DOCSLIB.ORG

Ontario Municipal Board Reform (Bill 139) Was Approved As Follows

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ontario Municipal Board Reform (Bill 139) Was Approved As Follows August 11, 2017 Sent via email SEE DISTRIBUTION LIST At Executive Committee Meeting #6/17, of Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), held on August 11, 2017, Resolution #B71/17 in regard to Ontario Municipal Board Reform (Bill 139) was approved as follows: WHEREAS the Province of Ontario has posted the proposed amendments to the Planning Act and Ontario Municipal Board Act as part of Bill 139, the Building Better Communities and Conserving Watersheds Act for public comment on the Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR); AND WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has roles and responsibilities affecting planning matters that come before the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB), through which TRCA staff regularly participate; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the staff report on TRCA’s draft comments to the Province through EBR posting #013-0590 be endorsed; AND FURTHER THAT this report be circulated to TRCA’s municipal partners, neighbouring conservation authorities and Conservation Ontario for their information. Enclosed for your information and any action deemed necessary is the report as approved by the Executive Committee. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Jeff Thompson at 416-661-6600 extension 5386, [email protected]. Sincerely Kathy Stranks Senior Manager, Corporate Secretariat CEO’s Office cc. Jeff Thompson, Planner II, TRCA /Encl. DISTRIBUTION LIST Gillian Angus-Traill, Clerk, Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville Gloria Collier, Clerk, Town of Richmond Hill Chris Darling, Chief Administrative Officer, Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority Michael deRond, Town Clerk, Corporate Services Department, Town of Aurora Mark Early, Chief Administrative Officer and Clerk, Town of Mono Peter Fay, City Clerk, Clerk's Department, City of Brampton Kim Gavine, General Manager, Conservation Ontario Carey deGorter, General Manager, Corporate Services, Town of Caledon Crystal Greer, Clerk, Clerk's Department, City of Mississauga Alec Harras, Manager of Legislative Services / Deputy Clerk, Town of Ajax Doug Hevenor, Chief Administrative Officer/Secretary-Treasurer, Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority Barb Kane, Clerk and Deputy Treasurer, Township of Adjala-Tosorontio Kimberley Kitteringham, City Clerk, City of Markham Debbie Leroux, Clerk, Township of Uxbridge Kathryn Lockyer, Regional Clerk and Director of Clerk's, Regional Municipality of Peel Mark Majchrowski, Chief Administrative Officer, Kawartha Conservation Deborah Martin-Downs, General Manager/Secretary-Treasurer, Credit Valley Conservation Authority Barbara McEwan, City Clerk, City of Vaughan Kathryn Moyle, Clerk, Township of King Christopher Raynor, Regional Clerk, Regional Municipality of York Debbie Shields, City Clerk, City of Pickering Mike Walters, CAO / Secretary Treasurer, Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority Ralph Walton, Regional Clerk / Director, Legislative Services, Regional Municipality of Durham Ulli S. Watkiss, City Clerk, City Clerk's Office, City of Toronto 2 RES.#B71/17 - ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD REFORM (BILL 139) Draft Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) Comments. TRCA’s draft response to the Province as it relates to the proposed changes to the Planning Act and Ontario Municipal Board Act, as part of Bill 139 – the Building Better Communities and Conserving Watersheds Act, 2017 (EBR Notice #013-0590). Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Seconded by: Anthony Perruzza WHEREAS the Province of Ontario has posted the proposed amendments to the Planning Act and Ontario Municipal Board Act as part of Bill 139, the Building Better Communities and Conserving Watersheds Act for public comment on the Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR); AND WHEREAS Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) has roles and responsibilities affecting planning matters that come before the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB), through which TRCA staff regularly participate; THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT the staff report on TRCA’s draft comments to the Province through EBR posting #013-0590 be endorsed; AND FURTHER THAT this report be circulated to TRCA’s municipal partners, neighbouring conservation authorities and Conservation Ontario for their information. CARRIED BACKGROUND Since 2004, the Ontario government has implemented a series of land use planning reforms aimed at making the provincial planning system more inclusive and transparent, including the Strong Communities (Planning Amendment) Act, 2004, the Planning and Conservation Land Statute Law Amendment Act, 2006, and the Smart Growth for Our Communities Act, 2015 (EBR# 012-3651). These efforts altered the procedures and operations of the OMB by placing limits on the number of matters that can be appealed and giving municipalities a stronger, more independent voice in local land use decisions. Despite these changes, the Province continued to hear concerns from municipalities, stakeholders and the public about the role of the OMB in the land use planning system. In June 2016, the Ontario government commenced its review of the scope and effectiveness of the OMB. In October 2016, the Province released a Consultation Document to provide the public with an opportunity to comment on changes being considered to improve Ontario’s land use planning appeal system in response to the changing needs of its communities (EBR #012-7196). A series of questions centering on the following five themes were proposed: 1) OMB jurisdiction and powers; 2) Citizen participation and local perspective; 3) Clear and predictable decision-making; 4) Modern procedures and faster decisions; and, 5) Alternative dispute resolution and fewer hearings. 351 On December 19, 2016, TRCA staff provided comments in response to these questions and offered a number of recommendations staff deemed to be of particular importance from TRCA’s jurisdictional perspective and experiences at the OMB, as approved by Resolution #A231/16 at Authority Meeting # 11/16. These key recommendations included: Appeals based on non-decisions are often tied to applications that are deemed “complete” yet lack the supporting information required for agencies like TRCA to make an adequate assessment of the application; Appeal rights should be restricted for land use matters that protect provincial interests and prohibit development related to natural heritage, source water and natural hazards in the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS); Given the unique provincial ministerial approval process, appeal rights should be restricted for official plan (OP) or OP amendments (OPAs) associated with Special Policy Areas (SPAs) under Section 3.1.4 (a) of the PPS; The technical criteria developed to provide guidance on provincial interests at OMB hearings, specifically those related to the natural heritage and natural hazard policies of the PPS, should be given more weight and status; Updated provincial planning rules should apply at the time of decision for applications submitted before 2007; Clarification is needed as to what constitutes information as “significant” when new “significant information” is introduced at an OMB hearing and sent back to council for reconsideration; The number of appeals should be limited, appeal timelines should be shortened, and broad appeals should be substantiated by a sound planning rationale prior to proceeding; When new technical work in support of an application is introduced during a hearing, the hearing should be adjourned and the application should continue to be processed to a decision in the municipal planning realm; Multi-member panels are needed to increase the consistency of decision-making and provide a more holistic and balanced perspective of the various public interests relevant during appeals, particularly for complex cases; Where applicable, OMB members may benefit from professional development/training on emerging or complex issues such as environmental management and/or issues related to the Conservation Authorities Act. On May 30, 2017, the Province introduced Bill 139, the Building Better Communities and Conserving Watersheds Act, 2017. Bill 139 is an “omnibus bill” that proposes a series of transformative legislative changes that, if passed, would overhaul Ontario’s land use planning system by changing the manner in which local planning decisions are made. The changes proposed through Bill 139 are included in the following five Schedules: Schedule 1: Enacting the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Act, 2017 Schedule 2: Enacting the Local Planning Appeal Support Centre Act, 2017 Schedule 3: Amendments to the Planning Act, the City of Toronto Act, and the Ontario Planning and Development Act Schedule 4: Amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act Schedule 5: Amendments to various Acts consequential to their enactment 352 Bill 139 will have to pass through two more readings in the legislature before being enacted. This could occur during the next season of legislature (commencing September 11, 2017). During this time, it will be debated and could be referred to a Standing Committee for a “clause by clause” review. Many of the proposed amendments are enabling only, meaning that they would not come into force until a later date through regulations made by the Lieutenant Governor in Council (LGIC) or the Minister. Bill 139 also proposes significant changes to the Conservation Authorities Act (Schedule 4), however, TRCA staff have, and will continue to report on these changes independently from those specific to the OMB reform (Schedules 1, 2, 3, and 5). Key Legislative
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Citizens' Guide 9 – the Plan Review and Approval Process
    CITIZENS’ GUIDE THE PLAN REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCESS 9 IN A SERIES Updated 2010 MINISTRY OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS AND HOUSING CITIZENS’ GUIDE Introduction Who is the approval authority? Land use planning affects almost every aspect of life in Ontario. Traditionally, the approval authority for land use planning It helps decide where in our communities homes and factories has been the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing and, should be built; where parks and schools should be located; in some cases, a municipality. To support increased local and where roads, sewers and other essential services should be autonomy in land use planning, the province has transferred provided. approval authority to municipal councils, municipal planning authorities and planning boards, where possible. Land use planning means managing our land and resources. It helps each community to set goals about how it will grow This delegation or assignment of approval authority allows the and develop and to work out ways of reaching those goals province to concentrate on policy development and advocacy while keeping important social, economic and environmental in land use planning. concerns in mind. It balances the interests of individual property owners with the wider interests and objectives of the whole The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing has prepared community. a table that summarizes where planning authority resides in Ontario. For a copy of the table, you can go to the Ministry’s Good planning leads to orderly growth and the efficient website at ontario.ca/mah. provision of services. It touches all of us and helps us to have the kind of community we want.
    [Show full text]
  • Directory of Institutions
    Ministry of Government Services Information Access & Privacy Directory of Institutions What is the Directory of Institutions? The Directory of Institutions lists and provides contact information for: • Ontario government ministries, agencies, community colleges and universities covered by FIPPA • Municipalities and other local public sector organizations such as school boards, library boards and police services covered by MFIPPA These organizations are all called "institutions" under the Acts. The address of the FIPPA or MFIPPA Coordinator for each institution is provided to assist you in directing requests for information to the correct place. FIPPA Coordinators • Provincial Ministries • Provincial Agencies, Boards and Commissions • Colleges and Universities • Hospitals MFIPPA Coordinators • Boards of Health • Community Development Corporations • Conservation Authorities • Entertainment Boards • District Social Services Administration Boards • Local Housing Corporations • Local Roads Boards • Local Services Boards • Municipal Corporations • Planning Boards • Police Service Boards • Public Library Boards • School Boards • Transit Commissions FIPPA Coordinators Provincial Ministries MINISTRY OF ABORIGINAL AFFAIRS Freedom of Information and Privacy Coordinator 160 Bloor Street East, 4th Floor Toronto, Ontario M7A 2E6 Phone: 416-326-4740 MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS Freedom of Information and Privacy Coordinator 2nd Floor NW, 1 Stone Rd. W. Guelph, ON N1G 4Y2 Phone: 519-826-3100 ARCHIVES OF ONTARIO Freedom of Information and Privacy Coordinator 134 Ian Macdonald Blvd Toronto, ON M7A 2C5 Phone: 416-327-1563 MINISTRY OF GOVERNMENT AND CONSUMER SERVICES Freedom of Information and Privacy Coordinator 20 Dundas St. West, 4th Floor Toronto, ON M7A 1N3Phone: 416-325-2791 MINISTRY OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Freedom of Information and Privacy Coordinator McMurty-Scott Building 5th Floor, 720 Bay St.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Planning Appeal Tribunal: a Year Later
    30 St. Patrick Street 5th Floor Toronto ON M5T 3A3 647.258.0017 toronto.uli.org Speaker Biographies: Local Planning Appeal Tribunal: A Year Later Joseph Ragusa, Principal, Sussex Strategy Group A founding partner of Sussex, Joseph has been a Principal at the firm since its inception in 1998. With over 30 years of experience in government, consulting, and politics, Joseph has particular strength in policy development and government process, with an acute talent for assessing political dynamics. Joseph employs his experience, his relationships with stakeholders and government officials, and his reputation in pursuit of his clients’ government relations objectives. Joseph leads the Sussex provincial government relations practice. Prior to consulting, Joseph served as a senior advisor on the political staffs of several legislators. He has consulted to corporations, industry and professional associations, labour organizations and non-profit groups at the federal, provincial, regional and municipal levels in many sectors. Recent and past successes on behalf of clients have included engagements in healthcare, economic development, new and emerging technologies, infrastructure, real estate development, public-private partnerships, housing, transportation, environment, information technology, procurement, export development, tax policy, financial services, forestry, and tourism. Joseph’s strategic communication skills have been sought out by both the media and political leaders. He has appeared on Sirius XM Radio, CBC Newsworld, Michael Coren Live, Cable Pulse 24 and 1010 CFRB. Joseph has also been a keynote speaker at a variety of industry and professional association conferences and has had a number of papers published in various association and trade publications. Joseph has held management and advisory roles in numerous political campaigns since the mid 1980’s.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Participation & Good Planning?: from the Ontario Municipal Board To
    PUBLIC PARTICIPATION & GOOD PLANNING?: FROM THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD TO THE LOCAL PLANNING APPEAL TRIBUNAL AND BACK. By: Thanh Nguyen Supervised by: Ute Lehrer A Major Paper submitted to the Faculty of Environmental Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters in Environmental Studies York University, Toronto, Ontario Canada July 31, 2019 0 Table of Contents Abstract i. Foreword ii. Acknowledgements iii. Introduction 1 Methodology 4 Chapter 1: Good Planning 5 Chapter 2: Public Participation 10 Chapter 3: OMB (1906-2018) 15 The OMB & Good Planning 15 The OMB & Public Participation 17 The OMB & the Just City 26 Chapter 4: LPAT – Bill 139 (2018-2019) 31 LPAT & Good Planning 33 LPAT & Public Participation 36 LPAT & the Just City 53 Chapter 5: LPAT 2.0 – Bill 108 (2019) 57 Conclusion 60 List of Tables Table 1 – Comparison of Participatory Features 33 Table 2 – LPASC Services 46 List of Appendices Appendix A: Schedule of Interviewees 63 Appendix B: Schedule of Acronyms 64 Appendix C: Sample LPAT Notice Requirement 65 Appendix D: Sample LPAT Public Notice 68 Appendix E: Sample of LPASC Service Agreement 70 Bibliography 72 1 Abstract This paper examines the reformation of the land use planning appeals system in Ontario from the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) to the Local Planning Appeal (LPAT) and beyond, and its impact on public participation and notions of good planning. This paper utilizes principles of urban justice to evaluate public participation by exploring the questions of ‘who is the public’ and ‘what are their interests?’ This endeavour is informed by the various voices involved in typical land use planning appeals including residents, planners, lawyers and academics.
    [Show full text]
  • Citizen's Guide to Subdivision
    CITIZENS’ GUIDE SUBDIVISIONS 4 IN A SERIES Updated 2010 MINISTRY OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS AND HOUSING CITIZENS’ GUIDE Introduction What is a subdivision? Land use planning affects almost every aspect of life in When you divide a piece of land into two or more parcels Ontario. It helps decide where in our communities homes and offer one or more for sale, you are subdividing property, and factories should be built; where parks and schools and the provisions of the Planning Act come into play. should be located; and where roads, sewers and other essential services should be provided. If your proposal involves creating only a lot or two, you may seek approval for a “land severance”. For more details, see Land use planning means managing our land and Land Severances, No. 5 in the series. resources. It helps each community to set goals about how it will grow and develop and to work out ways of reaching The other means of subdividing land is to obtain approval those goals while keeping important social, economic and of a plan of subdivision from the approval authority. This environmental concerns in mind. It balances the interests could be the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing or a of individual property owners with the wider interests and municipality. The authority to approve plans of subdivision objectives of the whole community. can also be delegated to planning boards, municipal planning authorities, committees of council or appointed Good planning leads to orderly growth and the efficient officers. provision of services. It touches all of us and helps us to have the kind of community we want.
    [Show full text]
  • Ontario Municipal Board
    Environment and Land Tribunals Ontario Ontario Municipal Board Annual Report 2009-2010 Ontario Municipal Board Annual Report 2009-2010 1 Contact Information: Environment and Land Tribunals Ontario Ontario Municipal Board 655 Bay Street, Suite 1500 Toronto, ON M5G 1E5 Tel: (416) 212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248 Fax: (416) 326-5370 Website: www.elto.gov.on.ca E-mail: [email protected] Copies of this annual report, as well as other Board publications, may be obtained from the Boards. © Queen’s printer for Ontario, 2010 ISBN 978-1-4435-3558-8 ISSN 1703-2822 Environment and Land Tribunals Ontario www.elto.gov.on.ca Ontario Municipal Board Annual Report 2009-2010 1 To the Honourable Chris Bentley, Attorney General Minister: We have the pleasure of submitting, for the approval of the Legislature, the Ontario Municipal Board 2009-2010 Annual Report. Respectfully submitted, Michael Gottheil Ali Arlani Executive Chair Chief Executive Officer Environment and Land Tribunals Ontario Environment and Land Tribunals Ontario 2010 Ontario Municipal Board Annual Report 2009-2010 1 Contents Page Chair’s Message 3 SECTION 1: Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) Overview OMB Role 5 History and Jurisdiction 6 Agency Cluster 6 Changes in Legislation and Regulations 7 Rules of Practice and Procedure 7 SECTION 2: Operations 2009-2010 Case Management 8 2009-2010 Caseload 9 Hearing Activity 9 Mediation 9 OMB Members 2009-2010 11 SECTION 3: Financial Summary Expenditures 13 Ontario Municipal Board Annual Report 2009-2010 2 Chair’s Message - 2010 On behalf of all Members and staff, I am pleased to present the 2009-2010 Ontario Municipal Board Annual Report.
    [Show full text]
  • Provincial-Municipal Relations in Ontario: Approaching an Inflection Point
    IMFG P"#$%& '( M)(*+*#", F*("(+$ "(. G'/$%("(+$ N'. 12 • 3415 Provincial-Municipal Relations in Ontario: Approaching an In!ection Point André Côté and Michael Fenn Institute on Municipal Finance and Governance IMFG Papers on Municipal Finance and Governance ProVincial-MUnicipal Relations in Ontario: Approaching an Inflection Point By André Côté and Michael Fenn InstitUte on MUnicipal Finance & GoVernance MUnk School of Global Affairs UniVersitY of Toronto 1 DeVonshire Place Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5S 3K7 e-mail contact: [email protected] http://mUnkschool.Utoronto.ca/imfg/ Series editor: Philippa Campsie © CopYright held bY aUthor ISBN 978-0-7727-0924-0 ISSN 1927-1921 The Institute on Municipal Finance and Governance (IMFG) at the Munk School of Global Affairs at the University of Toronto focuses on developing solutions to the fiscal and governance problems facing large cities and city-regions. IMFG conducts original research on Canadian cities and other cities around the world; promotes high-level discussion among Canada’s government, academic, corporate, and community leaders through conferences and roundtables; and supports graduate and post-graduate students to build Canada’s cadre of municipal finance and governance experts. It is the only institute in Canada that focuses solely on municipal finance issues and large cities and city-regions. IMFG is funded by the Province of Ontario, the City of Toronto, Avana Capital Corporation, and TD Bank. The IMFG Papers on Municipal Finance and Governance are designed to disseminate research that is being undertaken in academic circles in Canada and abroad on municipal finance and governance issues. The series, which includes papers by local as well as international scholars, is intended to inform the debate on important issues in large cities and city-regions.
    [Show full text]
  • Appeals to the City of Toronto New Official Plan
    ISSUE DATE: Feb. 20, 2008 PL030412 PL030514 Ontario Municipal Board PL060106 Commission des affaires municipales de l’Ontario The Ontario Municipal Board has received appeals under subsection 17(36) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended, from a decision of the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to approve in part, the new Official Plan for the City of Toronto, as adopted by By-law 1082-2002, to provide policy direction in the six municipalities of the former Metropolitan Toronto MMAH File No. 20-OP-2002 OMB File Nos. See Schedule “1” Harbour Remediation and Transfer Inc., Ontario Realty Corporation, Royal Canadian Yacht Club, and others, have appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board, under subsection 17(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, from a decision of the City of Toronto to approve Proposed Amendment No. 257 to the Official Plan of the City of Toronto to redesignate lands identified as the Central Waterfront O.M.B. File No. O030096 O.M.B. Case No. PL030514 Queen’s Quay Investments Incorporated, Michael Gregg, Tate & Lyke Canada Limited, and others, have appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board under subsection 34(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, against Zoning By-law 1049-2006 of the City of Toronto O.M.B. File No. R060297 O.M.B. Case No. PL030514 Schedule “1” APPEALS TO THE CITY OF TORONTO NEW OFFICIAL PLAN No. Sched APPELLANT NAME O.M.B. FILE No. 6 B 640 Fleet Street Developments Limited, 650 Fleet Street O030201 Developments Limited, Fleet Boulevard Limited 16 E 1255870 Ontario Limited O030213 27 B Avro Quay Limited O030146 39 B Canadian Tire Real Estate Limited (Lakeshore Boulevard) O030181 42 B Castan Waterfront Developments Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • The Municipal Councillor's Guide 2014
    THE MUNICIPAL COUNCILLOR’S GUIDE 2014 Ontario.ca/mah BLEED This guide is available on the Internet at the following site: mah.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=4965 DISCLAIMER This guide has been carefully prepared and is intended to provide a summary of complex matters. It does not include all details and does not take into account local facts and circumstances. The guide refers to or reflects laws and practices which are subject to change. Municipalities and councillors are responsible for making local decisions, including decisions in compliance with law such as applicable statutes and regulations. For these reasons, the guide, as well as any links or information from other sources referred to in it, should not be relied upon as a substitute for specialized legal or professional advice in connection with any particular matter. The user is solely responsible for any use or application of this guide. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 SECTION 1: ROLE OF COUNCIL, COUNCILLOR AND STAFF 3 ROLE OF COUNCIL 3 Role of Head of Council 4 ROLE OF THE COUNCILLOR 5 Representative Role 5 Policy-Making Role 6 Stewardship Role 7 ROLE OF STAFF 11 Council - Staff Relationship and Roles 13 STRATEGIC PLANNING 13 SUCCESSION PLANNING 14 KEY TIPS 15 SECTION 2: AN OVERVIEW OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT 16 MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT 16 Municipal Roles and Responsibilities 17 Service Managers 17 MUNICIPAL ORGANIZATION 18 Two-Tier Municipal Structures 19 Single-Tier Municipalities 19 Northern Ontario 20 ABORIGINAL PEOPLES 21 MUNICIPAL RESTRUCTURING 22 COMMITTEES, LOCAL BOARDS AND
    [Show full text]
  • 3.01 Assessment Review Board and Ontario Municipal Board
    Chapter 3 Ministry of the Attorney General Section 3.01 Assessment Review Board and Ontario Municipal Board Our audit of the Review Board found that it was 1.0 Summary taking longer to resolve appeals than its targeted times and had about 16,600 appeals outstanding as of March 2017. Many property owners are wait- In Ontario, boards and tribunals are created by the ing years (1,811 appeals have been outstanding provincial government to facilitate mediation or for more than four years) for their assessment make decisions independent of the government set- appeals to be settled, which leaves them at risk tling disputes between people or disputes between of not receiving a property tax refund in a timely people and the government. Because the boards manner if a decision is finally rendered in their and tribunals hear evidence, engage in fact-finding, favour. These delays can be particularly onerous for and make decisions that affect personal rights the municipalities because they rely on property taxes way a court does, they are known as “quasi-judicial” Chapter 3 • Section 3.01 to fund their operating budgets. Being required to agencies. The cases they hear are decided by board refund millions in property taxes can cause finan- members, called adjudicators, and the process is cial difficulty for smaller municipalities. known as adjudication. Our specific concerns related to the Review Our audit focuses on the operations of the Board are as follows: Assessment Review Board (Review Board) and Large backlog of unresolved appeals the Ontario Municipal Board (Municipal Board), • continues, with some appeals dating back which form part of Environment and Land to 1998.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of Yonge and Eglinton's Canada Square: Supporting Midtown Existing and Future Residents' Quality of Life
    From: Richard MacFarlane To: councilmeeting Subject: Support Midtown"s Quality of Life - Communication on PH25.7 Date: July 9, 2021 1:36:27 AM Attachments: TTC Buslands at Yonge-Eglinton, Public Consultation Meetings, Oxford, Josh Matlow, Ratepayers.doc TTC Buslands, Canada Square -- Item 31.27, Submission by Richard MacFarlane, Oriole Park Association, to the Mayor and City Councillors, Motion by Councillor Josh Matlow and Councillor Kristyn Wong-Tam, April 7, 2021.doc Dear Mayor Tory and City Councillors, For the past 20 years, as a dedicated participant in all things relating to planning and development, I have spent at least 300 hours a year working voluntarily for the Oriole Park Association community and Yonge/Eglinton area ratepayer organizations. From Year 2002, since attending the Minto Towers OMB hearing, I have attended over 200 public meetings, including numerous Committee of Adjustment sessions, and at least 15 major Ontario Municipal Board, then LPAT hearings (now the Ontario Land Tribunals). During this time, I have typed upwards of 1,000 pages of meeting minutes and correspondence concerning development issues. As you may be aware, our Oriole Park Association was established in 1954, coincidentally, the year I was born, the same year the Yonge line was finished, and the year the TTC bus barns began operating. The OPA is incorporated. It represents about 5,000 residents living in mostly single family homes, some duplexes and triplexes, and low rise apartment buildings along Eglinton. OPA boundaries are from Eglinton Avenue in the north, south to Chaplin Crescent, northwest along Chaplin to Eglinton, and the east border is the west side of Yonge Street.
    [Show full text]
  • The Better Local Government Act Versus Municipal Democracy
    Journal of Law and Social Policy Volume 34 Toronto v Ontario: Implications for Canadian Local Democracy Guest Editors: Alexandra Flynn & Mariana Article 1 Valverde 2021 The Better Local Government Act versus Municipal Democracy Simon Archer Goldblatt Partners LLP Erin Sobat Osgoode Hall Law School of York University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/jlsp Part of the Law Commons Citation Information Archer, Simon and Sobat, Erin. "The Better Local Government Act versus Municipal Democracy." Journal of Law and Social Policy 34. (2021): 1-20. https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/jlsp/vol34/iss1/1 This Introduction is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Osgoode Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Law and Social Policy by an authorized editor of Osgoode Digital Commons. Archer and Sobat: Better Local Government Act versus Municipal Democracy The Better Local Government Act versus Municipal Democracy SIMON ARCHER & ERIN SOBAT IN AN ERA MARKED BY THE RISE of “illiberal democracies,” the rule of law we thought we knew is being tested. Courts have been asked to engage with the expanded and extraordinary use of executive and parliamentary powers everywhere—most recently in the United Kingdom (on the use of the executive’s prerogative powers to call elections against the will of Parliament) and the United States (on the legality of executive orders by the President). Locally it has taken the form of interference by the provincial government of Ontario in municipal elections, including the threat of invoking the “notwithstanding clause” in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to shield such interference from effective constitutional oversight.
    [Show full text]