within policy and pre-approved by Council Services. One of the professional expenses last year was for public speaking." Karen Stintz, January 2009. " I wouldn't believe everything you read in a blog." But, it was 100% true. And, if we remember correctly, that was the type of standard answer during the MFP computer leasing scandal.
We're sorry, that doesn't cut it with us, and not with some others -
"Sounding less shrill thanks to $4,500 public speaking lessons, Stintz talks a good game, but her inconsistent votes should back it up more. She also shouldn't have accused Miller of lying during a committee meeting when she knew he wasn't and got called on it" Sue-Ann Levy Toronto Sun
Shortly after being re-elected Councillor Stintz thought she could be Mayor of Toronto and we thought it was a good idea too - at least she would be gone! Perhaps she thought too that she needed to improve her speaking skills. A good idea if you want to be Mayor but we didn't think it was something we needed to pay for. Neither did we think it was a good idea for her to be giving speeches where she complained about Mayor Miller, “… four years of missed opportunities for cost-containment, revenue generation and meaningful partnerships” like she did in 2007 at the the Economic Club of Toronto.
Someone please explain to me how Karen Stintz’s decision to blow taxpayer money on something this silly is not a missed opportunity for cost containment?http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/607196
But, more of that one later.
Ward 16 is angry too about the spending habits of Toronto councillors. For example, many in the Ward took exception to Councillor Stintz spending our money to improve her speaking habits. (Check out the video too.) At the time we wrote to the councillor and got this reply -
"All expenditures are within policy and pre-approved by Council Services. One of the professional expenses last year was for public speaking." Karen Stintz, January 2009. " I wouldn't believe everything you read in a blog." But, it was 100% true. And, if we remember correctly, that was the type of standard answer during the MFP computer leasing scandal.
We're sorry, that doesn't cut it with us, and not with some others -
"Sounding less shrill thanks to $4,500 public speaking lessons, Stintz talks a good game, but her inconsistent votes should back it up more. She also shouldn't have accused Miller of lying during a committee meeting when she knew he wasn't and got called on it" Sue-Ann Levy Toronto Sun
Shortly after being re-elected Councillor Stintz thought she could be Mayor of Toronto and we thought it was a good idea too - at least she would be gone! Perhaps she thought too that she needed to improve her speaking skills. A good idea if you want to be Mayor but we didn't think it was something we needed to pay for. Neither did we think it was a good idea for her to be giving speeches where she complained about Mayor Miller, “… four years of missed opportunities for cost-containment, revenue generation and meaningful partnerships” like she did in 2007 at the the Economic Club of Toronto.
Someone please explain to me how Karen Stintz’s decision to blow taxpayer money on something this silly is not a missed opportunity for cost containment?http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/607196
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)