Gordon Prentice at Large - Politics in Newmarket
- Details
- Written by: Gordon Prentice
Back story
In August 2018 contractors employed by the York Catholic District School Board to reconstruct the car park at the Canadian Martyrs Elementary School in London Road, Newmarket used heavy machinery to compact the ground, sending massive shock waves through adjacent homes in Harrison Drive and causing damage. No-one was warned beforehand. The Board denies liability and says residents should claim against their own home insurance policies and their insurers would, in turn, claim against the contractor’s insurer. This proved impossible as insurance companies do not insure against earth movement. The Director of Education, Mr Ab Falconi, decided home owners should foot the bill for the damage caused by the School Board's contractor.
The Director moves on
Ab Falconi, the Director of Education at the York Catholic District School Board, is retiring in August (photo right).
Newmarket Today records Mr Falconi's huge accomplishments in his two years at the helm.
Clearly, he has left his mark on Catholic education but not, alas, on the School Board’s records and information management policy which, to this day, rests on a manual that has not been updated since 1997.
I hope the new Director of Education opens a file on complaints. Remarkably, in this day and age, the School Board doesn't keep any records of complaints. They have no way of knowing who has ever complained about anything.
Complaints
And it’s not as if the York Catholic District School Board never gets complaints.
When construction vibration from the Catholic Martyr’s Elementary School damaged adjacent properties in Harrison Drive, Newmarket in August 2018 residents complained – and were left to repair the damage out of their own pockets.
Hopefully the Town of Newmarket will do the right thing and protect its residents from rogue organisations that damage people’s property and walk away. It happens more often than you'd think.
The Town is to consider a possible by-law on property damage caused by construction vibration later this year, sometime between July and September. The promised report has slipped before but no worries, the coronavirus has put a spoke in many of the departmental work plans.
More time needed
The revised workplan tells us:
“Additional time needed to liaise with Legal Services to ensure there is a legal means to require/enforce the recommended measures.”
Over a year ago, in March 2019, a report from Planning staff went before councillors which said this:
“Over the course of the review, staff contacted numerous municipalities to determine how they deal with vibration issues from construction activities in their communities.
Of the responses, it appears few municipalities (with the exception of the City of Toronto) have standard requirements for vibration considerations and only require review when a development proposal is in proximity to a rail line.”
Toronto has had a Vibration By Law since 2008. Perhaps we can learn from them.
- Details
- Written by: Gordon Prentice
Bob Forrest’s calculated and deliberate decision to order the destruction of one of Newmarket’s most historic buildings is without precedent in Ontario. And he got off with a smack on the wrist. 
The Town decided not to prosecute, reaching agreement with him without going to Court. He was very lucky.
On the evening of 9 October 2019, the Simpson Building in the Town’s historic Main Street was unlawfully demolished. The storied building, dating from the 1840s, was the apothecary of Ontario’s first female pharmacist, Anne Mary Simpson. It lay smack bang in the middle of the Town’s only Heritage Conservation District.
Demolitions
I contacted each of the 54 Ontario municipalities with Heritage Conservation Districts (HCD) and heard back from every one of them. Many, like Newmarket, have a single HCD. But at the other end of the spectrum we have Ottawa and Toronto with 20 each.
I wanted to know if any of these municipalities had ever brought a prosecution under S42(1)(2) of the Ontario Heritage Act and/or S8 of the Building Code Act for an unlawful demolition within a Heritage Conservation District. (Click on the "Read more" link below.)
Only two reported unlawful demolitions in their Heritage Conservation Districts where prosecutions were brought under the Ontario Heritage Act. But even in those cases the circumstances were very different from those in Newmarket.
Avoidable tragedy
Forrest knew exactly what he was doing. As part of the process for securing planning permission for his condo in the middle of the old downtown he ended up commissioning not one but two Heritage Impact Assessments on his Main Street properties. He was aware of the historic importance of the building.
Looking back, what happened was an avoidable tragedy. However, a new report from the Town’s planning staff gives us hope that nothing like it will ever be allowed to happen again.
The Town’s new Heritage Planner, Patricia Cho, pledges to beef-up the enforcement of the Property Standards By-Law
“to better ensure compliance with heritage provisions”.
The report tells us heritage buildings should be protected against demolition by neglect. In future, planning staff with cultural heritage expertise will accompany enforcement officers when inspecting heritage buildings.
Shocking truth
This deserves a round of applause but it must be carried through in practice.
The shocking truth is that Bob Forrest’s empty heritage buildings on Main Street were allowed to decay for years before our very eyes. We got used to seeing blue tarpaulins flapping in the wind, supposedly protecting the interiors from the elements.
Since those days we have mercifully seen a change of guard in the Planning Department. And the former Mayor, a keen supporter of Bob Forrest’s condo plan, is now MP for Newmarket-Aurora and out of things.
I see grounds for optimism.
Read more: Unlawful Demolition on Main Street - and making sure it never happens again.
- Details
- Written by: Gordon Prentice
Why did Newmarket-Aurora MP, Tony Van Bynen, miss the key House of Commons Health Committee meeting yesterday concerning the crisis in long-term care? Instead he travels 412km to Ottawa to read a question about agriculture from a script, which lasts 25 seconds. 
I suppose it is a question of priorities.
This is Van Bynen’s zinger:
“Mr. Speaker, my understanding is that the Conservative government cut $400 million in 2013 from the AgriStability fund and the business risk management programs. Why is it now, when we are improving the program, that this is such a significant improvement?”
Gobbledegook
This gobbledegook has, apparently, some relevance to Bill C-16 which amends the Canadian Dairy Commission Act to increase the Commission’s borrowing powers. The Bill is supported by all Parties in the House and there is no need for a roll-call vote.
Shortly after Van Bynen rises in the Commons Chamber the Health Committee gets underway by teleconference with evidence on long-term care from a number of experts.
To cover for him while he is away in Ottawa, Van Bynen asks Markham-Stouffville MP, Helena Jaczek, (Liberal) to take his place. (The Standing Orders of the House of Commons allow for the appointment of “acting members”.)
Knows her onions
Helena Jaczek certainly knows her onions. She is a medical doctor by training and was the Minister for Community and Social Services in Kathleen Wynne’s Liberal Government from 2014-2018 and Ontario’s Minister of Health and Long-Term Care in 2018.
She asks a series of pertinent questions. She wants to know, for example, what the Federal Government should be doing to assist in the redevelopment of long-term care homes which are outdated and no longer fit for purpose. We are told that homes with more modern designs have had greater success in preventing the spread of Covid-19.
I watch the entire three-hour committee session and, though the technology played up from time to time, I find it informative and learn a lot.
Sticking to the script
Sadly, we don’t get the chance to see Van Bynen at work, quizzing the experts on how we should tackle the crisis in long-term care. What issues would he raise? Would he express a point of view? Would he ask penetrating follow-up questions based on what he had just heard? Or would he stay safe, metronomically sticking to a script?
Van Bynen had lots of material to draw on. One of the worst outbreaks in the whole of York Region is in his Newmarket-Aurora riding at Revera’s Mackenzie Place in George Street.
This is what Newmarket Today tells us in its latest update:
In Newmarket, institutional outbreaks have caused 144 cases and 13 of its 16 COVID-19 related deaths. A Newmarket man, 57, was the first individual to die of a workplace outbreak acquired case.
Outbreaks remain active at five facilities in Newmarket, including at Mackenzie Place, which has one of the most severe outbreaks in long-term care homes in the region with 80 residents and 24 health-care workers testing positive, as well as 11 deaths.
AgriStability
I now know what my MP thinks about ancient Conservative cuts to the AgriStability fund and the business risk management programs.
But I don’t have a clue on how he would go about fixing the crisis in long-term care and whether the private sector should still have a role.
Update on 15 May 2020: From Newmarket Today: Two more deaths at Mackenzie Place bringing the total to 13.
Update on 16 May 2020: from the Toronto Star: for-profit nursing home chains make big payouts to shareholders, execs.
Update on 18 May 2020: Latest on the local impact of Covid-19 from Newmarket Today:
"Fourteen residents of Mackenzie Place have died as a result of the outbreak that continues to have the highest number of COVID-19 cases in the region, with 80 residents and 24 health-care workers at the 93-bed home testing positive."
How Tony Van Bynen MP spends his time. Tweeting furiously. Signalling non-stop activity.