Finale

Council ends term with two resolutions

At its final council meeting of the four year term on November 8, Council unanimously voted to approve a resolution put forward by Councillor Brad Nieman that opposes the Strong Mayors Act (Bill 3), which would place executive powers into the mayor’s hands without the consent of a council majority.

Under the Act, qualifying mayors could solely make decisions on items such as financial matters and budgets, the passing of bylaws, and the hiring and firing of key administrative staff, and also vetoing the decisions of Council. Currently, the bill names only Toronto and Ottawa, but it’s likely to extend to other growing municipalities.

In the resolution, Nieman stated that if a strong mayor system is put in place in Ontario, it would erode municipal autonomy and independence while creating instability for council and municipal administration.

Councillor Bill Roberts seconded the motion, and added that the bill presents a fundamental shift in the democratic process in local and municipal governments. “It also has implications for our CAO. The capacity for strong mayors to hire and fire department heads. To create or reorganize municipal departments. We need to do a little more thinking about this in terms of what it takes away from our council and our CAO and staff,” said Roberts, who added that the bill doesn’t fit with the Canadian version of consensus-driven decisions.

MORE HOMES BUILT FASTER
Prince Edward County has added its voice to the chorus of municipalities against some of the proposed changes contained in the province’s Bill 23, known as the More Homes Built Faster Act. A resolution by Councillor John Hirsch claims Council had not had enough time to look over elements before the deadline to provide feedback on November 24. The bill recently passed second reading in the Ontario legislature and Hirsch explained in his resolution the proposed regulations do not mesh with the County’s current and future vision.

The bill, which was introduced on October 25— the day after municipal elections in the province —proposes far-reaching changes. The bill legalizes three living units on most residential lots, reduces or eliminates the development fees municipalities can collect to pay for growth-required infrastructure, does away with the site plan control process for developments under 10 units, and takes away the control of conservation authorities to comment on natural heritage for development proposals and applications. It also includes new limits on third-party appeals to the Ontario Land Tribunal. While it may lead to fewer tribunal hearings, it may lead to more pressure from the public and organizations on municipal staff and councils.Hirsch noted that the affordable housing component of the bill was lacking, as it only requires up to five per cent of homes to be affordable. “The County is not currently able to implement an inclusionary zoning bylaw which would enable us to insist on and require affordable housing as part of subdivisions of ten or more units. However, we can request such authority from the Minister, and surely that is something that will be put forward in the next term of council,” said Hirsch. “But this legislation puts an upper limit on how many units could be required to be affordable in a subdivision. And five per cent to me is much too small of a limit. It should be something like 15 per cent.” Hirsch also worried about the heritage component, which requires the municipality to make a decision to designate all of them together or they come off the list entirely. “This is not in the best interest of the County or the owners,” said Hirsch.

Hirsch also noted the wetlands offset basis has serious implications for the County. “There are at least a couple of planning applications that might be coming before us soon, where the applicant would love to be developing within a wetland and this provision would then let them do that if they could provide some kind of an offset, which has been scientifically proven not to be a very satisfactory approach,” he said.

Brad McNevin, CAO of Quinte Conservation said his organization wants to do its part to help the government meet its housing goal, “But the proposed changes outlined in Bill 23 would have many serious, negative impacts to our environment which would contribute to issues with water quality, public safety, increased taxes, and a higher demand for new infrastructure and maintenance,” he said.

McNevin added that Conservation Authorities work closely with local municipalities who rely on the benefits of a long-standing partnerships. “In our view, the proposed changes undermine the core mandate of Conservation Authorities and may put people—and their homes—at risk,” said McNevin.

The motion to accept the resolution passed unanimously and will be shared with all 444 municipalities, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario, Association of Municipalities of Ontario and Quinte Conservation.