How Did I Ever Get Here?

Facts and history are very important to provide context.

In 1978 the Town of Oakville undertook what became known as the Paterson Planning Study. The consultant was hired to find away of limiting and restricting growth in Oakville. That report was adopted by Council as its evidence and position before what became a 6 month Ontario Municipal Board Hearing into future growth in the Town.

Then again, in the mid 1980s, Oakville Council adopted resolutions and bylaws to place a moratorium on growth. The objective was to limit housing growth.

Therefore, it can be fairly argued that if you moved into Oakville after 1978 or even 1985, you were part of the growth that the Town did not want and its citizens objected to at numerous public meetings.

BUT YOU ARE HERE.

The question is how or why did you get to come here? More over, why was it ok for farmland and trees to be cut down and lost to build your home, when clearly the residents of the day opposed it; and in fact tried to stop it. Virtually all of you bought your home or rented your apartment either directly from one of those greedy developers or someone else whose home was built by a developer.

Yet you rail against and are ready to label developers as being greedy. If you were going to sell your own home today: How much would you ask? The answer, as much as you can get. I doubt anyone would discount the value of their home so that someone in need of affordable housing could buy it.

If you live in Glen Abbey, West Oak Trails, Iroquois Ridge, the Uptown Core, River Oaks, the Granary, 111, Forsythe Street, Ennisclaire on the Lake, Blue Water Place, or Oakville North of Hwy. 5, shop at Dorval Crossing and Oakville Place, the Town of Oakville nor its citizens of the day did not want you to be here.

Fortunately for you that greedy developer challenged the Town’s decision to the former Ontario Municipal Board.

At those hearings, qualified experts on both sides of the issue, presented evidence and professional expert opinion, analysis and study to an independent tribunal.

The rules under which that tribunal operates are the same if you were to challenge a speeding or parking ticket to the courts. First, the hearing officers/judge are independent. Unlike a Councillor or Mayor who is elected by less than 30 percent of the people who are already here. More over, their job as Mayor or Councillor, is dependent on keeping those existing residents happy. Back in 1978 and 1985, those residents made it clear they did not want you to come. In fact, when growth did occur, the Mayors of the day were blamed and defeated.

Now if you were to challenge your speeding or parking ticket, you can bring your own evidence and experts. Equally, the Police or Town must provide evidence and their own experts. You can question (cross examine) those experts.

The design, rules and basis for for law is a fundamental concept called the right to Natural Justice. There is a companion piece to the foundation of law called Procedural Fairness. In part it is the right to confront, provide evidence and defend the accuser/law. It is why you have a fundamental right to challenge any law including all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary. That is because no one judge is infallible nor is a Mayor or a Councillor.

It is quite probable that over 40% of the people who love Oakville and call it home; are here because a developer challenged the Town’s decisions and there was an independent, evidenced based, objective tribunal in place to render a decision.

The Tribunal issues a public, written decision, sometimes hundreds of pages in length which sets out the reasons for the decision. This is, unlike Council, that can make its decision to approve or object to development sometimes behind closed doors. There is a provision under Ontario Municipal Law which permits Councils to make decisions in camera (private) related to legal and other matters.

More over, if the Tribunal has errored (as it too is not infallible), its decision can be appealed to the Courts to ensure it has not acted outside its powers. This is called “Leave to Appeal”. Similarly, if a municipality/Council acts outside of its legal authority, its decisions too can be appealed to the Courts.

Again this is part of Natural Justice, the foundation of our legal system and for that matter democracy.

Another refrain is those “experts” hired by the developer are paid to say what every the developer wants. First, the Tribunal functions like a court, you have to swear to tell the truth. Next, you have to be qualified as an expert. In fact, your CV is made public and open to challenge and cross examination. Next experts are licensed by a governing body. For engineers the Professional Engineers of Ontario, Planner, the Ontario Professional Planners Institute. Failure to meet the highest professional standards can result of the termination of their accreditation.

Next, if false evidence, opinion or allegations are made at a hearing; the Tribunal has the authority to dismiss this submission and in the most serious instances, award costs.

I have seen numerous instances where a Municipal Council has agreed with residents opposing a development, despite the fact their own planning department and Chief Planning Official endorsed it as being consistent with the Official Plan.

In those cases I have seen municipalities search out a consultant whose professional opinion would essentially endorse the Council position. Is this not the complaint when a developer's experts present evidence.

Again, the checks and balances of this transparent system come into play. It is not unusual in these circumstances the Chief Planning Official for the municipality which chose to ignore or not follow that professional opinion or recommendation is either subpoenaed to appear as a witness or requested by the Board to give evidence.

This year, the Federal Government announced that it would approve 1.5 million immigrants to come to Canada by 2025. That is in addition to refugees in the 10s of thousands. Of those it is estimated that 60% or nearly 1,000,000 will come to the GTA. That is in addition to growth from people moving here from the rest of Canada or new families being formed and adding children (natural increase). That means 30,000 people or around 10,000 families will be seeking housing each and every month.

Oakville and its residents support refugees from Ukraine and the Federal Governments immigration targets yet it is against intensification whether a 6 story retirement residence, a 9 story condo building or a 25 story building on Kerr Street. It does not want to expand urban boundaries, it wants to protect farm land and the Greenbelt.

Both the Prime Minister and Premier have said we need to intensify and that we need to use existing surplus public lands for affordable housing. In Oakville, any attempt to reduce the cost of housing is met with opposition as are intensification. When public lands have come available, the old hospital, St. Anns School or the National Defence lands on Rebecca they have been used to build multi-million dollar homes.

We are to a point our own children can’t afford to live here. Oakville has the 4th highest rental costs in Canada, its housing costs are in the stratosphere. Nearly 40 percent of the cost of a new house is in the form of taxes from all levels of government and delays in a very costly and long approval processes.

The current restrictions and nimbyism has served only a small group of people those who own homes and have made trillions of dollars in equity because the who process is designed to constrain the supply of housing to the benefit of a small group of people, the 30 percent who bother to show up an vote.

So again, why was it ok for you to move here and not some one else. Maybe just maybe when you supported Ukraine, you needed to put in a caveat, “but please live some where else when you come to Canada” because we don’t like growth.

Or talk to your MP the Honourable Anita Anand, who is a member of Cabinet and asked her support for the Prime Minister to exclude Oakville from any requirement to house immigrants based on the targets the government has set.