{"id":22633,"date":"2019-01-10T12:38:40","date_gmt":"2019-01-10T17:38:40","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/?p=22633"},"modified":"2019-01-17T11:54:50","modified_gmt":"2019-01-17T16:54:50","slug":"aurora-says-no-to-open-for-business-legislation-that-could-have-environmental-impact","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/aurora-says-no-to-open-for-business-legislation-that-could-have-environmental-impact\/","title":{"rendered":"Aurora says no to \u201cOpen for Business\u201d legislation that could have environmental impact"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Brock Weir<\/strong><\/p>\n

Aurora has formally said \u201cno\u201d to Ontario\u2019s Bill 66, which could give municipalities the ability to override provincial planning documents put in place to protect the environment in the interests of speedy developments.
\nIn his motion, Mayor Tom Mrakas said the \u201cprotection and integrity of the Green Belt is paramount for our residents\u201d and cited the importance of legislation protecting our water.
\n\u201cSignificant concerns have been raised by residents, community leaders and organizations such as the Canadian Environmental Law Association that provisions within Bill 66 will weaken environmental protections as it \u2018\u2026will enable municipalities to pass \u2018Open for Business\u2019 zoning bylaws that do not have to comply with\u2026\u2019 important provincial environmental statutes.
\nThe Mayor called upon Council to oppose planned changes to the Planning Act contained within Bill 66 that may allow for an \u201cOpen for Business\u201d planning bylaw while requesting the Province to reconsider its plans.
\n\u201cI believe we have to get out front and make a statement and let everyone know, especially in our community,\u201d said Mayor Mrakas, noting some colleagues in other municipalities have considered waiting for information before making a similar motion. \u201cWhile we encourage jobs and businesses to come into the community and we want them to come to our community, I don\u2019t think any of us want it at the expense of our environment, at the expense of any safety measures that have been put in place by previous governments. To overturn and allow municipalities to be exempt from these legislative requirements, I think, is a bad thing not only for our community but the province in general. I think it is important we put forward this motion, we let the province know we\u2019re not in favour of this.\u201d
\nAddressing Council members around the table, he added: \u201cI know each and every one of you to a certain extent and I know we would never look at allowing for an exemption like this to\u2026occur, but I think the concern lies with what other municipalities are doing. That is why we need to send that message to the Province [and say] we oppose this, and that is exactly what this motion says.\u201d
\nFirst to support the motion was Councillor Sandra Humfryes, who said she supported it \u201c100 per cent\u201d and seconded the motion.
\nNext to note her support was Councillor Wendy Gaertner who agreed that many Council members ran on environmental platforms and the proposed legislation was contrary to the mandate given to them by Aurora voters.
\n\u201cThis [move], without a doubt, is contrary to that as the protections in the Clean Water Act, the Green Belt Act, the Oak Ridges Moraine Act, the Places to Grow Act. It can override all of those. It is very important that we send a strong message, not only to the Province, but to our community,\u201d she said.
\nCouncillor Gaertner, however, suggested the Motion on the floor go a step further, taking a cue from information submitted to Council by Susan Walmer, Executive Director of the Oak Ridges Moraine Land Trust, and inserting another clause: that \u201cthe Town of Aurora will not exercise the powers granted to it in Schedule 10 or any successor sections or schedules to pass open-for-business planning bylaws.\u201d
\n\u201cI think having that extra clause just hits the spot because it says exactly what we\u2019re not going to do,\u201d she said. \u201cIt sends a message to our community exactly what we are not going to do.\u201d
\nBut this additional clause received some pushback from Mayor Mrakas, as well as Councillor Michael Thompson, with the latter suggesting it might be too premature.
\nSpeaking to an earlier iteration of the clause which had the phrase \u201cany other\u201d instead of \u201cany successor,\u201d he said he couldn\u2019t support something that vague.
\n\u201cWe all know how bills work,\u201d said Councillor Thompson. \u201cIt has passed first reading and it still has to go through other stages. There could be some amendments and changes along the way. We have also received communication from AMO (the Association of Municipalities of Ontario) that talks about all the various components of that Bill and there is a wide number of them, but I am leery to move forward on something that says \u2018any other\u2019 because I don\u2019t know what \u2018any other\u2019 means at this point. That kind of vagueness is difficult to support.\u201d
\nMayor Mrakas, on the other hand, said his motion spoke for itself.
\n\u201cIf we pass it, we\u2019re saying we oppose it and wouldn\u2019t be looking at amending or giving powers and allowing to exercise for an open business planning bylaw,\u201d he said. \u201cI stated that clearly and I think Council by passing this motion are stating that clearly. I don\u2019t think it has to be a clause within the motion.\u201d
\nWhile the original clauses of Mayor Mrakas\u2019 motion passed unanimously, this additional cause was passed on a vote of 5 \u2013 2, with Mayor Mrakas and Councillor Thompson voting against.
\nIn supporting the motion as a whole, Councillor Harold Kim said it is important to build upon the last decade-and-a-half of Provincial legislation.
\n\u201cThe Green Belt plan, which was formulated back in 2005, is a cornerstone of the Greater Golden Horseshoe growth plan that we have been operating in over the last 14 years or so and a lot of other established practices have occurred since then,\u201d he said. \u201cThere\u2019s a marked delineation between agricultural land and urban land. The builders understood where they could build and where they could not build, the municipalities created their official plans based on the existing policies. For the province to change all of that now and really have it be helter-skelter because some municipalities will make the necessary changes to have a \u2018business friendly\u2019 land development policy and others will not, so there is no consistency. Prior, there was order from the top down. Now you do what you want. That\u2019s not very orderly and I don\u2019t think that serves the citizens very well.
\n\u201cFor all that work and all these policies and practices to be put out of place by this one Bill is unfortunate and I think we owe it to our residents and we owe it to ourselves to put this motion forward.\u201d<\/p>\n\"Facebook\"<\/a>\"twitter\"<\/a>\"mail\"<\/a>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Aurora has formally said \u201cno\u201d to Ontario\u2019s Bill 66, which could give municipalities the ability to…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[4,5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-22633","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general_news","category-news"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p3D2k4-5T3","publishpress_future_action":{"enabled":false,"date":"2026-06-19 23:03:37","action":"change-status","newStatus":"draft","terms":[],"taxonomy":"category","extraData":[]},"publishpress_future_workflow_manual_trigger":{"enabledWorkflows":[]},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22633","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=22633"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22633\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=22633"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=22633"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newspapers-online.com\/auroran\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=22633"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}