The Mayor is puzzled?

So, our Mayor is puzzled, astonished, surprised over Ajax's decision not to support the Region's plan to push an incinerator on Clarington/Durham Region without clear answers to the many outstanding questions that should have been answered before getting to this point in the process. http://www.newsdurhamregion.com/news/Durham/article/88270

We might use other terminology for the Mayor's confusion and position on this incinerator. How about baffled, befuddled, bewildered, dazed, discombobulated, disconcerted, disorganized, distracted, flummoxed, flustered, fouled up, glassy-eyed, gonzo, misled, mixed up, muddled, nonplussed, perplexed, perturbed, punch-drunk, punchy, screwy, shook up, slaphappy, spaced out, stumped, taken aback, thrown, unglued, unscrewed, unzipped... How about just plain wrong.

What is perplexing to me and to many others is how our elected regional representatives could so easily believe everything they are told by those who have a vested interested in having this incinerator built, without question, yet will not consider information and objections brought forward by:

• residents who have done their homework and presented documented reports, studies, concerns


• 16 Clarington doctors who have signed a petition declaring their health concerns as well as their opposition to this incinerator


• 43 Durham Region doctors who have done the same


• Peer Reviewers hired by the municipality of Clarington, at great expense to us, who have outlined shortcomings and problems with the EA studies to date on this project

How can they have such tunnel vision? How can they be so blind? How can they be so obtuse?

How can the Mayor continue to say that he has not made up his mind on whether Clarington should support this incinerator or not, all the while promoting it to everyone and every group he comes in contact with? All the while showing promotional videos from proponents, but never, not even once truthfully considering "the other side" of the story? Does he think residents of Clarington are as blind or as undiscerning or myopic as he is? This man is not a leader. He is a follower (of Mr. Anderson and cronies).

I will level this charge today at our two other regional representatives - Charlie Trim and Mary Novak. Both have also continued to say that they haven't made up their minds yet and are waiting for all the information to be in. Well, they have shown their true colours recently and there is no doubt where they stand either. Both are fully in support of this project, even without having all the answers. Even with having hardly any clear-cut answers at all.

There is no technology chosen to date, although Mr. Anderson has repeatedly said it will NOT be plasma arc or the newest tech since it is too expensive. Money before health and safety - is anyone surprised at that? Mass Burn is what is being seriously considered.

You may say, "how do you know?". Ask yourself, how did we know the preferred site would be not only in Clarington, but specifically in Courtice? How could we have known that more than a year ago? How did we know that no other alternatives would be seriously studied or looked at well before they made public that "thermal technology" would be the preferred option? How have we known before the "studies" have even been done, what each step would be?

We knew because it has all been pre-planned, pre-ordained. And Clarington has been the target all along, one reason being our uber-weak political representation. While the local councillors are still not willing to declare us an unwilling host, even though they by now have seen the shortcomings of the studies, the process, the beat-around-the-bush "spin" put on this whole project, the regional councillors have determinedly, unequivocally, and unmistakably supported the Region's "vision" to burn our garbage from the start.

Oh to be blessed with honest, intelligent, open-minded representation such as Ajax has. We can only hope for better choices in 2010, and will actively work toward that goal. That includes the "Elect the Chair" campaign. While we know our Mayor and 2 regional councillors will never support that, we can hope our local councillors come to their senses and push for election of the regional chair, as residents have repeatedly asked them to do.

A question to our Mayor and regional councillors - why is it that you promote the "new" incineration technology, which STILL cannot remove the harmful ultrafine and nanoparticulate from the stack emissions, but continue to talk about the "old" landfill technology, and will not admit that there is new technology in stabilized landfill that collects leachate, prevents it from contaminating our groundwater, can collect the methane gas produced and with technology can safely burn it for energy, and does not pollute the atmosphere the way incineration will? Even the Region's consultants admitted in their brief "alternatives to" study that the greatest impact on the airshed would be from incineration, not from landfill (not even from old-style landfill, which is the only type they "studied").

With all the lip service paid to global warming and climate change, our environmentally non-friendly Region of Durham (proven during the greenbelt debacle) wants to contribute even more through stack emissions to the problem.

And the claims that forest fires contribute more to greenhouse gases than incinerators is disingenuous at best. Naturally occurring forest fires are not remotely related to intentional burning of waste. There are better alternatives but those have not even been considered by this Council or the Region's Consultants. One more chink in the EA armour.

Our elected (and non-elected) representatives should err on the side of caution when it comes to our health. Also when it comes to the financial commitment. Use the Precautionary Principle, which is normally used first and foremost in the scientific community. It has been totally disregarded by not only the Region but by the consultants who are promoting the vision of the Region. Yes, there is a huge and ever widening credibility gap. Especially when questions are asked at the public information sessions and no clear answer is ever given - just a bunch of spin and non-answers. I have not spoken with ONE person who asked a question at a PIC who was satisfied with the answer they received. NOT because it was not the answer they wanted, as suggested by Mr. Cliff Curtis who is Commissioner of Waste... er, Works, but because they didn't get any answer at all. Just spin.

It is depressing to see what is happening to Clarington. It is more than depressing to see people putting their houses on the market already, so convinced are they that this will be pushed through in spite of what the final true answers are. It is a sad state of affairs for Clarington, for the Region of Durham, and for the GTA overall. It is depressing that seeing facilities that look "clean" in Europe seem to be the deciding factor, nevermind all the invisible emissions coming from the stacks; nevermind that their waste stream is different than ours; nevermind that we will not have the best available technology - we will have the most affordable technology. Nevermind that European standards are much higher than Ontario standards for emission control. Nevermind that Ontario has only guidelines, not requirements for emissions, and that while there may be a financial cost for exceeding limits placed upon incinerator facilities, many consider it simply a 'cost of doing business'.

Those who support this project should spend a little time doing some real homework. That includes our elected (and non-elected) representatives. It is more than obvious that our Mayor does not understand the EA process or how it works (or is supposed to work) at all. It is a process for ASKING questions of the proponents, and making sure those answers are received. He seems to object to all the questions being asked by residents and peer reviewers, since our Council is not asking the questions that need to be asked.

Also see Metroland articles and editorials:
Ajax council raises good questions on incinerator
Is Ajax standing up for Clarington’s interests?
Take a stand, Clarington, says incineration opponent
Energy from waste draws new faces

Durham Environment Watch - good source of information for incineration issues and media articles
Watchdog Incinerator Posts - previous posts regarding this incendiary issue

Sellout crowd at Regional Council meeting

Yes, the room was full for the meeting. That was Regional Council chambers on January 24th. It was so full there were people sitting on the stairs, and in extra chairs behind Council itself. There were two major issues to be dealt with at that meeting - The Lord's Prayer and the Greenbelt issue that has been plaguing this Council for many months.

Greenbelt - The great majority of this Council finally came through (see issue in the January 23 posting below). They voted 29 - 1 for the best compromise option, which was Option #1. Option #2 would have been best (to rescind), but there was no way they would support an option that said outright that they were dead wrong. So politically, the best result we could hope for was Option #1, which was to simply receive the Planning Committee report (which signalled the intent of Durham Region to remove lands from the Greenbelt at it's earliest opportunity, which wouldn't be until at least 2015 when the Greenbelt is revisited) - to receive the report for information. That effectively lets it die a quiet death.

The *recommendation* of Planning Committee had been to attach a supplemental attachment to the Official Plan to let developers and landowners know who the lucky few were who had their lands singled out for "future growth" plans by the Region. That would have been Option #3, the one that had been recommended by Planning Committee. Remember that this was a purely political recommendation, not supported by Planning Staff (the experts) or the majority of residents nor by some of the municipalities. It appears that Regional Council did see the light, and showed that they actually MAY have the best interests of the region, the environment, and the people at heart. We certainly will be watching closely to see what they do in the future, as will the media (including the dreaded Toronto Media).

The Lord's Prayer - The Ottawa-based group, Secular Ontario, has lost this round with Durham Region. This organization has complained that saying prayers at any municipal council's meetings, including Durham Regional meetings, is against the law. Since the 1999 Ontario Court of appeal ruling against prayer, individuals and groups like Secular Ontario have used that ruling to force councils to stop the long-held tradition of praying at the beginning of meetings.

This issue has caused quite a stir in the region, with many residents speaking at Finance and Admin Committee meeting, and following up with another 13 delegations signed up to speak at Council on Wednesday (24th). Most were strongly in favour of keeping the Lord's Prayer, with 3 speaking against it. Durham Region came up with a "compromise", sort of. They will still say the Lord's Prayer, but it will be *before* the meeting is officially opened, rather than after the meeting is called to order. Council voted 21 - 4 to approve this change in "procedure".

Those speaking against the proposal gave valid reasons for their position, such as prayer should be a personal thing, a matter of conscience. They felt prayer has no place in a political forum. On the other hand, those who were staunchly in support of continuing the tradition also had their valid reasons, and Council attempted to come up with a compromise.

It remains to be seen whether this action will hold up if challenged in a court of law, but it was evident that the vast majority of both Councillors and residents wanted to continue with prayer prior to meetings. The new "procedure" of saying the Lord's Prayer (and allowing anyone else to silently pray on their own, or not) prior to calling the meeting to order was begun that very day with the Chair (Anderson) entering the meeting, Council and the public standing, the Lord's Prayer recited, and then the Chair calling the meeting to order afterward. This is how meetings will begin in the future at Regional Council. Most people were quite happy with the solution. This may or may not be the end of it and we'll see what happens in the future.

These two issues show that community involvement can make a difference. Becoming involved in an issue that is important to you and to the community is an approach more and more people are taking. Durham Regional Council is listening, at least part of the time. With media and individual pressure and speaking up, it is possible to get them to change their minds (in the case of the Greenbelt) and to support an action many of them originally wanted to support in the first place (retaining prayer). So please continue to "get involved". If you can't attend a meeting because of work or other obligations, then write a letter. Or lots of letters. It is the only way you will be heard.

Will you be there?

Who will be attending the Durham Regional Council meeting tomorrow (January 24, at 10:00 a.m.)? Will it be as wild as the September 13 Regional Council meeting when so many residents got up to speak against removal of lands in Durham Region (including 2 parcels within Clarington) from the Provincial Greenbelt? Where several were berated by Councillors for their opinions? Or will it be a slightly quieter meeting, but again with a large number of residents from across Durham Region speaking up as delegations to Planning Committee on January 9, where the Greenbelt issue took up the majority of a very long meeting?

Will you be there to witness the hypocrisy of some on Council who continue to try to convince us of how supportive they are of the Greenbelt, yet they want to attach a supplemental document to the Official Plan which spells out which lands they will try to remove from the Greenbelt at the earliest opportunity? And that opportunity won't even present itself for at least another 9 years. So why make future councils conform to the wishes of this present council, when so many things can change in that period of time. They will tell you it is their "vision" for the future. But their "vision" is truly short-sighted in the overall scheme of things.

Durham Region has the worst reputation in the GTA for being environmentally unfriendly. Will they try to change that perception with new "spin" on what they are doing, or will they truly try to become a friend to residents and the Province and discard this silly (and destructive) plan?

The public is watching closely. The media is watching too. Why wouldn't this Planning Committee (not STAFF - the Planning Committee is made up of politicians, not experts) listen to the advice of their staff (the experts) and the pleas of their residents, and requests from Municipal Councils such as Clarington and Ajax? They won't even let the municipalities do their own planning, which is a shame. Is this Planning Committee so all-knowledgeable, so infallible that they know better than the Provincial Government, planning experts, and municipal staff and councils? Do they not have an obligation to do what is in the best interest of the majority, rather than try to give the advantage to a few while causing damage to our environment as well as to their own reputations with the public? That reputation as a "retrograde, developer-friendly" bunch is reinforced more and more each day. They will try to put a new spin on it but nobody is buying.

Come out to the meeting at Durham Regional Headquarters, 605 Rossland Road East, Whitby, in Council Chambers on the main level to support Clarington's request that all Clarington lands be removed from the "Supplemental Attachment" that Planning Committee wants attached to the Official Plan. Come out to let Council know that you don't agree with Planning Committee. Come out to support the Greenbelt and Provincial Legislation. The meeting begins at 10:00 a.m. Come and enjoy the show. Or participate in it. Tell your own Regional Councillors and Mayor that you support the Greenbelt and they should support "Option #1".

Greenbelt primary focus of Official Plan vote

Durham Region's first full council meeting after the summer break saw the main issue being the contentious Durham Region Official Plan the main focus of delegations and Council.

The majority of delegations spoke in support of the Provincial Greenbelt Plan as well as Provincial Places to Grow. Two candidates for Clarington Council spoke in support of the Greenbelt as it stands with the Province - Richard Ward (candidate for Mayor) and Linda Gasser (candidate for Regional Wards 3 & 4). Ms. Gasser was badgered by Oshawa Mayor John Gray but she stood her ground and gave good answers. She was also questioned by Councillors Emm and Nicholson and Chair Roger Anderson, who tried to fluster her but didn't succeed. Mayor Parish, a member of the planning committee, asked numerous questions of Ms. Gasser and supported her efforts, as well as others. A welcome change in attitude from the nastiness especially of Mayor Gray. Chair of the Planning Committee, G. O'Connor looked plenty perturbed by most of the delegations, but took out her angst on Terry Nuspl from Pickering. There were some excellent speakers in support of the Greenbelt legislation and included lands and very few against it. Not at all reflective of the majority of regional councillors.

Last May Durham Region designated 2,200 hectares of greenbelt land for future development (to satisfy developers who supply the majority of election campaign funds for Durham politicians, perhaps?). An attempt to have council rescind its May decision on Wednesday failed on a vote of 15 to 9. This in spite of the fact that Durham planners say that Durham Region already has enough land designated as "urban" for development to accomodate the next 25 years of growth. But council agreed to postpone further discussion of the details of greenbelt intrusions until January 2007 - after the election - likely because of all the opposition to it from residents who showed up at Council chambers for the meeting.

This is typical of the Regional Council. Their very capable planning staff did support the greenbelt and did not support trying to change it - the Greenbelt legislation is LAW and the Province has made their intentions clear - they will NOT change it for the next 10 years But Regional Planning Committee (made up of some of the mayors/regional councillors) directed planning staff to do a report that would include removal of the subject lands from the greenbelt, or find a way to signal that if that was not possible, these lands were preferred for future development (pending studies, of course). Typical back-door approach that happens when they can't get what they want directly.

Good news though for Clarington. The west Courtice areas that the Region wanted removed from the Greenbelt so they could be slated for future development - were removed from the "Future Growth Areas" as per Clarington's wishes. But their inclusion in the Provincial Greenbelt will still be under assault by Durham Region in January when it comes before them again (after the election).

This is an important issue and should be an "election issue" for voters of Clarington. When your candidate comes around to your door or phones you or you have any opportunity to meet any of them, ask them their position on the Greenbelt. Don't be fooled if they say "they support it" - ask whether they will keep the Greenbelt boundaries intact until it is reviewed by the Province in 2015, or whether they agree with the attempt by Durham Region to remove some of the lands from the greenbelt designation. You may also want to ask them if they are accepting campaign contributions from developers. Don't let them double-talk you - get solid answers to your questions. Don't be afraid to ask.

So, bottom line is that Regional Council is still "developer friendly" and doesn't even try to hide it anymore (at least most of them). And here is one more good reason why the Regional Chair should be ELECTED by the voters, not appointed by a vote of Council.

It is also true that every single one of our present council and mayor had developers as donors to their last campaign. For example, in the last election, Mayor Mutton raised over $40,000 in campaign contributions. Approx. $1600 of it was from private individuals, and the rest was from corporations - mostly developers and contractors! No wonder our council and Durham Region is perceived as being "developer friendly".

And after the shouting down and nasty reception of several resident speakers at Regional Council on Wednesday (along with similar actions in Clarington Council chambers over the last while) - it's no wonder that these Councils are NOT seen as being "resident friendly".

For more, see "Bastard Child of the 905" in the Oshawa Metroland blog, along with the Globe and Mail's John Barber's Column in that same blog entry. See text below. Emphasis/bold is mine.


Don't mess with Durham

JOHN BARBER

Linda Gasser, an organic beef farmer aspiring to municipal office in Clarington -- an urban-frontier amalgamation of what used to be the few small towns and many farms and forests of Clarke and Darlington townships -- prepared meticulously for the presentation she made this week to Durham Region council, the body she hopes to join Nov. 13.

Standing at a lectern facing an oval-shaped parliament of stiff and comically sober incumbents, she offered a detailed, thoughtful critique of the region's latest retrograde attempt to prepare supposedly protected land for more of the same sprawl that is threatening to ruin the last of its old towns, farms and forests.

Despite six years of review, she said, the new official plan currently before council is a mess. "I lay responsibility for this official plan mess at the feet of the chair of planning committee, and [Durham Region] Chairman [Roger] Anderson."

At that, the oval went electric. Oshawa Mayor John Gray, chairing the meeting at the time, began shouting at Ms. Gasser. "You can't lay allegations here!" he bellowed, while fellow councillors rose to decry the monstrous offence in tones equally aggrieved and indignant. "Don't lay allegations!" he bellowed again and again.

"It's not an allegation," Ms. Gasser, shaken by the sudden uproar, replied quietly. "It's an opinion."

Mr. Anderson, the usual chairman of such gatherings, is more sophisticated than ludicrous Mayor Gray is in his mistreatment of constituents, preferring facetious mockery to clumsy intimidation. Thus, he contrived to mispronounce the perfectly phonetic name of one meek citizen he faced down, Terry Nuspl of Pickering, half a dozen times before she was able to begin her plea to preserve the farms and forests.

Chairman Anderson was all charm and jocularity as he insulted his constituent by mangling her name every way he could think of. Then he turned the proceedings over to attack-dog Gerri Lynn O'Connor, mayor of Uxbridge.

Mayor O'Connor mercilessly berated Ms. Nuspl for not knowing the precise name of the particular instrument that Durham had invented to punch holes in the Greater Toronto greenbelt -- and whether it is an attachment, schedule or appendix to the official plan.

The rules of procedure allow councillors to question citizens who come to speak in the chamber. But Mayor O'Connor made no pretense of asking questions as she viciously laid into the quaking citizen for not knowing the difference between an attachment and an appendix. After uttering one insincere, ineffective protest on behalf of the rules, Chairman Anderson just let her rip.

"It's a tried-and-true tactic in Durham," candidate Gasser reflected after the ugly meeting ended. "I try to be prepared for it but it still takes me aback."

Two themes dominate her doorstep discussions with voters during the current campaign, according to Ms. Gasser. One is strong support for the provincial greenbelt and new provincial policies restricting the sprawl so beloved of Durham council. "They see that it is really important to maintain the rural character of this region, this municipality in particular," Ms. Gasser said. "I hear a lot about that."

The other theme is disgust at self-serving politicians who abuse their constituents. "People don't really want to be shouted down at town hall," she said. "They are looking for politicians who treat them fairly."

In truth the two issues -- the greenbelt and political thuggery -- are perfect reflections of one another, both potent proofs of how isolated and unaccountable local politics has become in Durham, bastard child of the 905. Still scandalously dependent on the development industry to finance their campaigns, incumbents can afford to ignore public opinion while they serve vested interests. The reason? Hardly anybody bothers to vote.

The few citizens who do step up dare not mention in council what they all know to be obvious. Oh, how the politicians howl, how prickly and pompous they become when some meek voter dares to notice their slavish dependence on developer dollars. Like contrary opinions, the plain truth about local politics has no place in the perfect echo chamber of Durham council.

Consider the case of Clarington Mayor John Mutton, a notorious shouter who is campaigning for re-election while facing criminal assault charges. Mayor Mutton raised more than $40,000 to contest the 2003 election, of which individual constituents -- four in total -- contributed $1,600. The rest came from corporations, the vast majority of whom were developers and contractors from everywhere except Clarington.

Are the results of the official-plan debate any surprise in such circumstances? Of course not. Even though Durham planners say that the region already has enough designated urban land to accommodate another 25 years of sprawl, council voted to prepare another 15,000 acres for development -- lands specifically protected by provincial law as agricultural forever. Cowed slightly by mounting opposition that even they can't fail to notice, the Durhams courageously delayed their attempt to punch holes in the actual greenbelt until after the election.

Despite some "dumb political acrobatics," the result is clear, according to Ajax Mayor Steve Parish, the only council member who refuses corporate contributions. "They basically are still committed to the private interests that support them," he said. "This was really the triumph of private interests over the public interest."

Chairman Anderson blames his council's increasing notoriety on meddlesome Toronto newspapers. I hope he's right about the effect of the novel scrutiny, but nothing will change unless Durham voters start to meddle themselves.

Political funding in 905 mainly from developers

The Toronto Star June 1st edition, gave us some insight as to why our councils may seem to us to be "developer-friendly". It's not all in our heads.

A study released Thursday by York University political science professor Robert MacDermid found that local councillors in the suburban cities and towns bordering Toronto get the bulk of their campaign funds — in one case as high as 96.7 per cent — from corporate contributions, primarily from developers. Oh my, what a surprise!

A detailed analysis of the money shows that across the 905 municipalities almost 70 per cent of all corporate contributions came directly from developers or companies that represented construction interests. In Toronto it's 44 per cent. But then they don't have all that open land waiting to be developed in Toronto. Not like we have in the 905 areas, certainly in Clarington!

"Citizens have a blame here," MacDermid said. "In their absence from politics both as voters and as contributors, business and development interests fill that void."
As a result their interests dominate in the 905 area where there is more land to be developed, he said.

There is a way to remedy this - and Ajax Mayor Steve seems to have found it. Ajax has the 2nd highest individual voter participation behind Toronto, and they are the only municipalities to offer rebates for individual contributions. In the case of Ajax, voters can get 75 per cent of the first $100 donated to a politician back and 50 per cent of the next $150 pack. The cap for rebates is $250. It's a way to get individuals to donate and those big donations by developers aren't needed.

Parish has asked the province to step in and reform campaign finance laws, but to date his plea seems to have fallen on deaf ears, as usual. Perhaps Clarington should consider following the Ajax lead though, and offer rebates. It couldn't hurt. (Only for individual contributions, not unions and corporations)

Of course all politicians will dismiss any suggestion that developers have undue influence because of their election contributions. In some cases that may be true, in others not. But the perception of impropriety is as important as the real deal itself, and there is certainly that perception. Especially when there are "planning" decisions that make absolutely no sense other than to give developers what they ask for, at times even against the recommendations of planning staff. They can usually find an excuse for their actions, but not always a plausible one. We're not that stupid.

Kudos to Clarington Council

... and ever bigger kudos to Clarington Planners for their excellent report and recommendations...

So, last night at the Clarington GPA meeting (council chambers) saw quite a number of Clarington residents who had something to say to Council about the Greenbelt and Durham Region's slap in the face to Clarington Council and Clarington residents. To their credit, the municipality decided to go through with a Public Meeting on Durham Region's decision to try to have two areas in Courtice removed from the Greenbelt, and a large area between Bowmanville and Courtice (called the "urban separator") added to the Greenbelt, even though Durham Region has already voted on the issue. Both would be bad moves for Clarington, but what does the Region care about Clarington? If they can get what they want -which is more development - then why not take advantage of Clarington, stuck off in the hinterland of the Region (or that's what some seem to think).

Roger Anderson's attitude toward development is blatantly apparent at any Regional Council meeting you might care to attend. His lack of understanding and/or lack of concern for environmental issues is deplorable. Just one more reason why the position of Chair for the Region should be, no must be ELECTED. This is a man who is not even elected to any position at all. He is handed the position of Chair with all that entails on a silver platter by some Councillors who may fear him or feel they owe him their support. If the position of Chair was chosen from elected Councillors/Mayors on the Durham Region Council, then that's one thing. But to be appointed because everybody knows you or you have an "in" but don't have to answer to the electorate - that is a beastly way to get a position. And Durham Denizens are realizing that fact more and more as time goes on.

But back to the meeting last night. Clarington Planning Department recommended that the municipality of Clarington should advise the Minister of Municipal Affairs & Housing, the Greenbelt Council and the Region of Durham that it does NOT support amendments to the boundaries of the Greenbelt Plan at this time (amendments Durham Region voted to send to the Province). The report details the many reasons for this position, and the great majority of people who came to speak at the public meeting were in support of the Clarington Planning Report.

After everyone had a chance to speak, some of the Councillors gave their opinions too. Then the vote - and it was unanimous. All the Clarington Councillors and the Mayor voted to support the recommendations of Clarington Planning Department. All except Councillor Schell, one of our two regional councillors for Clarington, who did not vote as he was chairing that portion of the meeting. However, he did vote at Durham Region on May 10th to support the Region's resolution to ask for adjustments to the boundary, and includes designating these lands as "future development area". And he should vote next week at the regular Clarington Council meeting, so we'll have to see whether he supports the municipality when the vote comes up for ratification at the Regular Council Meeting (Clarington) on May 29th, or whether he'll vote against Clarington and continue to support Durham Region's stand. We hope he will vote as the others did last night.

We also hope that none of the Councillors or the Mayor will change their mind/vote next Monday night. It's been known to happen in the past, but since this is an election year, we're hoping they continue to support Clarington Planning recommendations and the residents of Clarington on this issue. Having a unanimous vote will send a clear message to the Province and to Durham Region. We hope there will be just as many (or more) Clarington voters at Bowmanville Town Hall on May 29th at 7:00 pm to watch.

If you didn't have a chance to get to the GPA meeting last night, you still have another chance. Write to your councillors or speak with them and let them know you don't want them to cop out or surrender to any pressure they may encounter from some of their peers at the Region, including the Chairman. This is an important issue that will affect the face of Clarington for years to come. And show up at the meeting on May 29th to lend your support or just to see how things work at municipal council meetings. It can be interesting, frustrating, fascinating, offensive, enjoyable, objectionable.... But it certainly is an education, especially in an election year.

See "comments" below.

Development Hungry Councillors

More coverage on the Greenbelt debacle from the Toronto Star - Durham councillors love look of sprawl - and from Durham Region News - Durham wants lands out of greenbelt.

Both articles mention how developer-friendly our councillors are, and they certainly deserve that label as they've worked hard for it over the years. They have fought residents at every turn when concerned locals have tried to protect environmentally sensitive lands, preserve wildlife corridors, fisheries and forests, and keep urban sprawl to a minimum.

Now Durham is the only region in the entire GTA where local councillors are openly fighting greenbelt boundaries. And Clarington is right at the forefront. The Star calls Durham Region a "retrograde council". We couldn't have said it better.

"The behaviour of Durham's concrete-friendly councillors exemplifies why Ontario needs a greenbelt plan that is enshrined under the authority and force of provincial legislation. Were it not for that, efforts to chip away at the belt and erode its protections would likely be more widespread." This is exactly why the Greenbelt Plan was enacted - because some local municipalities couldn't keep their paws off sensitive recharge areas, wetlands, prime agricultural land, etc. They wanted it for development, and we have already lost much of our prime land to developers with more slated to be paved over in the future. Even the Province realized there needed to be some protection from these developer-friendly councils, some of whom go overboard when it comes to approving developments; who seem to think that all development is good, no matter what.

The Durham Region Official Plan tells us that we do NOT need more urban lands within Clarington before at least 2026, so why the rush to remove these areas from the greenbelt so they can be designated for development now? And why THESE lands? There is plenty of land in south Courtice that is undeveloped that is not environmentally sensitive. And more land in other parts of Clarington, that is not within the greenbelt. Why THIS particular area, if not for pressure from certain development interests? It just doesn't make sense. And that is precisely why our Council and Regional Council (the majority, with a few notable exceptions) have such a terrible reputation with Durham residents as well as in the GTA as a whole. This is not a new thing.

And it's also one more reason why we still think the Chair of Durham Region should be elected by the residents of Durham, not chosen by the small group of development-hungry councillors. Mr. Anderson (current Chair) is known to be quite pro-development too. Why not give residents a chance to put in someone who might be a little more willing to listen? Why can't we vote for Regional Chair?

"Concrete-friendly, retrograde council". Not terribly flattering, is it? We think it's time for a substantial change to the composition of our council. We need some new faces and new leadership. We need people who can understand the wisdom of controlled development and preservation of agricultural and environmentally significant lands. We need a council who is not afraid to reverse some of the ill-conceived direction this council has taken and go forward on a more sensible path. We need a council who will actually listen to residents and what they want, rather than pretending to listen and then pushing forward with their own agendas nevertheless.

Let's ask the difficult questions of those running for office, and demand answers on questions such as the greenbelt issue, development, transportation issues, 407, tax increases, and more. Remember that these politicians do NOT always know best, as they like us to think. We have had some who have come to run for office because it pays better than their previous job (if they had a job). Some come to run because they truly feel they can make a difference. Some run because of ego. Some turn out to be excellent and others end up being an embarrassment or worse, causing lasting damage to our municipality. We have had some of those in the past and are still dealing with the fallout from some terrible decisions they have made regarding "paving over paradise".

Here is one good example to illustrate how this sprawl happens. Clarington added what is called "the finger" in North Courtice, which should never have been added in to the urban boundary in the first place. (See 4, 3 on map) That section was added because two Regional Councillors from Courtice at the time (Mary Novak and Larry Hannah) pushed hard at the local and regional level to have the area added. There was no "need" for the added land, and it encompasses some of the most environmentally sensitive land in the municipality. It is the large green area to the left of the white #4 area, south of Pebblestone and all the way west to Townline Road (left edge of map) that is one of the two areas in Courtice where Regional Council wants to remove the greenbelt designation so it can be added for future development. You can see the two areas on the map in the previous blog article.

Both areas (3 & 4) are still "special study areas" and a stipulation was made that development could only take place if a full, comprehensive watershed study was completed and if that study allowed for development of some of the lands. Local residents worked hard to get that designation and they should be commended, particularly Mrs. Racansky, who was treated so badly by the mayor recently. To date there has been no watershed study done, and it's been at least 10 years. Piecemeal studies are not good enough - the stipulation was for a complete, comprehensive watershed study of the entire Black-Farewell watershed, which we understand is very large. (Thanks to Mrs. Racansky's hard work for information on "the finger").

So why not remove "the finger" from the urban boundary since it never should have been added in the first place. Allow that area to be added to the greenbelt which would make the Province happy, rather than continuing to fight them. Why not add other areas that are more suited for development and intensification. Talk about "urban sprawl". Just look at the map. What would you call "the finger"? You won't find a better example of it than that.

So lets really get involved in this election. Learn about the candidates, ask questions, and make a point of voting. They say we get the government we deserve. We don't think we deserve this.

Greenbelt a Goner in North Courtice???

Durham Region will be making a submission to the Minister of Municipal Affairs to request changes to the Greenbelt Plan to delete certain lands near the Courtice Urban Area in north Courtice. The effect of such a change would allow for urban development in these environmentally sensitive areas - not a good thing for the area and not needed according to Official Plan Review reports.

The Provincial Greenbelt Plan was developed to provide clarity and certainty about urban structure, where and how future growth should be accommodated, and what must be protected for current and future generations. It identifies where urbanization should not occur in order to provide permanent protection to the agricultural land base and the ecological features and functions occurring on this landscape.

A Public Notice on page 2 of the May 10 Canadian Statesman says that Clarington will be considering its position on the proposal to adjust the Greenbelt boundaries through a report being prepared by the Planning Dept. This will be considered by the GP&A Committee on Tuesday, May 23 at 7:00 pm in Council Chambers (40 Temperance St., Bowmanville), and if you wish to speak to this matter at the meeting, you must register with the Clerk's dept. by Wednesday noon, May 17th (clerks@clarington.net). It will then be considered by Council on Monday, May 29 (same location) at 7:00 pm. You must register with the Clerk's dept by Wednesday noon, May 24 if you wish to speak at that meeting, and I sincerely hope people will do so.

Now, the funny thing about this (or NOT so funny) is, Regional Council has already voted on the matter, and no one from Clarington council (the Mayor or our Regional Councillors) asked that the matter be deferred until after Clarington had a chance to consider it and have public and planning dept. input on it.

On May 10, Regional Council voted 16 to 8 to exclude these lands from the Greenbelt area so that they can be developed, with John Mutton leaving the meeting prior to the vote, Jim Schell supporting it and Charlie Trim voting against. The motion passed, so it will be sent to the Minister and the Greenbelt Council, who hopefully will dismiss it for many reasons, which I'll go into later.

What good will come of the May 23 and May 29 meetings in Clarington, since the Region has already voted to send this to the Province? Why didn't the Mayor or our Regional Councillors (Jim Schell and Charlie Trim) ask that this vote be deferred until AFTER the Clarington meetings, since it was dealing with Clarington issues?

Someone commented that this is democracy in action - Clarington-style. Our Clarington Regional Councillors (Schell & Trim) voted on this matter at the region, without asking that it be deferred, BEFORE receiving the report from our planning staff (so how well informed are they?) and before the advertised public meetings on the issue for local residents (and local councillors).

I sincerely hope people will comment on this very important issue. And remember that it's an election year...