text:
$1.6-Million at stake as City and LiUNA Argue Parkland Fees at OLT – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 26, 2024
The Ontario Land Tribunal will decide if parkland dedication fees can be calculated on the date a demolition permit is issued, or should be continued to be calculated when construction permits are issued.
$1,592,016 is at stake, the difference between what the City of Hamilton says the parkland fee should be, and what LiUNA says it should pay for its new construction 6-storey residential building with 261 units.
A three-day hearing began Tuesday morning.
The City of Hamilton argued it can calculate pre-Bill 23 parkland dedication fees at 488-500 Upper Wellington Street because demolition permits were issued on January 26, 2022.
LiUNA argues the Planning Act’s parkland dedication fee should be calculated based on construction permits, not demolition permits.
Building permits for geotechnical systems were issued on May 10, 2023, and a conditional permit for foundation construction was issued on July 28, 2023.
Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act, imposed new caps on municipal development charges.
Following Bill 23, municipal parkland dedication fees are capped at no more than ten percent of property value for parkland dedication fees when developments are being constructed on five hectares or less.
488-500 Upper Wellington’s property value is $6.7-million, making the capped parkland fee $670,000.
The uncapped fee, under the City’s pre-Bill 23 development charge bylaw, is $2,262,016.
A difference of $1,592,016.
LiUNA paid the amount, under protest, and filed this OLT appeal.
This is the second post-Bill 23 OLT dispute in the City of Hamilton.
The City won in the other case involving 71 Main Street in Dundas in which that developer argued parkland dedication fees should be charged only when the final building permit was issued.
In that case, the foundation permit was issued before Bill 23, and the OLT ruled parkland dedication fees can be charged when the first building permit is issued.
Today’s case differs because the City is now arguing that because demolition permits are “building permits” under the Building Code Act, the City can charge parkland dedication fees based on the date of demolition permits.
If the OLT rules for the City, properties across Hamilton in which demolition occurred before Bill 22would be subject to higher parkland dedication fees. Following this logic, both the City and developers could argue for development charges to be based upon past demolition dates, depending which is more favourable.
The OLT must decide if parkland dedication fees can be charged when a demolition permit is issued for a property subject to a proposed development application, even if that application has not received final approvals. No permits have been issued for the new development.
LiUNA’s lawyer, Jason Park of Kagan Shastri DeMelo Winer Park LLP, told the Tribunal that the City’s position contradicts the Planning Act’s plain meaning and the legislation’s intent.
“It is our position that that is not in line with the intention of that provision, or the plain and literal meaning of the words building permit for development or redevelopment,” he said, adding the Planning Act’s development charge provisions use of building permit “is not meant to capture a demolition permit.”
City lawyer Peter Krysiak said that demolition permits are building permits and that parkland fees are charged upon the issuance of a demolition permit. Therefore, the City’s decision is a statutory interpretation.
“This is an appeal about statutory interpretation. The broad issue in this appeal concerns what is a building permit. Specifically, the Tribunal will have to determine if a permit for demolition is a building permit.”
“This is not a planning issue, but rather a statutory issue, which can be resolved by applying the correct interpretation to the appropriate legislation,” Krysiak said.
He added that there is “no basis either in law or in common sense to support” LiUNA’s argument that parkland fees should be charged when municipalities issue building permits.
Krysiak says LiUNA’s case “will involve twists, leaps and bends applied by the appellant to definitions and to applications of statutes in order to contort the language to a shape that suits their case.”
He said LiUNA was doing this because “there is a refund to the tune of about $1.5-million on the line.”
“The City trusts the Tribunal will not be misled by these tactics and will apply the law and common sense to dismiss this appeal.”
The first witness called was Fengate Asset Management’s (LiUNA’s investment manager) Director, Development Anthony Girolami, who told the Tribunal that the City only sought parkland fees when the developer applied for their construction permits.
Girolami said it was only after Bill 23 came into effect that the City informed him fees were calculated upon the issuance date of the demolition permit.
In cross-examination, the City’s lawyer questioned Girolami regarding if the City had any obligation to inform him about the parkland dedication fee when issuing demolition permits.
The second witness on the stand was land development expert Ed Newhook.
Newhook was Director, Research and Planning, for the former City of North York from 1992 to 1999. In this role, he says he led “the review of consolidation of” Parkland bylaws “for the newly established amalgamated municipality of Toronto.”
He is a Registered Professional Land Use Planner. The OLT qualifed him as an expert witness regarding parkland dedication fees.
Newhook testified he is unaware of any instance of parkland land dedication fees being levied using the date of a demolition permit.
“This is the first time I’ve seen this,” he said. “Very obviously, from my position, the Building Code Act cannot act as the legislation that directs the parkland dedication.”
Newhook emphasized that parkland dedication fees are development charges. The Planning Act states, “development means the construction erection or placing of one or more buildings or structures around the land or making an addition or alteration to a building or structure.”
He testified that development and development charges are tied to increases in the size of structures or the usability of a property.
“The underlying principle for the Parkland dedication requirements of the Planning Act is that there’s the appropriate amount of Parkland and related facilities for new development and the incremental population who will occupy, work, or visit these new developments,” Newhook stated. There is no incremental demand created by demolition. Therefore, there is no need for parkland at that stage.”
Newhook said the City of Hamilton’s novel interpretation is driven by a desire to capture the $1.6-million in additional parkland dedication fees.
“If there’s a motivation for the City of Hamilton to go outside of what is the norm in parks planning, it is, in fact, the difference between the $2.262-million and the amount that would be owed to the City of Hamilton under the cap scenario.”
The City will present its case on Wednesday. Closing arguments are scheduled for Thursday.
The OLT hearing panel is Members Sarah Bobka and Bita Rajaee.
For zoning purposes, the building is considered a six-storey building, but for Building Code purposes, it is considered an eight-storey building. This is due to its mezzanine level and indoor roof amenity space. TPR, like all parties in the OLT hearing, refers to it as a six-story building.
Sarah Kagan is a co-counsel for LiUNA.


text:
2024 McMaster Student Union Candidates Focused Upon Campus Life, Not City Life – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 18, 2024
This post was a bit delayed getting published. It was written in January.
The after-effects of “Zoom U” were evident during this year’s McMaster Student Union’s presidential debate.
Having begun their university education behind a screen, just another square on Zoom, all four candidates campaigned on ensuring future students can have the student life experiences denied to them by the pandemic.
The four candidates view Hamilton as a place they do not visit, and Hamiltonians should be thankful for the economic activity McMaster generates. They all agree that the city’s nuisance party bylaw targets students and lessens their student life experiences.
Muhammad Ammad Ahsan, Luca Bernardini, Jialiang (Kevin) Hu, and Jovan Popovic shared similar platforms to increase funding to campus clubs, hold more events, and create a fun culture on campus.
Will increasing funding to MSU clubs help? What about spending on more expensive and popular performers for MSU events? Should larger clubs get more funding?
These questions dominated the 2024 presidential debate.
Candidates agreed that tuition should not increase and that food should be more affordable – but they were not referring to grocery prices.
Other than briefly mentioning the campus food bank and providing free soup at lunch, the candidate’s discussion of food affordability focused on the cost of buying hot meals on campus and from commercial restaurants off campus.
Housing received a passing reference during the debate, but only to say McMaster University needs to build more student housing.
The City of Hamilton? The student leaders had harsh words for a city they feel no connection to.
One candidate confidently declared that Hamilton has a “fainting legacy of being a Steel City” and should be thankful for the economic activity students bring.
Each candidate denounced the nuisance party by-law, with one describing it as giving “police all power to, let’s just say, abuse power against students” and another as “discrimination” because it only targets student street parties.
“They are anti-student; students do not vote,” declared another candidate of how City Council views students and why.
The candidates want McMaster to have an official homecoming again and to work to “channel the energy of students” to prevent incidents such as the 2021 car-flipping from reoccurring.
In 2017, McMaster University rebranded Homecoming as “the biggest party of the year.”
The students took the new brand to heart, holding large street parties in Ainslie Wood and Westdale that year. The tradition has continued since. McMaster University has disassociated itself from the annual homecoming parties.
Presidential candidates all called for McMaster to organize sanctioned events on campus in an attempt to stop unsanctioned street parties.
The student leaders had a thoughtful discussion regarding AI and academic integrity. All four say students should be allowed to use AI to complete assignments and essays.
One of the candidates thoughtfully cited how statements regarding the use of ChatGPT mirror concerns created when the Internet, and then Google, became study tools used by undergraduates decades ago.
Notably absent from the debate was any discussion of the City’s new rental housing licensing bylaws, property standards, or HSR transit.
In the days before the COVID pandemic, the Society of Off-Campus Students was the most mentioned campus club during debates. SOCS was not mentioned this year.
Popovic won this year’s presidential election, becoming the first MSU president to be re-elected in over four decades.
notionvc: dd331609-5f83-4daf-8223-c47b4645030c

source: news-thepublicrecord

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
BRIEF: Hamilton Police Adding Three Staff to Offender Management Unit, Province Funding 100% for Three Years – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 24, 2024
The Hamilton Police Service (HPS) is adding three staff, a constable, a civilian crime analyst, and a court clerk for its Offender Management Unit for three years, with the Province of Ontario funding the $1,193,408.51 cost.
In a report to the March 28 Hamilton Police Service Board meeting, the HPS states “in 2022, the Hamilton Police made 7,814 arrests where 62% (4,828 individuals) had release orders” and “in 2022, HPS found that 1 in 3 individuals charged with a violence offence were breaching judicial releases.”
The Offender Management Unit consisted of two constables, one crime analyst, and one court clerk.


text:
BRIEF: Hamilton Police Chief Asks Police Board for Permission to Hire 33 Officers to Backfill for Long-Term Absences – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 24, 2024
Hamilton Police Chief Frank Bergen is asking the Hamilton Police Service Board to authorizing increasing the “approved headcount by thirty-three (33) full-time Sworn Members, to backfill officers currently included in the HPS authorized headcount, who have been absent on WSIB for more than twenty-four (24) months continuously with no current prognosis for a return to work.”
In a report to the Board, Bergen states the HPS is using overtime to fill shifts, causing a “decline in Member wellness.”
The report states, “The HPS spent $6.89M in overtime in 2022 and $6.31M in 2023.”
As of February 13, 2024, 49 sworn police officers had been on WSIB leave for more than two years, and 29 officers had been on leave for less than two years. “Combining these figures, seventy-eight (78) members represent 9% of our sworn workforce,” Bergen writes.
In 2016, Ontario passed Presumptive Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) legislation for first responders.
The City of Hamilton replaces paramedics and firefighters when they are deemed ‘permanently disabled’, Bergen states the HPS is seeking to match this practice.
The Police Board meets on Thursday to consider the recommendation.


text:
BRIEF: Hamilton Police Paid Duty Events Increased 15.47% in 2023 Compared to 2022 – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 24, 2024
The Hamilton Police Service’s annual Paid Duties report says the service was contracted 1,911 times for paid duty events in 2023, an increase of 15.47 percent compared to 1,655 events in 2023. The Police Service collected $797,164.69 in “administrative fees and cost recovery” in 2023, an increase of 45.69 percent compared to 2022. The administrative fee is 20 percent of the “total amount charged for officers and equipment.”
HPS collected a total of $2,885,959.57 in revenue.


text:
BRIEF: Hamilton Police Services Board Will Livestream on YouTube – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 26, 2024
The Hamilton Police Services Board will now stream its Board meetings on YouTube, beginning with this Thursday’s meeting.
The HPSB’s new YouTube page is: https://www.youtube.com/@HamiltonPoliceServiceBoard
UPDATE: The Hamilton Police Services Board has changed its livestream location, they are using the primary “Hamilton Police” YouTube account for the March 2024 meeting.
Watch live here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ca-2tRMLqTE


text:
City of Hamilton and Losani Reach Deal on Windwood 3 and 4 in Binbrook – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 16, 2024
The City of Hamilton will permit Losani Homes to build two six-storey buildings, with stepbacks for angular plane above the third storey, at 3064-3084 Regional Road 56 and 3160-3190 Regional Road 56.
The City and Losani Homes reached a settlement agreement at the Ontario Land Tribunal. The OLT approved the deal on March 7.
The properties are located on the west side of Regional Road 56 between Binbrook Road and Windwood Drive.
The original proposals for the sites sought a total of 237 housing units.
The settlement changes the proposal to include more commercial space on the ground levels of the buildings.
Details including design and number of units are not included in the OLT ruling.


text:
City of Hamilton Pauses Some OLT Hearings due to CyberIncident – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 6, 2024
Thus far, the ongoing ransomware attack against the City of Hamilton has had only a minor impact on the City’s cases at the Ontario Land Tribunal.
Many of the City’s OLT cases are handled by outside legal counsel, who are not impacted by the loss of access to files which internal City of Hamilton lawyers are experiencing.
The City was forced to request a delay to a settlement hearing for 651 Queenston Road. It has been postponed until April 23.
A settlement hearing for 3064, 3070, 3078 & 3084 Regional Road 56 Road and 3160, 3168, 3180 & 3190 Regional Road 56 was conducted on Tuesday, February 27.
The Ontario Land Tribunal hears fewer cases during the school March Break period. This will alleviate some of the impact.
The next City of Hamilton hearing is a March 19 case management conference for a non-decision appeal for the property at 499 Mohawk Road East.
The City’s planning staff are locked out of their files due to the ransomware attack. When new appeals are filed, they cannot produce the required municipal records for submission to the OLT.
They cannot access records to prepare evidence and affidavits for ongoing appeal hearings.
As the weeks of lost productivity compound, the City will face a backlog of OLT work to be completed.


text:
COLEMAN: A Bit More of What I’m Hearing from City Staff on Ransomware Service Impacts – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 6, 2024
The City of Hamilton’s governance and services are being severely impacted by an ongoing cybersecurity failure, which has seen ransomware take over the City’s interconnected computer systems.
The City has disclosed some of the service disruptions that are occurring. Here’s what I’ve been hearing from multiple sources on City staff.
Hamilton has not declared an emergency under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act.
(Note: I attended City Council on Monday. The City did not answer any questions following the meeting.)
The City is manually processing pay for its approximately 9,000 employees, the vast majority of whom are salaried.
Full-time hourly employees in one section of the City told me they were paid a set amount of hours and that adjustments would be made later.
On Monday, in the hallway of City Hall, I asked the City’s Executive Director of Human Resources, Lora Fontana, about payroll issues.
“There have been some nuances, depending on the circumstances, but generally speaking, everyone is being paid as best as possible based on previous activity,” Fortana stated.
The City cannot provide staff with T4 tax slips. The City had transmitted the information to CRA prior to the breach. Employees can request their T4s from CRA.
The City of Hamilton has not stated if it submitted its list of employees paid greater than $100,000 in 2023 to the Province of Ontario by March 5, as required by The Public Sector Salary Disclosure Act.
The City of Hamilton has until March 31 to release the 2023 remuneration given to members of the City Council, and all citizen appointees are paid honorariums to sit on local boards.
Having not formally declared an emergency, the City must meet legislative deadlines.
Emergency responses are occurring without disruption. Sources tell me that fire dispatch is using manual processes.
Radio systems are working.
Routing and vehicle tracking systems are down.
However, assigning and dispatching units is not as efficient.
Numerous employees in emergency services and the City’s public transit division tell me that managers are not able to track employee absences, they are unaware of what scheduled time off employees have booked (for things such as medical appointments), and are struggling to fill shifts.
The HSR cannot track bus locations, and is struggling to maintain service due largely to the employee attendance management issues noted above.
HSR operators must continue driving their buses for one-hour or an additional trip when their relief operator does not show.
This is occurring a lot during the past two weeks. Operators are paid double time for this work.
Maintenance issues are becoming backlogged due to computer issues. Manual processes are in place.
On Wednesday, when Hamilton Police had to close King Street in Downtown Hamilton due to a shooting, it took over an hour for HSR managers to post detour information.
This does not appear to be related to computer issues. HSR office managers continue to enjoy “flexible” work-from-home arrangements and rarely respond to service disruptions in a timely manner.
The City’s Planning Division has requested developers and their agents to resend applications and other documents.
Planning staff are using personal cellphones to communicate and some are using their personal computers to work.
Officially, the City of Hamilton states that planning applications are being processed. This is true, but they are not being processed efficiently.
The City is still required to process and have City Council decide on applications within 90 or 120 days.
If the City fails to meet these timelines, it must send applications for partial or full refunds for application fees.


text:
COLEMAN: Council Cannot ‘Skip Out to the Washroom’ To Pass Stoney Creek Housing – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 26, 2024
Wednesday, Hamilton City Council is expected to remain deadlocked 8-8 on a proposal to allow affordable housing on two surplus municipal parking lots at 5 and 13 Lake Avenue South in Downtown Stoney Creek.
The result will be the defeat of the proposal, unless Mayor Andrea Horwath invokes ‘strong mayor’ powers to override Council.
This got me thinking: Could a councillor who wants to vote against the proposal for political reasons but does not actually want it defeated ‘accidentally’ go to the washroom, miss the vote, and the measure pass in an 8-7 vote?
It’s a proven political maneuver. They arrange to have other councillors call the vote when they are in the washroom, the motion passes, and they performatively protest.
Here’s the problem: Hamilton City Council now votes down items during by-law ratification votes. (This is how the Vacant Unit Tax was defeated in November)
Obviously, they can’t be ‘caught’ off-guard twice.
How did this come to be?
67 units of housing, in place of 57 parking spots.
The debate has been framed people versus parking, housing versus parking, and various similar phrasing.
I think a better frame for understanding the politics of the issue is People Value [Free] Parking.
Parking is one of the biggest issues in municipal politics. It matters to people [who vote]. People want free parking close to where they live and where they work. They see parking as an asset they will use.
It is parochial, and guess what, in politics, parochial matters.
People will vote out a politician who takes away their parking spot, no ward councillor can be seen voting to decrease parking supply.
For the number of comments and attention, one could think we’re talking about hundreds of each.
City councillors have used the past five weeks taking to various platforms and pulpits to declare why the other side is wrong.
The eight opposed have stated they will not change their position.
This is parking, changing their position would come at great political cost.
Since time immemorial, ward councillors have voted parochially against unpopular proposals in their ward, only to “lose” to a majority vote of the Council. When the next time rolled around, and a similar issue occurred in another ward, the ward councillor would be parochial, and the first ward councillor voted against them alongside the majority of the council.
Technology has partially ruined this political game; people can watch Council meetings anytime. The game is exposed.
They can’t change their votes, they can’t be in the washroom.
This leaves us, hours before the hour, with what appears to be an unbreakable deadlock.
We’ll see what happens.


text:
COLEMAN: HSR is Hiring More Consultants, Which Begs the Question, Why? – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 10, 2024
The City of Hamilton does not know how many consultants it hires or how much it spends on consulting in any given year.
On January 30, City Council passed a motion instructing city staff to begin tracking this data and provide a report before the 2025 city budget process.
In response, during this meeting, city management told Council that they only use consultants when they need specialized knowledge that is not available in-house or expertise or to accelerate project completions.
This begs the question, why is the City’s public transit agency, the Hamilton Street Railway, hiring consultants to “develop a transit growth and implementation strategy.”
It is not to accelerate any project completion. If we are to take city management’s statement at face value, it means the HSR lacks the expertise to do the work.
How is that possible when the HSR has over 50 managers and project managers working in planning, innovation, and support services?
The HSR’s Transit Planning & Infrastructure section has 20 managers and project managers. The Customer Experience & Innovation section has 13 managers and staff. There are 15 managers and staff in the Transit Support Services section.
This is further evidence of serious inefficiencies at the HSR.
As HSR passengers have experienced in recent months, none of these managers are working during peak transit times, and there have been repeated instances where no HSR managers were on duty during weekday office hours to provide detour information.
Maybe the HSR needs a consultant to determine what HSR managers are doing with their time.
Actually, when you think of it, City Council is supposed to oversee spending.
It is time for the Council to do its job.


text:
COLEMAN: Mayor Horwath May Regret Endorsing the Province’s Annual Housing Targets Criteria – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 9, 2024
Hamilton Mayor Andrea Horwath may soon regret her endorsement of the Ontario government’s Building Faster Fund bonus funding criteria come this time next year.
The City of Hamilton was lucky in 2023 because the bonus funding criteria is something City Hall cannot control – new housing starts, aka pouring of foundations.
In 2023, foundations for 4,142 new housing units were poured in Hamilton. Hamilton was one of only 19 municipalities with enough new foundations to meet the provincial housing start target.
Burlington and Mississauga, among many, were not so lucky. Despite each approving thousands of new housing units for construction, developers did not start enough projects for those cities to meet targets.
Hamilton is expected to receive around $12-million in bonus funding. Meanwhile, both Burlington and Mississauga will receive nothing, $0.
Hamilton Mayor Andrea Horwath wrote on February 23, 2024:
“I’m thrilled to announce that the City of Hamilton has not only met but exceeded our 2023 housing target. Working collaboratively with our local development industry and community stakeholders, and thanks to the hard work of City staff and Council, there were 4,142 new homes, including long-term care beds, built in Hamilton last year, which is 120% of the provincial housing target.
Hamilton is among just 19 Ontario municipalities with housing targets who have met or exceeded their annual target and as such is eligible for increased funding under the Province’s Building Faster Fund.
…
It’s clear that Hamilton is doing its part to get more homes built faster. I am grateful to Council
and staff for their commitment to meeting and exceeding our provincial housing target.”
A few large projects began construction in 2023. The three new towers being built condos at 41-61 Wilson Street in Downtown Hamilton counted for 931 new housing units alone.
2024 is not looking as strong for Hamilton, with national housing starts decreasing. The Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation states new construction starts were down ten percent in January 2024 compared to December 2023.
The Building Faster Fund rewards municipalities for new housing construction starts – a measure that is outside the control of municipalities.
Municipal councils can approve zoning and change official plans to enable more housing and intensification, but they do not construct housing.
It should be no surprise many municipalities are highlighting this flaw.
Burlington Mayor Marianne Meed Ward summarized the problem well in a letter to the provincial government:
“The criteria by which cities are judged, namely foundations poured, is inappropriate and inaccurate,” Meed Ward wrote, adding housing construction “is outside the municipality’s control. The City of Burlington does not pour foundations nor are we in the business of building houses. We issue permits so that houses can be built.”
Burlington has 4,256 approved units of housing that are not yet under construction.
Mississauga’s letter echoes these points.
“Mississauga has been clear that cities must be measured on factors they can influence and is encouraging the government to re-think housing starts as a way to measure our progress,” reads the Mississauga letter.
“We’re losing out on funding despite all of the work we’ve undertaken to grow our City including streamlining our development and building permit approval processes and expanding housing permissions.”
Mississauga only had 3,470 housing starts in 2023, despite approving over 31,000 new housing units during the past three years and having over 12,000 units under construction.
Unless federally determined economic conditions change, namely interest rates, the City of Hamilton will not meet the 2024 target.
Mayor Horwath chose to endorse the formula, what will she say in 2025 when it works against us?


text:
COLEMAN: The Police Board Complaint Against Councillor Kroetsch Threatens Council Itself – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 11, 2024
The provincial appointees on Hamilton’s Police Services Board are undermining municipal democracy.
They requested the Ontario Civilian Police Commission to investigate Ward 2 Councillor Cameron Kroetsch for motions he made at the city council regarding police budgeting and his comments regarding how the Police Services Board reviews the annual police budget before sending it to Council for approval.
The OCPC has launched an investigation, and Kroetsch has stepped off the Police Board as required during the investigation.
Kroetsch’s statements and actions as elected city councillor are undoubtedly intimately tied to municipal democracy.
For this reason, the use of statutory processes against Kroetsch threatens the independence of City Council and its ability to govern.
Municipalities are creatures of the province, with no inherent protections or privileges. They merely have the powers given to them by statute and regulation.
Elected councils govern municipalities.
These councils have fought for recognition as true governing bodies and the ability to govern their meetings and affairs independently from outside interference – especially interference from unelected and unaccountable entities.
The Municipal Act grants councils powers to govern, including oversight and financial management of police boards.
The Police Services Act explicitly states municipal councils “shall establish an overall budget” for policing.
Councillors speaking, moving, and passing resolutions regarding policing budgeting is necessary to fulfil their legislated mandates.
(If a Police Board deems the overall budget inadequate to provide effective policing, the Board can appeal to OCPC to decide what funding the municipality must provide.)
The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that municipal councillors must be able to speak on matters of public interest to ensure the “preservation of municipal democracy.”
Prud’homme v. Prud’homme (2002 SCC 85) is most informative.
In this case, Councillor Fernand Prud’homme of Repentigny, Quebec, publicly criticized his fellow councillors for “the fact that no public debate had been held” on a matter of public interest.
Other councillors, “offended by the statement, which was, in their opinion, full of malicious insinuations about them that made them out to be bad citizens, brought an action against the respondent in damages for interfering with their reputation, honour and dignity.”
In dismissing the defamation case, the unanimous Supreme Court noted an “intimate connection” between municipal councillors’ duty to represent their constituents and their right to speak on matters of public interest, especially during council meetings.
The elected councillor’s freedom of expression is necessary for “the preservation of municipal democracy.”
The Supreme Court approvingly quoted Professor Pierre Trudel, translated:
“Municipal democracy is based on confrontation between views and on open, and sometimes vigorous and passionate, debate. Discussion about controversial subjects can occur only in an atmosphere of liberty. If the rules governing the conduct of such debates are applied in such a way as to cause the people who participate in them to fear that they will be hauled before the courts for the slightest breach, the probability that they will choose to withdraw from public life will increase.”
It also approvingly quoted from Lord Diplock in Horricks v. Lowe, at p. 152 A.C.:
“My Lords, what is said by members of a local council at meetings of the council or of any of its committees is spoken on a privileged occasion. The reasons for the privilege is that those who represent the local government electors should be able to speak freely and frankly, boldly and bluntly, on any matter which they believe affects the interests or welfare of the inhabitants. They may be swayed by strong political prejudice, they may be obstinate and pig-headed, stupid and obtuse; but they were chosen by the electors to speak their minds on matters of local concern and so long as they do so honestly they run no risk of liability for defamation of those who are the subjects of their criticism.”
If the Hamilton Police Services Board succeeds, the independence of Hamilton City Council is permanently undermined.
From that point forward, the three people that City Council appoints to the Police Board – plus the Mayor who is legislatively appointed to the Board – will cease to be Council representatives and be forever bound to represent the Police Board to Council.
It is clear, to this observer, that a majority of the sixteen members of City Council harbour negative opinions of Kroetsch. Kroetsch does not try to make friends and does antagonize his political opponents on Council.
This is irrelevant because, on principle alone, City Council, led by the Mayor, should be standing up for their hard-fought privilege to govern and manage their affairs without undue interference.
Instead, it appears this Council will allow the weaponization of accountability processes, a weaponization that will be turned against all of them – at great expense to Hamilton taxpayers who are footing the financial bills for lawyers and integrity commissioners.
Ultimately, the City Council will regret allowing all of this to happen. It distracts them from the work they have been elected to achieve and undermines their credibility.


text:
Hamilton City Hall Concedes It Must Follow Charter Law, Ending Suit by Pro-Life/Anti-Abortion Group – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 6, 2024
In November, the City of Hamilton conceded it failed to properly consider free expression rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms when it rejected a bus advertising purchase by the Association for Reformed Political Action Canada  [ARPA].
The City of Hamilton has been subject to a previous court ruling ordering it to comply with Charter law when considering political ad purchases on public transit.
Lawyers for the City made the concession back in October, only a week before a long-awaited Ontario Divisional Court hearing,
The ARPA tried to place ads on the side of Hamilton’s buses that included an ultrasound image of a late-term fetus in the womb that refers to the fetus with the pronoun “her.”
The City of Hamilton rejected the ad, stating the use of gender pronouns implies that human fetuses are people under the law.
The City’s decision cited the “Canadian Code of Advertising Standards, Clause 1 (Accuracy and Clarity) and the Criminal Code of Canada” and instructed ARPA that the ad “would need to be revised so as not to reflect personhood in relation to the image.”
[The ARPA website includes an image of their proposed ad “We’re for women’s rights” here.]
The City’s decision did not consider the APRA’s Charter right to free expression.
Arguing in front of the Divisional Court, lawyers for ARPA sought a ruling the City violated their Charter rights and an order for the City to run the advertisement.
Lawyers for the City asked the Court to remit the matter back to the City for reconsideration with a promise the City would follow Charter law before issuing a new decision.
The Court agreed to remit the ad to the City for consideration.
“In light of the Respondent City’s concession that it did not provide adequate reasons … the Court granted the application for judicial review, quashed the decision of the City, and remitted the matter back for proper consideration by the City,” wrote Justice Paul B. Schabas for a three-judge panel.
“About a week prior to the case being heard, the City conceded that the reasons it provided for rejecting the Ad made no reference to the balancing of the Applicants’ right to freedom of expression against the City’s statutory objectives, as required by the Supreme Court of Canada’s decisions.”
The Divisional Court granted APRA costs, finding that the City “could have conceded this point much earlier, as it recognized the insufficiency of its reasons some time ago.”
The City has 30 days to pay $20,000 to ARPA.
The City Manager’s Office will now reconsider the advertisement and issue reasons.
ARPA can return to the Divisional Court if the City Manager’s Office again rejects the ad.


text:
Hamilton City Hall Makes Emergency Changes to Committee of Adjustment Hearings – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 12, 2024
In a no-notice emergency meeting on Tuesday morning, the City of Hamilton’s Committee of Adjustment changed their procedural rules to allow themselves to return to video conference meetings.
The meeting occurred despite the City Manager’s Office announcing there be no meetings at City Hall until March 27.
The procedural changes all the City to prohibit in-person delegations to the Committee of Adjustment.
No justification or explanation for the change has been provided by the City.
It appears the emergency changes are to allow for meetings to occur in the event the City can no longer hold meetings at City Hall.
With municipal public Wi-Fi down at all City facilities and Hamilton libraries, members of the public who do not have access to high-speed internet connections will have to submit their comments in writing or by phone.
The Committee of Adjustment plans to meet on Tuesday March 26. The meeting notices states it will occur in-person at City Hall.
The City of Hamilton has not declared an emergency under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act despite exercising emergency powers following a cybersecurity breach and failure that became noticeable on February 25.
The City Council extended its two-week March Break recess to four weeks. Councillors will return on March 27, but only to deal with urgent, time-sensitive business. The council is hopeful about resuming regular meetings in April.
Members of the City Council are not responding to questions regarding any decisions being made regarding the cybersecurity incident.


text:
Hamilton Mayor Andrea Horwath Paid $272,392.27 in 2023, Among the Highest Mayoral Salaries in Canada – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 24, 2024
Hamilton Mayor Andrea Horwath’s remuneration for 2023 was $272,392.27, including a base salary of $212,392.27 and a $60,000 payment from Alectra Utilities.
The City of Hamilton released the annual Council and Local Board compensation reports on Friday, as required by Section 284 of the Municipal Act.
Across Canada, mayors of major cities are paid much less.
Calgary’s mayor is paid an annual salary of $213,737, Edmonton $216,585, Ottawa $198,702, Toronto $216,160, and Vancouver $205,914 plus $25,000 for sitting on the regional transit board.
The Premier of Ontario is paid $208,974 annually. Ontario cabinet ministers are paid $165,850. Members of Provincial Parliament are paid $116,500.
In suburban municipalities west of Toronto, local politicians collect base pay plus extra remuneration for their roles overseeing municipal corporations.
Alectra, the local hydro utility which services large portions of Hamilton, Niagara, Peel, York, and Barrie, gives municipal politicians a top-up of $60,000 per year for sitting on its board.
Markham Mayor Frank Scarpitti collected $278,474 in 2023. He was paid $150,381 as mayor, $62,093 for sitting on York Regional Council, and added $57,500 from Alectra and $8,500 from Markham District Energy Inc.
Former Mississauga Mayor Bonnie Crombie made $255,233.22 in 2023: $129,438.53 as mayor, $54,484.22 as a regional councillor, $56,250 from Alectra, and $15,060.47 for sitting on the police board.
(Crombie took unpaid leave of absence on October 6, 2023 to run for Ontario Liberal Party leader. She resumed mayoral duties the first week of December and resigned in January.)
Vaughan Mayor Steven Del Duca reported a salary of $225,277.04 between the City of Vaughan and the Region of York. Neither the Region or City disclosures report any payments from Alectra Utilities. (TPR has emailed Vaughan’s City Clerk to confirm)
York Regional Chair Wayne Emmerson reported a salary of $257,858 for 2023, he did not report any additional pay.
Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown made $225,259.99 in 2023: $149,022.06 as mayor, $61,108.65 as a regional councillor, and $15,129.28 for sitting on the Peel Regional Police Services Board.
Peel Regional Chair Nando Iannicca made $216,804.34 in 2023: $198,331.15 as chair and $18,473.19 for sitting on the police board.
Oshawa Mayor Dan Carter made $198,399.59 in 2023: $132,563 from Oshawa, 59,866.37 for sitting on Durham Regional Council, and $5,970.22 for sitting on the Durham Region Police Services Board.
(Carter received an additional $5,229.83 in lieu of pension from Durham Region. Durham Region does not provide a pension plan to politicians. Other municipal councils provide themselves with pensions.)
Durham Regional Chair John Henry was paid $209,106.29 in 2023: $204,606.29 as Regional Chair, and $4,500 from Durham OneNet Inc.  (Henry received an additional $25,728.92 in lieu of pension.)
Barrie Mayor Alex Nuttall reported receiving $60,000 from Alectra, topping up his $129,621.85 salary for a total of $189,621.85.
Mayor Andrea Horwath’s two-week July 2023 Sister City trip to Racalmuto, Sicily, Italy, cost the City of Hamilton $4,872.35 for the mayor’s travel, accommodation, and per diem.
Members of the public and punditry heavily criticized the trip. Horwath met with municipal officials in Italy and attended various cultural events.
In July, a spokesperson for the Mayor stated the trip cost $4,505.30 for flights and accommodation.
The Section 284 disclosure states flights were $2,952.49, accommodation was $859.20, and the mayor received a per diem of $1,060.66. The per diem is in accordance with City of Hamilton travel policies.
Mayor Horwath attended three conferences in 2023: the Ontario Big City Mayors (OBCM) annual general meeting in Kitchener, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) annual conference, and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) conference.
In total, conference expenses totalled $3,643.15.
The Mayor expensed $394.84 for accommodation to attend a Bloomberg Harvard City Leadership Initiative training session in July.
Mayor Horwath expensed $1,894 for meals and meetings, and $685 for tickets to community events.


text:
Hamilton Police Board Proposes Ban on Recording Public Meetings – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 24, 2024
Hamilton’s Police Service Board held a secret Governance Committee meeting on March 13, 2024, the latest in a series of open meeting law violations.
During the secret meeting, the Board debated an overhaul of its procedural bylaw and policies in preparation for the April 1 enactment of Ontario’s new Community Safety and Police Act (CPSA). The CPSA replaces the Police Services Act.
The CPSA’s new regulations impose greater transparency requirements upon police boards, including decreasing the reasons police boards can go into closed session.
Board Chair Pat Mandy, provincial appointee Member Geordie Elms, and Ward 7 Councillor Esther Pauls attended the Governance meeting.
During the secret meeting, those present approved banning recording of public meetings of the Board and its committee.
The new Police Board procedural bylaw states, “the use of recording equipment or any other device used for recording the proceedings of a meeting by members of the public, including the news
media, may be permitted and shall be subject to the approval and/or direction of the Chair unless otherwise decided by the board.”
The Board has not posted public posted any recording of the meeting, nor disclosed if any members dissented when voting for the recording ban.
Section 35 of the Police Services Act requires that Police Board meetings be open to the public. This includes Board meetings self-designated as “committees.”
On February 12, 2024, the Hamilton Police Board announced it was closing its February 13 budget meeting to the public.
On Feb 13, TPR set up video streaming equipment hours before the meeting and streamed the proceedings.
TPR‘s defiance forced the Board to open the meeting room to the public.
This latest secret meeting, and the plan to ban recording of public meetings, fit into pattern of open meeting violations in recent years.
On September 2, 2021, the Police Board declared an emergency and held a secret meeting. The emergency – a vote to make the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation a holiday for Hamilton Police Service employees. The Board refused to release the meeting agenda.
In December 2021, when TPR was trying to get a copy of the September meeting agenda, TPR learned the Stevenson created a GMail account that was used by the Police Board, contrary to the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
Ontario’s Information and Privacy Commission expressed concern about the use of GMail. The Board claimed the GMail account was only used once.
On January 24, 2022, the Board claimed it had technical issues and did not livestream its meeting. The meeting was closed to the public due to COVID.
On January 25, 2022, the Board Chair Mandy issued a statement saying the Board “remains committed to providing continued transparency and ensuring the public’s access to their meetings.”
On January 27, 2022, the Board held a secret governance committee meeting.
The Board claims because it eventually discloses it secret meetings, they are not violating open meeting laws.
The Police Board will meet on Thursday to ratify the proposed recording ban.
The meeting begins at 1:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Hamilton City Hall.


text:
Hamilton’s Committee of Adjustment Plans to Resume Meetings on March 26 – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 12, 2024
Hamilton’s Committee of Adjustment plans to meet in two weeks, making them the first City board to resume making decisions since the City cybersecurity breach/failure became noticeable on February 25.
The CoA had to cancel two meetings following the breach, their February 27 and March 12 hearing dates.
The March 26 meeting agenda lists 32 hearings, more than the average CoA meeting. All 32 hearings are applications rescheduled from the cancelled meetings.
Regular city council meetings remain cancelled until at least April 2.


text:
Jason Thorne Leaving City of Hamilton for New Opportunity – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 12, 2024
The City of Hamilton’s General Manager of Planning and Economic Development Jason Thorne is leaving the City of Hamilton for a new opportunity.
Thorne announced his resignation on the morning of March 12. That afternoon, he took to X (formerly Twitter) to publicly share that he is leaving for an “exciting new role” in the private sector.
“It’s a day of very mixed emotions for me. Today I announced that I am going to be leaving the City of Hamilton to take on an exciting new role. Thank you, Hamilton, for letting me be part of the City’s amazing renaissance over the past 10 years!”
Thorne was hired in 2014 and has overseen several major initiatives during his decade at City Hall
During his time as General Manager, his department had its share of successes.
City planning processes have been streamlined, major zoning reforms have been implemented, including new city-wide commercial mixed-use zoning, transit-oriented community zoning along the planning B-Line light rail transit line, and soon-to-be-implemented city-wide residential zoning reform.
Failures in bylaw enforcement, especially regarding property standards, were one of the areas of recent controversy during Thorne’s tenure. In 2023, bylaw managers’ failure to prepare anti-renoviction measures for Council approval resulted in a rare apology from staff to the Council.
Thorne is one of the few senior City staff who live in Hamilton. He was engaged in community events, organized public talks, bicycled across the city, and was always willing to explain his decisions.
In 2023, when City Manager Janette Smith departed before the end of her contract, Thorne was appointed Interim City Manager.
During this period, he masterfully navigated council-staff relationships, ensured reports were delivered on time, and quietly completed tasks.
His last day will be March 26.
The City of Hamilton has yet to announce the recruitment process to find the next general manager.
Mike Kirkopoulos, the CAO of the Town of Lincoln, was one of the first to comment publicly on the news, writing that Thorne is a “consummate professional who always brought a private sector and senior government perspective to Hamilton’s public service.”
Maureen Wilson, Ward 1 City Councillor, writes that Thorne is “so incredibly smart and immensely talented. Curious, creative, and perhaps Hamilton’s biggest champion.”
Toon Dreessen, a former president of the Ontario Association of Architects, wrote: “Congrats @JasonThorne_RPP; you’ve been a force for change, for good and a strong vocal supporter of the role design can play in transformative outcomes. Wherever you land will benefit from your wisdom and experience.”
Gregg Lintern, a former Toronto Chief Planner, wrote: “Influential impact on Hamilton and its future Jason! All the very best in your next endeavour!”


text:
Joey’s Notepad: City of Hamilton Resumes Internal Development Review Team Meetings – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 28, 2024
The City of Hamilton continues to recover from its cybersecurity failure.
Next week, the City’s internal Development Review Team (DRT) will resume meetings.
DRT brings staff from various divisions together to meet with development applicants. The goal is to save the City and developers time (and money) by bringing everyone together to discuss issues and hopefully reach agreements on everything from parking surface materials to landscaping, height, density, and stormwater management. You name it, it is discussed.
This is a notepad post; I’ll quickly note that the alternative to DRT is long email chains, which take more time for everyone involved.
DRT has paused for the past month.
Next week’s meeting includes two files.
1565 Barton Street East (plaza with a FreshCo), Site Plan Application, “The applicant proposes to renovate the existing one-storey commercial building with a new façade facing Barton Street and a reduction of the overall building footprint. Also proposed are a new commercial building with direct street frontage on Barton Street and alterations to the existing parking area.”
304 Main Street East (Canadian Tire), Formal Consultation, “The proposed development as it pertains to 304-314 Main St E is to demolish the existing buildings and construct a 7-storey podium along with two towers with heights of 16 and 18-storeys respectively, for total building heights of 23 and 25 storeys including the podium, (plus mechanical penthouses) for the establishment of 355 dwellings units. A total of 1,256 square metres of outdoor amenity area will be provided, excluding unit balconies which are yet to be designed. On the south block at 17 West Ave S, the proposed development is to construct a 5-storey building, plus mechanical penthouse, which will provide 24 dwelling units, 96 square metres of outdoor amenity area. Overall, there will be a total of 248 parking spaces provided exclusively underground.”
A Site Plan Application is the final step before receiving building permits. Formal Consultation involves conceptual plans. It occurs before any official Planning Act application is submitted, FC applications are often use to test the boundaries of planning permissions to allow the developer to learn the positon of planning staff before spending significant amounts of money to produce a full planning application.


text:
Joey’s Notepad: Council Will Regret Cancelling All March Meetings – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 12, 2024
Hamilton City Council announced Monday that they are cancelling all their March regular meeting.
The announcement was made as the city government entered its third week without computer systems following a devastating cybersecurity failure that became noticeable on Sunday, February 25.
When Council meetings resume (hopefully in early April), Council will face three issues they are contentiously divided on:
– a vote on converting portions of municipal downtown Stoney Creek parking lots into affordable housing;
– a motion to retroactively overturn a decision by a previous Integrity Commissioner declaring Ward 7 Councillor Esther Pauls had a conflict of interest voting on the Police Board due to her son’s employment as a senior police officer; and
– a vote to express Hamilton’s preference for LRT operations.
The Stoney Creek affordable housing parking lot issue has brought out to the public some of the tensions that have been occurring behind the locked downs of the councillor’s area at City Hall.
With an 8-8 split on the issue, the affordable housing project is likely to die on a tie vote at the next Council meeting. But not before councillors go round the table with strongly worded speeches and surely a few accusations of bad faith.
Ward 15 Councillor Ted McMeekin wishes to retroactively overturn Council’s 2023 acceptance of an Integrity Commissioner ruling that Councillor Pauls had a conflict of interest when voting on the police budget.
Pauls was docked 15 days’ pay for her conflict.
Hamilton’s new Integrity Commissioner has more narrowly defined Pauls’ conflict of interest, stating she will only be in conflict when voting or speaking about the Hamilton Police Service’s collective agreements. The new IC says Pauls can vote on the police budget.
McMeekin’s motion will overturn the ruling and return to Pauls that 15 days of pay.
Ward 2 Councillor Cameron Kroetsch was the person who filed the integrity complaint against Pauls – something other members of council are not going to forget.
I am observing factionalism growing during this council term, but for the most part, public chirping and disrespectful behaviour have been limited and momentary.
As I noted in my Feb 22 column regarding Strong Mayor powers and the Stoney Creek issue, there is a formal opposition bloc of six councillors on the right-centre, and a group of left-wing councillors who often split from council on issues.
If Council resumes in April, its first ratification meeting will be Wednesday, April 10—nearly two months after its February 14 meeting.
It will be a long meeting, with councillors required to cram nearly seven weeks of reading and work into the single week preceding.
They’ll be tired and the first Council ratification meeting will be long.
The conditions will be ripe for frustrations to boil over, which is why I expect Council will regret canceling all its March meetings.


text:
LJM and City of Hamilton Reach Deal to Allow Condo Building at 651 Queenston – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 6, 2024
The City of Hamilton and LJM Developments have reached a deal to allow the development of a condo building on the northwest corner of Queenston Road and Nash Road in East Hamilton.
Both parties are keeping the details confidential, citing pending approval of the settlement at the Ontario Land Tribunal.
In December 2022, LJM filed a non-decision appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal after it became apparent that City staff would not recommend approval for a sixteen-storey 316-unit condo building at 651 Queenston Road.
City staff stated that the proposal was too tall for the site, at double the permitted eight storeys in the Centennial Neighbourhood Secondary Plan. They also expressed concern about the lack of angular planes.
Ward 5 Councillor Matt Francis, in whose ward the development is located, stated he supported the height and density.
Francis stated he supports 16-storeys at this site because it is at a planned light rail transit stop.
As I wrote in December 2022, “with the ward councillor in favour of the height and density, what remains is negotiating water and sewage services.”
The City of Hamilton has been hit with a ransomware attack. The City’s legal and planning staff cannot access their digital files.
The City has requested all Ontario Land Tribunal hearings be delayed indefinitely until the City can determine how to restore its systems and workflows.
A March 5, 2024, settlement hearing in this matter was cancelled.
The OLT rescheduled the settlement hearing to April 23, 2024.


text:
McMaster Students Approve New Bike Share Fee of $24.50 Per Student – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 9, 2024
McMaster University undergraduate students voted 3970 to 299 to add a fee to their tuition for every full-time student to be a member of Hamilton Bike Share.
The new fee will provide over $600,000 annually to Hamilton Bike Share Inc (HBSI), making McMaster students the largest single revenue stream for the program.
HBSI is a non-profit corporation that operates the Hamilton bike share program under contract with the City of Hamilton. The City owns the program’s capital assets.
The City provides HSBI with an annual operating grant of over $300,000. HSBI raises revenue from membership fees, sponsorships, advertising, and grants.
In 2020, when Uber notified the City of Hamilton that it would no longer operate SoBi Hamilton, HBSI told Hamilton City Council that a minimal bike share system costs approximately $45,000 monthly.
McMaster students can opt out of membership and receive a refund for the fee.
The McMaster Students Union states there were 25,714 students eligible to vote this year.
Hamilton’s bike share system has faced financial challenges since 2020 when Uber ended its contract with the City to operate the system.
On May 28, two weeks after Uber announced its departure, a Council motion to fund bike share to the end of 2020 failed on an 8-8 tie vote.
On May 31, just before the system was shut down on June 1, Hamiltonians began locking bike share bicycles in front of City Hall to express their displeasure.
In the hours which followed, HBSI announced a $100,000 pledge from the Patrick J. McNally Charitable Foundation, which combined with other pledges and over $70,000 from a gofundme campaign, meant they could take over bike share to the end of 2020.
On June 30, 2020, the system relaunched.
Since this time, the City of Hamilton has found ways to provide operating funding to HBSI.
This includes charging e-scooter rental companies a fee that goes to HBSI, the annual operating grant, and working to assist HSBI in securing sponsorships.
The new McMaster student funding provides financial stability for HBSI.


text:
OLT Delays 1065 Paramount Drive Hearing due to City of Hamilton Cybersecurity Problems – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 12, 2024
The Ontario Land Tribunal has granted a City of Hamilton request to adjourn the planned March 26 case management conference for a non-decision appeal involving a proposed mid-rise development at 1065 Paramount Drive in Upper Stoney Creek.
City of Hamilton staff cannot access their electronic files due to a cybersecurity breach/failure that became known to the City on February 25.
The City of Hamilton is not publicly stating what the impacts on the City’s planning division are due to the ongoing cybersecurity crisis.
The OLT granted the City’s request for adjournment, including not setting a new date for the matter.
“The Parties are directed to reach out to the Tribunal once they have been able to coordinate and suggest a timeframe for rescheduling the Case Management Conference,” reads the OLT notice granting the adjournment.
The proposal at 1065 Paramount Drive is noteworthy for how contentious it has become.
In December, the developer filed a non-decision appeal to the OLT after learning the City’s planning staff would not recommend approval of the application to City Council.
“The applicant proposes the development of an eight storey, 181 unit multiple dwelling, 79, three and three and a half storey stacked townhouse dwellings, and 44, four storey stacked maisonette townhouse dwellings, for a total of 304 dwelling units, with 415 parking spaces with 225 of those being in one level of underground parking, 38 short term bicycle parking and 208 long term bicycle parking spaces along with two driveway accesses proposed off of Paramount Drive,” is the City staff summary of the project.
Council held a rare non-statutory hearing on February 6, after the appeal was filed, to hear public concerns and publicly instruct city planners and lawyers to vigorously oppose the developer at the OLT.
City staff stated they cannot support the proposal due to the following reasons:


text:
OLT Sets First Hearing Date for 1065 Paramount Drive (Stoney Creek) Appeal – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 8, 2024
Editors Update, March 12 2024:
The hearing has been postponed.
More info here: OLT Delays 1065 Paramount Drive Hearing due to City of Hamilton Cybersecurity Problems.
The Ontario Land Tribunal will hold a video case management conference on March 26, 2024, to determine who will have standing and set hearing dates in the non-decision appeal by the owners of 1065 Paramount Drive in Upper Stoney Creek.
The developer decided to bypass Hamilton City Council and file a non-decision appeal after they learned City staff would not recommend approval of a zoning bylaw and official plan amendment application.
“The applicant proposes the development of an eight storey, 181 unit multiple dwelling, 79, three and three and a half storey stacked townhouse dwellings, and 44, four storey stacked maisonette townhouse dwellings, for a total of 304 dwelling units, with 415 parking spaces with 225 of those being in one level of underground parking, 38 short term bicycle parking and 208 long term bicycle parking spaces along with two driveway accesses proposed off of Paramount Drive,” is the City staff summary of the project.
City staff state they cannot support the proposal due to the following reasons:
At its February 14 ratification meeting, City Council unanimously directed staff to oppose the applicant at the Ontario Land Tribunal. Dozens of nearby residents registered their opposition to Council.


text:
OLT To Decide on 499 Mohawk Road East (Hamilton) in 2025 – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 20, 2024
New Horizon Development Group (NHDG) will have to wait until at least the middle of 2025 to learn if the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) will approve their proposal for zoning permissions to build 1,995 dwelling units on the 3.9-hectare property located at 499 Mohawk Road East on the northwest corner at Upper Sherman.
NHDG filed a non-decision appeal to the OLT in August 2023 after City of Hamilton planning staff stated they could not recommend Council approve the proposal.
City staff state the density proposed is too much for the site, that vehicle traffic could be too great for the local road network,
During a case management conference (CMC) on Tuesday, the two sides proposed dates for a contested hearing. The City and developer both stating they expect to need ten days between them to present evidence, hearing from experts, and make their case.
NHDG’s lawyer’s, Matthew Helfand of Aird & Berlis LLP, asked for the hearing to be scheduled in the fall.
City of Hamilton lawyer Peter Krysiak told the Tribunal that the City needs more time to prepare for hearings due to the consequences of its cybersecurity failure, which allowed ransomware to encrypt the City’s entire computer networks.
When asked for dates to schedule the hearing, Krysiak stated:
“The problem is the ongoing cyber attack that is delaying a lot of city business. And it’s also going to delay a number of hearings that the city has coming up throughout this year, or at least put pressure on us to deliver all our submissions and materials.”
“We would prefer to play it safe … March of 2025.”
OLT Member Sarah Bobka took the parties’ submissions to the OLT’s scheduling staff, and returned to say the hearing will begin on March 10, 2025 and is scheduled for ten days.
Helfand offered to have his law firm complete the administrative work of creating the procedural order to implement today’s decisions by Member Bobka.
Member Bobka granted until April 9 for the procedural order to be filed.
“We’ll go with the three weeks just in case Mr. Krysiak runs into any difficulties with the situation.”
Due to the cybersecurity failure, the City of Hamilton did not file a draft procedural order on March 5, as required.
NHDG and the City have held two mediation sessions since the last CMC on November 15, 2023. During OLT mediation, all parties are bound to confidentiality.
Kysiak stated mediation is ongoing.
NHDG and the City can reach a settlement agreement before the March 2025 hearing. If a deal is reached, Hamilton City Council would need to approve it. City Council decides on settlements in closed session, and does not release any details before the OLT approves settlements.
In November, the OLT approved 15 individuals’ requests for participant status in the hearing. Participants can file written submissions to the OLT.
Participants have no input at mediation sessions. If a settlement is reached, participant statements are not considered.
NHDG wants to construct 15 buildings: two 25-storey multiple dwellings, one 20-storey multiple dwelling, two five-storey multiple dwellings, one 13-storey multiple dwelling, two eight-storey multiple dwellings and seven three-storey townhouse dwellings.
The buildings will have 1,945 units, and the townhouses 50 units. 1,995 parking spaces are proposed. The 1,995 proposed building units include 350 bachelor units, 585 one-bedroom units, 619 one-bedroom + den units, 342 two-bedroom units and 99 three-bedroom units.
There are no commercial uses proposed.
Hamilton City Council voted in October 2023 to vigorously oppose the proposal.


text:
Ontario’s Civilian Police Commission Investigating Cameron Kroetsch for Being Critical of Police Budget – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 11, 2024
The Ontario Civilian Police Commission (OCPC) is investigating Hamilton Police Board member Cameron Kroetsch regarding comments he made about the Hamilton police budget process and for making motions at the City Council regarding how police budget surpluses are allocated.
Hamilton Police Board Chair Pat Mandy, a provincial appointee to the Board, alleges Kroetsch violated the Police Services Act by making comments critical of the Police Board’s budgetary approval process.
Mandy filed the complaint on behalf of the Police Services Board.
Ward 2 Councillor Kroetsch is a city council appointee to the Board.
Mandy, citing confidentiality, is not elaborating on why she filed the OCPC’s complaint.
The provincial government appoints members of the Ontario Civilian Police Commission.
In a statement, Kroestch says he is being investigated for “bringing a motion to the City’s Audit, Finance and Administration Committee asking the City to direct the use of HPSB and Hamilton Public Library Board (HPLB) budget surpluses and making public comments on social media that were critical of the Board’s budgetary processes.”
Mayor Andrea Horwath, a member of the Police Board as mayor, supported Kroestch’s motions at City Council.
Mayor Horwath did not support Kroetsch’s budgetary motions at Police Board meetings.
Kroestch states the investigation is designed to silence him for doing his job reviewing the police budget as an elected official.
“I was elected on a platform focused on transparency and accountability and I promised
to do things differently,” he wrote. “Different means speaking out when I see budget processes that are not rigorous and when I have serious questions about how the police are spending public money.”
Ward 4 Councillor Tammy Hwang posted that she is “still trying to wrap my head around this. This council was voted in to do things differently; in an open and transparent way.”
Ward 13 Councillor Alex Wilson wrote, “As a queer Hamiltonian it’s hard not to draw parallels to the retribution faced by our community in the aftermath of the 2019 Pride violence. When demands for accountability we’re brought forward then, our community was blamed the violence, for not being more ‘collaborative’.”
On January 11, Kroetsch filed an application for Judicial Review in Ontario’s Divisional Court, arguing that Mandy’s complaint was unreasonable and procedurally unfair. He has withdrawn the application.
Hamilton City Council can appoint another councillor to fill Kroetsch’s seat during the vacancy. City Council meetings are suspended due to the City’s ongoing cybersecurity failure/breach.


text:
Original Document: Prefabricated, Leased Washroom Pilot at Woodlands Park (March 27, 2024) – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 26, 2024
Ward 3 City Councillor Nrinder Nann planned to move a motion to install a prefabricated washroom at Woodlands Park this summer.
This follows an encampment-caused fire in January that destroyed the washrooms at the Barton Street East park, which is located on the north side between Wentworth Street and Sanford Avenue.
The motion was withdrawn on Tuesday and removed from the City website.
TPR is republishing the public motion document because it contains information regarding the estimated three to four years it will take to build a new permanent replacement washroom.
Document here: https://www.thepublicrecord.ca/static/docs/2024/Hamilton-City-Council-Woodlands-Park-Motion-and-Update-27-March-2024.pdf


text:
Titan Recycling Scrapyard in Freelton Is Legal Non-Conforming Use – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 17, 2024
Titan Recycling Inc.’s Freelton scrapyard is a legal, non-conforming land use.
In a ruling released in late February, Ontario’s Superior Court ruled that the 140 Freelton Road property has been used as a scrapyard continuously since at least 1955, making the continued use of the lands for a scrapyard legally non-conforming.
The ruling puts to rest a dispute between the City of Hamilton and Titan Recycling in which the City argued the salvage yard was not permitted under the current ‘S2 Settlement Commercial’ zoning.
The dispute was amicable, as these things go, with Titan agreeing to City conditions to operate while awaiting the court ruling.
The dispute began in November 2021, when the City unexpectedly declared that the site had not operated as a scrapyard since 2007 and had lost its legal non-forming status.
On August 12, 2015, and December 13, 2018, the City of Hamilton issued zoning verification documents stating, “Building Division records indicate that the recognized use is an Automotive Salvage Yard and Automotive Sales which is legally established non-conforming provided that it has continuously existed since prior to November 5, 1990.”
Titan purchased the Freelton property in November 2020 from Park Model Living. Park Model was using the site to sell and scrap recreational motor vehicles and trailers.
Before closing the purchase, Titan’s due diligence included confirming the zoning status of the property.
On August 13, 2020, the City wrote, “Building Division records indicate that the recognized use is an automotive salvage yard with automobile sales which is legally established non-conforming provided that it has continuously existed since prior to November 5, 1990, until present.”
The Superior Court summarizes the City’s position as:
“On November 16, 2021, Titan received an email from Joseph Sanseverino, Zoning Correlator for Hamilton in which he purported to elaborate on the findings of the Zoning Compliance Review. He stated that until 2007 the Property was used as an automotive salvage yard with automotive sales. After 2007, the automotive salvage yard component ceased. He stated that the pre-2007 salvage activities were limited to automobiles to complement the automobile sales component of the land use. However, since 2007 the business carried on at the Property was Major Recreation Vehicle Sales and Service “with some degree of salvaging activities occurring on site, however, such a use was never permitted on the lands in the current or previous Zoning Bylaws…” He stated that the salvage operations which were carried on after 2007 were not a continuation of the previous automotive salvage yard because they were not limited to automobiles only. He concluded by stating that automotive salvage operations ceased in 2007 and that the intended Salvage Yard use by Titan would be considered a deviation in continuity from the previous automotive salvage yard.”
The Court ultimately decided the City’s 2020 statements, and issuing of a salvage license, established that – on the balance of probabilities – the site continously operated with automotive salvage.
Justice Gerald Taylor noted the City’s zoning bylaws contain no definition for an “automotive salvage yard.”
Emily Coe, the City’s Supervisor of Zoning, was singled out by the court for refusing to answer a question:
“[54]           When asked if there was anything else Titan could have done to confirm the continued non-conforming use, Coe refused to answer.”
The City of Hamilton will have to pay legal costs to Titan Recycling.
Both sides have been given 45 days to reach agreement on costs. [If Titan and the City reach an agreement, the City can keep the payment secret from public disclosure.]


text:
Ward 6 Councillor Tom Jackson Tops 2023 Council Expense Report – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

March 24, 2024
Ward 6 Councillor Tom Jackson expensed $1,743.86 for meals and event tickets in 2023, topping the councillors’ expenses list. Jackson often expensed for two tickets to community events.
Ward 1 Clr Maureen Wilson, Ward 3 Clr Nrinder Nann, Ward 7 Clr Esther Pauls, and Ward 13 Clr Alex Wilson filed no expense claims in 2023.
Ward 8 Clr John-Paul Danko expensed $1,541.76, he often expensed two tickets to community events.
Ward 14 Clr Mike Spadafora expensed $1,128.05, mostly attending community events, including purchasing five tickets to the Food4Kids Breakfast Gala.
Ward 5 Clr Matt Francis expensed $394.32, nearly evenly split between meetings at restaurants and community events. He claimed $185.64 for mileage.
Ward 10 Clr Jeff Beattie expensed $243.16. He expensed one community event ticket of $80.00 and $163.16 for restaurant meetings.
Ward 4 Clr Tammy Hwang expensed two meetings at restaurants for a total of $158.82. She claimed $185.64 for mileage.
Ward 15 Clr Ted McMeekin expensed $150 for one ticket to the Outstanding Business Achievement Awards. He claimed $747.32 for mileage. Ward 15 is largely rural.
Ward 9 Clr Brad Clark expensed $65.00 for one ticket to the Stoney Creek Chamber of Commerce Citizen of the Year Gala.
Ward 11 Clr Mark Tadeson expensed $21.25 for meals. He claimed $694.95 for mileage. Ward 11 is the most expansive in geographical size.
Ward 2 Clr Cameron Kroetch expensed two meals of $9.00 each for a total of $18.00.
Ward 12 Clr Craig Cassar expensed $13.76 for one meal. He claimed $319.60 for mileage.
TPR reported on Mayor Horwath’s 2023 expense claims here.


text:
Anti-Abortion/Pro-Life bus advertisement running on the side of Hamilton buses – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 23, 2024
The City of Hamilton has conceded it lacked legal grounds to reject an advertising purchase by the Association for Reformed Political Action Canada (APRA) to run a pro-life/anti-abortion ad on the side of the city’s public transit buses.
The advertisement includes an ultrasound image of a late-term fetus in the womb alongside three images: a young woman and two girls. The City of Hamilton initially banned the ad, stating it was misleading because the use of the “her” pronoun implied the fetus was a person under the law.
Hamilton was the only municipality to refuse the advertisement.
The ARPA challenge the City’s decision in court. One week before scheduled arguments at Ontario’s Divisional Court, the City of Hamilton conceded it failed to consider the Charter of Rights and Freedoms when it rejected the ad.
“In light of the Respondent City’s concession that it did not provide adequate reasons … the Court granted the application for judicial review, quashed the decision of the City, and remitted the matter back for proper consideration by the City,” wrote Justice Paul B. Schabas for a three-judge panel.
The Court also ordered the City to pay the ARPA $20,000 in legal costs.
ARPA resubmitted its ad purchase to the City.
The City determined it lacks legal grounds to prohibit the ad.


text:
BRIEF: $60.5M, Updated Highway 5 and Highway 6 Interchange Project Cost – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 2, 2024
The City of Hamilton says Ontario’s Ministry of Transportation cost estimate for the Highway 5/6 Interchange is now $60.5-million, up from an earlier estimate of $49.1-million.
The City of Hamilton is responsible for approximately 25 percent of the overall cost, with the Province responsible for approximately 75 percent.
The change means a net capital cost increase of approximately $2.7-million for the City, which will be financed using development charges.
The upcoming update to Hamilton’s development charges bylaw includes project financing.


text:
BRIEF: City of Hamilton to Participate in Coroner’s Inquest – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 27, 2024
Hamilton City Council discussed “City Participation in a Coroner’s Inquest” during its closed session meeting on Wednesday (April 24).
This was the second time Council discussed this litigation matter behind closed doors.
On February 7, 2024, the City Solicitor listed the item as a “litigation update.”
Ward 7 Councillor John-Paul Danko publicly asked the City Solicitor why she titled it a ‘litigation update.’
“The title of this item, ‘ a litigation matter,’ kind of leaves it open to speculation what that might be,” Danko stated.
City Solicitor Lisa Shields responded, “This is a very sensitive matter, that if I were to disclose a lot more, it would identify the individual involved.”
Behind the scenes, councillors sought to have the type of litigation revealed.
This explains why this week’s update was titled “City Participation in a Coroner’s Inquest.”
Coroner’s Inquests are open to the public and are now often livestreamed.
The City’s decision to withhold which Inquest it will participate in is not mandated by any legislation, it is a choice that city management recommended to Council, and that council approved.
Looking at the Ontario Coroner’s list of upcoming inquests, it is possible the City plans to participate in the Attila Csanyi inquest. The Csanyi inquest begins Tuesday (April 30). The Coroner will livestream the proceedings.
On May 2, 2020, Csanyi was “found without vital signs on the roof of Jackson Square Mall in Hamilton. He was pronounced deceased after unsuccessful resuscitation efforts.”
Csanyi was 28-years-old.
A documentary on how systems failed Csanyi – who grew up in the foster care system – is streaming on Crave.
The Globe and Mail’s film critic describes it: “in terms of understanding and confronting the harsh reality that so many Canadians endure today, Attila is remarkable, verging on essential, filmmaking.”


text:
BRIEF: Hamilton-Burlington Realtor’s Association Merges with Mississauga, Simcoe, and Waterloo – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 30, 2024
REALTORS Association of Hamilton-Burlington is merging with the associations in Mississauga, Simcoe, and Waterloo Region to form a new association named the “Cornerstone Association of REALTORS®.”
The planned merger was publicly announced today, with Hamilton-Burlington realtor Julie Sergi elected chair.
The merger will be completed on July 1st.
The Realtors Association is one of the more active lobby organizations interacting with the City of Hamilton. With the merger, the new association will have more resources. It will likely have a more regional approach to planning, land use, municipal regulations, and a host of issues related to their industry.


text:
BRIEF: Hamilton Police Traffic Enforcement Decreased in 2023 – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 20, 2024
The Hamilton Police Service’s 2023 traffic enforcement statistics show a decrease in the number of tickets issued by HPS in 2023 compared to 2022, and the lowest number of R.I.D.E. checks conducted during the past few years.
HPS issued 32,254 traffic-related provincial offence notices in 2023, a 22.9% decrease from 2022, when 41,834 were issued.
Speeding tickets decreased in 2023, with 6,130 issued compared to 8,506 in 2022.
55,264 R.I.D.E checks were completed in 2023, less than half the total from 2021, when 130,995 were completed. HPS reported 83,595 checks for 2023.
HPS logged 8,979 collisions in 2023, down from 9,221 in 2022. The number of personal injury collisions decreased to 1,006 from 1,247.
There were 14 fatal collisions in 2023, down from 19 in 2022. The five-year average is 16.
[On March 19, 2022, a person operating a stolen car killed three people. The driver also died in the collision.]


text:
BRIEF: Hamilton Receiving $12.4-M in Gas Tax Money – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 20, 2024
The Province of Ontario announced this year’s gas tax allocations on Friday.
Hamilton will receive $12,389,845 this year, an increase from last year’s $12,006,354.
The gas tax is distributed using a formula that includes transit ridership. Mississauga’s funding is increasing to $23,363,091 from $19,658,102. Both London, Kingston, and Ottawa will have decreased funding in 2024.


text:
City of Hamilton Fails to Meet Council Pay and Benefit Disclosure Requirements – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 4, 2024
The City of Hamilton has decided to violate Section 284 of Ontario’s Municipal Act by not releasing the remuneration, benefits, and expenses given to Hamilton’s city council and local board members as required by March 31st.
There are 444 municipalities in Ontario, Hamilton appears to be the only one in violation of the mandatory disclosure.
City of Hamilton General Manager of Finance and Corporate Services Mike Zegarac states he has informed the Ministry of Municipal Affairs the city will submit the documentation at some time in April.
The city did post a Section 284 report, which they removed shortly after making public.
[TPR posted the documents here.]
Zegarac says the pay and benefits in these reports was accurate, but city staff are “vetting” expense reports with members of council to ensure accuracy.


text:
COLEMAN: “Made in Stoney Creek” Solution Moves Affordable Housing to East Hamilton – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 1, 2024
Here’s another quirk of the great Downtown Stoney Creek parking lot debate:
The “Made in Stoney Creek” proposal to save the parking lots and instead place affordable housing in the Riverdale neighbourhood would see planned affordable housing shifted into East Hamilton.
Riverdale is in East Hamilton, not Stoney Creek.
The former Hamilton – Stoney Creek boundary runs just north of Queenston Road.
Francis would likely point out he represents both Riverdale and Downtown Stoney Creek. Both are in Ward 5.
And nothing politically turns on this.
Nobody will change their mind because of this; it is nonetheless a fact that has not been noted to this point.
The boundary between East Hamilton and Stoney Creek is one of my favourite Hamilton localisms to debate. The political boundary is clear, it runs north of Queenston Road from Centennial Parkway to just east of Gray Road.
Culturally, economically, and how people live, the boundary barely exists.
For many, Centennial Parkway is what they think of as the boundary between East Hamilton and Stoney Creek.
For those newer to Hamilton, I’ve seen them consider everything east of the Red Hill Valley Parkway to be Stoney Creek.
This is to say that while I’m pointing out the political boundary, it is no longer politically relevant.


text:
Council Approves New Direction on Jamesville Redevelopment as Parties Cancel Merit Hearing – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 16, 2024
Update: April 22, 2024: The OLT granted an adjournment request from the City of Hamilton. The May 2024 hearing is now scheduled for February 2025.
Councillors on the Planning Committee approved direction to staff in closed session at the end of their meeting on Tuesday, April 16, 2024. The direction will “remain confidential” until it is made public at the Ontario Land Tribunal.
In nearly all OLT cases this, combined with the cancellations of the contested hearing dates, indicates a settlement has been reached.
ORIGINAL VERSION BELOW
The Ontario Land Tribunal has cancelled the May 2024 hearing dates to hear arguments regarding the 447-unit redevelopment of the former Jamesville social housing site at 405 James Street North.
Mediation talks have been ongoing between the City of Hamilton, CityHousing Hamilton, the private developer consortium Jamesville Redevelopment Limited Partnership, and CN Rail.
CN Rail appealed Hamilton’s approval of the redevelopment, stating that the new housing units, which will be approximately 230 metres east of CN’s Stuart Street Yard, require better noise and environmental mitigation measures.
“CN is not objecting to the development and principal provided that the impact on the adjacent rail operations are accounted for, and appropriate mitigation measures are applied,” stated CN legal counsel Katarzyna Sliwa in June 2023.
City councillors will discuss the mediation talks in closed session at the end of today’s Council Planning Committee meeting. The discussion was added to the agenda as a last minute item.
The City’s Acting General Manager of Planning and Economic Development Steve Robichaud stated he could not provide more information before Council discusses the matter.
Any decisions made in closed session today must be approved next Wednesday (April 24) at the Council ratification meeting.
Today’s events indicate the parties have reached a settlement. When settlements are reached, the OLT cancels merit hearings and awaits Hamilton City Council to approve the terms in closed sessions before calling the parties together for a settlement hearing.
More on the Jamesville Redevelopment and Appeal.


text:
Council to Vote Next Week on Stoney Creek Parking Lots and Vacant Unit Tax – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 19, 2024
Hamilton City Council will vote Wednesday on two confirming bylaws for issues that have divided city councillors in recent months: declaring two Downtown Stoney Creek parking lots surplus to be used for affordable housing development and implementing a Vacant Unit Tax for the 2025 calendar year.
Hamilton City Council deadlocked in an 8-8 vote on a recommendation from the City’s Housing Secretariat to declare portions of the City’s Downtown Stoney Creek parking lots surplus and to use the lands for affordable housing development.
Following the recommendation’s defeat, Mayor Andrea Horwath announced she would use a Strong Mayor veto to break the tie. The mayoral veto implementing bylaw will be voted on this Wednesday.
If all sixteen council members are present for the bylaw vote, five councillors must join Horwath for it to pass under the one-third support requirement for Mayoral bylaws.
The majority of Hamilton City Council approved a VUT in February 2023. The implementing bylaw was brought to Council in late November 2023. Implementing bylaws are traditionally a housekeeping matter for municipalities in Ontario.
The implementing bylaw was voted down in a 6-6 tie vote, the first time the City of Hamilton has seen a council decision reversed in the bylaw approval stage.
As a result, the City could not implement a VUT for the 2024 taxation year, despite having hired staff and sent out notices informing people to prepare to declare the occupancy of their residential property.
In February, Council directed staff to bring the implementing bylaw back for a final vote. Ward 2 Clr Cameron Kroetsch, Ward 3 Clr Nrinder Nann, and Ward 15 Clr Ted McMeekin were absent during the November vote.
If all six councillors who voted for the VUT bylaw in November remain in favour, the bylaw will have the necessary support to pass, provided all council members are present for the vote.
Numerous interest groups have circulated emails in recent days calling on the City of Hamilton to scrap the Vacant Unit Tax following the City of Toronto’s VUT administration fiasco.
[Hamilton & District Apartment Association email]
The City of Toronto received tens of thousands of complaints after property owners received vacancy tax bills in early April, including many who filed their mandatory declarations being charged late fees.
Toronto is now scrambling to overhaul the program. (and waiving late fees.)
Mayor Olivia Chow apologized, saying, “It is not acceptable the way that we rolled out this program,” and promised, “We’re cleaning up this mess. I apologize.”
At the root of the problem is that property owners must declare their properties’ occupancy status every year. Toronto says around 650,000 of the city’s approximately 800,000 residential tax accounts filed declarations before the deadline. More than 167,000 properties received additional tax notices, and 108,000 have had their charges reversed after making late declarations.
Toronto council approved major changes to VUT administration, including deeming 58,000 properties that made declarations last year, but did not declared this year, to be occupied.
RELATED: From Monday: Matt Francis on the Vacant Unit Tax, Opening Municipal Lands for Housing, and Seeking a “New Deal” with Ontario


text:
Eight Months Later: Hamilton Still Looking for a new City Clerk – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 5, 2024
The City of Hamilton remains without a City Clerk, nearly eight months after the last City Clerk announced her resignation.
The job posting closed on October 20, over five months ago.
When asked for an update on the search, the City Manager directed TPR to Mike Zegarac, the General Manager of Finance and Corporate Services.
Zegarac says the process is ongoing and did not divulge details.
In 2018, the last time the City Clerk job was vacant, the City had to post the job multiple times.
Ontario’s municipal clerks fulfill essential statutory duties under the Municipal Act, including independently administering and overseeing elections.
The clerk, and deputy clerks, are protected positions. They cannot be dismissed by the head of council under ‘strong mayor’ powers and cannot be removed by municipal councils during election periods.
All municipalities are required to have a person designated as clerk. In large municipalities, such as Hamilton, it is increasingly common for the municipal clerk to be a practicing lawyer due to the complexity of quasi-legal and statutory decisions the person makes.


text:
Hamilton City Council Officially Requests a New Deal with the Province – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 28, 2024
Mayor Andrea Horwath has been lobbying the provincial Conservative government for a “new deal” that will enable the City of Hamilton to address social and housing needs in Hamilton, gain additional revenue to address the city’s fiscal challenges, and have more autonomy to implement local measures on a range of issues.
Last week, on a motion by Ward 5 Councillor Matt Francis, Council officially requested a new deal.
Francis moving the motion is interesting because he’s opposed the City’s Vacant Unit Tax and opposed the conversion of the Downtown Stoney Creek parking lots to be used for affordable housing.
Premier Doug Ford stated Ottawa and Toronto were receiving ‘new deals’ because they’ve committed to both measures.
In exchange, those cities received new fiscal tools and the province is uploading their municipal highways. Hamilton wants the province to take over the Red Hill Valley Parkway and the Lincoln Alexander Parkway.
As I noted after the Ottawa announcement, Premier Doug Ford highlighted Ottawa’s commitment to “strengthening the city’s vacant unit tax” and “opening up municipal lands for housing development to support shared housing priorities.”
I asked Francis to explain his positions on these matters when they are conditions for a new deal.
“I don’t oppose a vacant unit tax, I oppose the way that this vacant unit tax is going to be implemented. I thought there was a different way to do it. I don’t think you have to do the mandatory declaration every single year. So I want to make clear that I am not opposed to the VUT. I’m opposed to this current iteration of the VUT,” Francis stated.
On municipal lands for affordable housing, he stated that Stoney Creek is one parking lot, that he supported the motion to surplus the other parking lots put forth in the housing secretariat’s report, and will support further motions if they have the support of their involved ward’s councillor.
It will be interesting to see if Hamilton can get a ‘new deal.’
In the days following my question to Francis, Toronto’s vacant home tax was revealed as an administrative fiasco.
The City of Toronto received tens of thousands of complaints after more than 167,000 property owners received vacancy tax bills or incorrect late declaration penalty fees.
Mayor Olivia Chow apologized, saying, “It is not acceptable the way that we rolled out this program,” and promised, “We’re cleaning up this mess. I apologize.”
Toronto scrambled to overhaul the program. (and waived late fees.)
The root of the problem is that properties’ occupancy status needs to be declared every year. Toronto says around 650,000 of the city’s approximately 800,000 residential tax accounts filed declarations before the deadline.
Toronto council quickly approved changes, including deeming 58,000 properties that made declarations last year, but have not declared this year, to be occupied.
Hamilton’s General Manager of Finance and Corporate Services Mike Zegarac says “technology is a contributing factor” to the problems in Toronto, and Hamilton uses different systems.
During the April 24 council meeting, he stated, “The City of Hamilton uses the same business solution as the City of Ottawa does.”
Council voted 9-6 later in the meeting to approve the Vacant Home Tax implementing bylaw for the 2025 tax year.


text:
Hamilton City Council Says No to Haudenosaunee Development Institute Payment Request – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 3, 2024
Hamilton City Council voted unanimously on Wednesday to refuse to pay the Haudenosaunee Development Institute $95,357 that the group is seeking, above the $50,000 the city agreed to pay them for environmental monitoring during the Chedoke Creek cleanup.
Ontario’s Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks ordered the City of Hamilton to dredge the creek following the leakage of over 24 billion litres of combined wastewater from the city’s sewage system.
In 2022, the HDI blocked clean-up work of Chedoke Creek, delaying it by a year, until the City of Hamilton agreed to pay $50,000.The HDI had sought $400,000.
Clean-up was completed in 2023, and the HDI invoiced the City for an additional $95,357 behind the agreed amount.
Council also unanimously voted not to enter into any new agreements with the HDI to monitor remaining remedial work and post-dredging monitoring activity.
The vote sets the stage for a confrontation with the HDI, the administrative arm of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy Chiefs Council.
Indigenous newspaper The Two Row Times extensively covers the controversies involving the HDI.