Did you vote for this?

Karen Stintz stumped with David Miller and the New Development Party in April in support of Transit City. Now she heads up the TTC and will soon be cutting bus routes and increasing fares for students.

The people of Ward 16 did not vote for Mayor Ford and our councillor should not be cutting services to hard working constituents who use the bus service along Avenue Road.

The Toronto "Planning Department".

It appears we have two "Planning Departments" in Toronto. There's the group headed up by Gary Wright and then there's the local councillor.

During the Miller Administration the local councillor needed the approval of the New Development Party and that's about the extent of planning in this City.

The "Planning Department" is seriously underfunded for these very reasons. Why pay for more professionals when Council need on order-takers. "I'd like a 20 storey building here but the Official Plan says I can't have it" says a councillor to the planner, "OK, here's how we will get around that" says Mister Wright.

Where's all the money from development?

You all agree, Toronto grew up pretty fast in the last 30 years. It was during the time that Alberta was becoming an 'oil Province'. Albertans did very well but Toronto doesn't seem to have benefited from all the intensification it has experienced.

With development comes Development Charges. These are the fees property owners must pay the City to finance the additional infrastructure required to service new condo and office space. No matter what we think these charges should be it is obvious whatever the City received doesn't seem to be paying off.

The puny amounts developers pay makes us think this has been a major part of Toronto's budget problems all along. When you see the levels of profit companies like Minto and Riocan generate every time they build into the sky it is obvious the City and existing residents aren't getting what is needed to accomodate them.

The Ward Councillor has all the power.

We learned a lot on the campaign trail. What stood out was how few residents understood where the power lies in our municipal affairs. Many believe the big issue of the day is who will be Mayor. Will Smitherman be the man who will do what Miller promised or will Ford be the guy who finally gets the job done.

Who is Mayor is important but consider this. Regardless of who makes it to that position, and regardless of what happens to the functionality of Council, there will be many issues confronting Ward 16 constituents that will be decided by the councillor.

That's what happened on Orchard View and Duplex. It took from only May the 20th to July 18th for Karen Stintz to make up her mind and support a 20 storey building that will overwhelm the adjacent neighbourhoods. That wan't very long given all the deliberations communities deserve. The community met only once with the planner and that was only 5 days before he made his final decisions. All along, the local residents believed the councillor was opposed to a 17 storey plan and were taken completely by surprise when she supported a 20 storey plan!

Of course things had all been decided on long before that. That's how they get done under Karen Stintz. The same strategy was used on projects like the open space at Yonge and Eglinton and 1066 Avenue Road.

If you are comfortable in your lifestyle, the local councillor has all the power to change the view from where you live in a very short time. If the local councillor doesn't understand the Official Plan or the many policies designed to protect our neighbourhoods, matters can get a whole lot worse.

Look at what happened at 1249 Avenue Road.

Planning is important.

The large building behind this accident is 1066 Avenue Road. 

Imagine what it will be like with snow and ice on it!

The local community isn't happy.

But, that didn't seem to matter to Councillor Stintz.

She wanted to show she could be Mayor.

Development dominates Ward 16 debate

Orchard View and Duplex apartment building raises the ire of some candidates

Tags: VoteTO 2010, Ward 16

By Shawn Star

October 20, 2010

Neighbourhoods: Hoggs Hollow, Allenby Ledbury Park / Cricket Club / Bedford Park / Caribou Park / Lytton Park / North Toronto

SHAWN STAR/TOWN CRIER TAME DEBATE: While some had been expecting an evening full of personal attacks and fireworks between the Ward 16 council candidates the event was rather civil. Hopefuls, from left, Michael Coll, Roy MacDonald, Terry Mills and Karen Stintz answered questions from the audience on issues related to development, arts funding and infrastructure improvement. Personal attacks and mudslinging were kept to a minimum at the most recent Ward 16 debate.      Avenue Road Eglinton Community Association (ARECA) at the North Toronto Memorial Community Centre hosted the congenial debate on Monday night.       The more than 100 people in attendance posed questions to the candidates on topics ranging from arts funding to improving sidewalks and even to the candidates’ favourite restaurant in the ward. The most consistent issue was development, which was incorporated into one-third of the questions.      At the forefront of the development talk was the approval of a 20-storey apartment building at the corner of Orchard View Boulevard and Duplex Avenue and the role of The Working Group, an organization of community members and associations that opposed the development.      The most raucous moment came when incumbent councillor Karen Stintzdefended her role in the approval of the new building by saying the majority of people in The Working Group supported it.       “The Working Group was created about two years ago and we had some new members who were added in the last few months,” she said, before suggesting those late-coming opponents were seated with her at the candidates’ table.      Candidate Michael Coll said he was there from the first meeting and there was no such majority. He then pointed to fellow candidate and member of The Working Group, Terry Mills and his work as an example of Stintz not taking the community’s opinion into consideration.      “Terry (Mills) put forward a thoughtful proposal,” he said. “And I’m sure he can testify that his recommendations were not followed through.”       Mills addressed the issue by citing his track record on the issue of development, and how the community can stop the approval process of a development site it’s not in favour of.       “In 2003 I stopped Greenwin from doing an enclosure of that corner,” he said. “RioCan then came back with an application and Karen (Stintz) endorsed it saying it was great. I stopped it. So you can do it.”      Rounding out the four candidates was elementary school teacher Roy MacDonald, who said when it comes to development, he thinks Stintz has her priorities backward.      “With what Karen was saying, the first thing I heard was ‘developers’, then I heard ‘city planners’, then farther down the line I heard ‘residents’,” he said. “I think that needs to change a little bit.”

h
























































http://mytowncrier.ca/development-dominates-ward-16-debate.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Do Politicians Have A “Best Before” Date?

While it might seem odd to compare people and products, sometimes it's informative to do so.

Many products are stamped with a “best before” date.  Using the product after the “best before” date has its risks.  Knowing this, we abide by the date to ensure our safety and well being.  Ask any parent and they will tell you they don’t give their children things that have gone beyond the “best before” date.

Seems like politicians, by and large, also have a “best before” date.  There are exceptions of course and we don’t mean to lump all politicians into the same category.

In Toronto’s Ward 16 we have a history of checking the "best before" information on our elected representatives. For example, the current Councillor won in 2003 because her predecessor had reached her “best before” date.  And, there's nothing predictable about the actual date of deterioration. Rather it is something that seems to be central to the person.  Shortly after her first 3 year term, current Ward Councillor – Karen Stintz – had already passed her “best before” date.

When she was first elected in 2003 there were many supporters who were happy that she won and would bring a freshness to the Ward.  In her first term she was open, willing to listen, willing to work with, and for, constituents.  This continued for only a short time after her re-election in 2006. In 2007 there was a marked changed of attitude.  Like someone leaving the bag of bread open, the councillor started becoming “crusty”.  Despite massive objections, a huge, misplaced development won approval in the "Upper Avenue". The following year, the hugely-out-of-place development at 1066 Avenue Road (St James Bond UC) also met with her approval.  

Like eggs that had been kept too long, the air was starting to smell as the community sensed something was foul.  Next, Riocan’s desire to close in the public open space on the north west corner of Yonge and Eglinton.  While in 2004 Stintz was against such a proposal, she chose to support it now despite major push-back from the Community and many other areas of Toronto.  With this, many in the Ward felt they had consumed something that was well past the “best before” date and were sickened by her turncoat attitude.  Most recently, Karen Stintz reversed her support for the community and approved of an over-sized, misplaced building to be erected at Orchard View and Duplex.  

This was the one that 'broke the camel's back'. Many more residents now believed she too had consumed something that was past its “best before” date.  She stands staunchly on her decision to change her opinion and now supports a development that is outside the “growth area” and outside the City’s “Official Plan”. This has left many feeling betrayed, disappointed and solidifying the commonly held view that she is well beyond her “best before” date.