text:
Coleman's Notes: Public Transit Capacity, Ridership, and Costs during Social Distancing – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 20, 2020
Here’s the TLDR version: Ridership is down, physical distancing limits buses to 10 or 15 passengers, hence the drop in ridership is close to the drop in capacity, thus, it is near impossible to eliminate buses while maintaining physical distancing. The cost of operating a bus is fixed per hour, regardless of passengers. Thus, there are practically no measures transit agencies can take to address the deficits they are running.
Transit Ridership is down, large systems are reporting between 80 to 90% ridership decreases.
Let’s look at the question, can the number of buses on the road be decreased while still serving essential workers and essential trips?
The short answer is probably not.
To enact physical distancing, seated capacity per bus is decreased between 66% to 70%.
The standing capacity calculation varies depending if the load is optimal to “crush capacity”. Using an optimal standing load of 25%. Thus a regular sized bus which now seats 10 passengers previously carried an optimal load 42 passengers. This represents a decreased capacity of 76%.
Keep in mind the system often operates at crush capacity on mainline routes. The capacity lost expressed as percentage is likely greater, I’m just ball parking for the sake of providing an overview.
This brings us to fixed costs.
Similar to many operations, including those in the private sector, building maintenance, fixed infrastructure and facility upkeep are unavoidable costs.
Support costs (garages, HR support, buses, maintenance, infrastructure, supervision) are nearly fixed, in theory that could be scaled back, but the ability to do so is limited. There is a base amount of support required no matter the number of buses in passenger service.
Thus, cancelling 25% of bus service does not result in a decrease of 25% for support costs.
Cancelling 25% of passenger bus service does result in a decrease to road operation expenses of basically 25% (again, excluding fixed and support costs), however, this returns us to the available capacity issue and the question we are trying to solve: how to provide essential trips.
Thus back to the reality of the situation, transit costs are directly tied to the public health objective of physical distancing.
Capacity per bus will inevitability increase as our public health infrastructure of testing and tracing improves, and other measures are taken.
We are now instructed to wear masks on federally regulated airlines.
On Friday, Transport Canada stated “Passengers travelling by rail or motor carrier/bus modes of  transportation are also strongly encouraged to wear non-medical masks or  face coverings as much as possible. Passengers may be asked by the  transportation operator to cover their noses and mouths when physical distancing is not possible.”
Capacity increases will likely mirror the slow reopening of the economy; thus the ratio of riders to capacity will not much change. Transit costs will remain tied to public health objectives.
Leaving us with the policy issue to be solved, how to fund public transit in era of COVID-19.
Further Reading
This New York Times piece gives you a sense of the competing factors to be weighted and potential outcomes of political decisions on transit. It is in front of the NYT paywall, it does require signing in by email or social network.
The Worst-Case Scenario: New York’s Subway Faces Its Biggest Crisis


text:
Is Hamilton's Physical Distancing By-law Ultra Vires? – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

April 7, 2020
Originally published on Joey’s personal blog on April 8.
Good laws are clear, concise, and limited to serving the purpose of their enactment. This by-law fails the test because it grants broad powers of enforcement to enforce vaguely written provisions.
Hamilton’s By-Law does not provide clarity for residents who wish to obey the law, nor clarity for the municipal bylaw enforcement officers who have to impose it.
As written, an essential business is in violation of this by-law if its customers are lined up two metres away on a public sidewalk of a width less than two metres (effectively every sidewalk in Hamilton).
While municipal bylaw enforcement officers will be asked to exercise discretion, overreach is invited by the vagueness of the proposed bylaw.
Hamilton’s By-Law states “Every person shall maintain a distance of at least two (2) metres from every other person who is not a member of the same household when in a Public Space.”
Hamilton’s By-Law defines public space as “any outdoor or indoor space to which the public is ordinarily invited or permitted access, either expressly or by implication, whether or not a fee is charged for entry”.
In short, everywhere could be “Public Space” if a City of Hamilton staff member decides it is “by implication”.
Compare this to the clarity in the City of Toronto social distancing by-law. Toronto states no person shall “Remain, for longer than an incidental period, closer than 2 metres to any other person who is not a member of the same household”.
Incidental is the key word in Toronto’s by-law. Hamilton’s by-law technically makes it a municipal offence to walk pass another person on a public sidewalk.
Further Toronto’s by-law only applies to public parks and public square; it does not apply to other “public spaces” such as sidewalks, roads, and private property. Toronto’s bylaw is limited to its purpose, and is clearly within the legal authority of the City.
Another key difference between the Toronto by-law and Hamilton’s proposed by-law is a severability clause inserted in expectation the Ontario Superior Court of Justice may declare Hamilton’s By-Law to be ultra vires – beyond the powers of the municipality.
Section 7.2 reads “Should any section of this By-law be declared by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be ultra vires or illegal for any reason, the remaining parts shall nevertheless remain valid and binding, and shall be read as if the offending section or part had been struck out.”
Why is this in Hamilton’s By-Law?
Hamilton City Council is creating a new provincial offence which is not required or imposed by those with the clear authority to make it illegal to be closer than two metres to another person.
The Province has not imposed physical distancing as a legal requirement, nor is Hamilton’s Medical Officer of Health issuing a physical distancing order. Both have clear and undisputed powers to do so.
In justifying the proposed by-law, Hamilton City Council cites Section 10(2)(6) of the Municipal Act, which states a “municipality may pass by-laws respecting the … health, safety and well-being of persons” adding “it desirable to enact a by-law to support the intent and purpose of the Provincial Orders made under the [Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act] in order to protect the health, safety and well-being of persons in the City of Hamilton by prohibiting certain activities and regulating physical distancing during the COVID-19 Emergency”.
What is the “intent and purpose of the Provincial Orders”?
Ontario Regulations 82/20 and 119/20 order the “closure of places of non-essential businesses” allowing essential businesses to operate “subject to the advice and recommendations of public health officials, including their recommendations about the importance of physical distancing”.
It is already a Provincial Offence to operate an essential business without implementing physical distancing. There is no need for a municipal by-law for these spaces.
Dr. David Williams, Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer of Health, has not issued an order imposing two metre physical distancing; nor has Hamilton’s Medical Officer of Health Dr. Elizabeth Richardson. Both have the power to issue a two metre physical distancing order.
Ontario Regulation 99/20 prohibits gathers of more than five people, or more than 10 persons for a funeral service. Ontario Regulation 104/20 makes it illegal to use outdoor recreational amenities such as playgrounds, sports facilities, multi-use fields, community gardens, benches, etc.
Noteworthy, especially for likely legal challenges against municipalities issuing tickets for being in public parks closed by municipal order, O.Reg 104/20 states “(4) For greater certainty, nothing in this Order precludes individuals  from walking through or using portions of park and recreational areas that are not otherwise closed and that do not contain an outdoor recreational amenity described in subsection (2).”
We don’t know why the Province did not make physical distancing a legal requirement using its clear powers to do so under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act.
We know they have not imposed physical distancing by force of law.
As Hamilton’s By-Law proposes to regulate all nearly all spaces outside of people’s personal residences, there is a legal burden upon City Council to prove the need for such a broad wide-reaching  By-Law.
Does this By-Law meet the standard of the Oakes Test? Especially as it relates to the “intent and purpose of the Provincial Laws”?
A court will ultimately have to decide, based upon the inclusion of the severability clause, Hamilton City Council isn’t entirely confident they are actually within the legal powers granted to them under the Municipal Act.
Hamilton City Council proposes a minimum fine of $500 per individual violation of the proposed By-Law, in addition to fines which may be levied under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act.
A quick scan of other municipalities imposing similar by-laws finds $500 is a common figure. Oakville is imposing $300 fines under its by-law, which is more clearly defined in its language.
Oakville’s By-Law provides clarity of the appeal process for persons fined under the by-law.
Due to time constraints, I’m not able to write about the concerns regarding enforcement. Needless to say, we need to be very concerned about disproportionate enforcement of this by-law against vulnerable and marginalized populations.
Additional: In this morning’s Hamilton Spectator, Spec contributor Andrew Dreschel shares the story of a Hamilton nurse issued a $880 fine for being on a golf course with her dog unleashed. The woman plans to fight the ticket.

source: news-thepublicrecord

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


text:
83% of Property Owners Paid April Tax Instalment, Representing 82% in Revenue – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

May 12, 2020
Hamilton City Council, as part of the provincial COVID-19 state of emergency, implemented a property tax deferral plan allowing Hamilton ratepayers a 60-day interest free extension on paying their April 30th property tax instalment.
83% of Hamilton property tax instalments were paid by April 30, Hamilton City Manager Janette Smith shared during a Hamilton Chamber of Commerce video conference session on Monday.
The City’s Finance section, in response to an email question from The Public Record, states this represents 82% of owed revenue.
The most recent figures publicly released by the City of Hamilton for 2018 recorded 10.88% of properties in arrears.
As the COVID-19 emergency is a unique circumstance, there are no past measures which can be used to estimate how many properties will pay their instalment during the 60 day extension.


text:
Bruce Kuwabara Designing Signature 45-Storey Tall Building for Pier 8 – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

May 20, 2020
Renowned architect Bruce Kuwabara is designing a 45-storey signature tall building for the proposed Pier 8 redevelopment as part of a Local Planning Appeal Tribunal settlement with Herman Turkstra and Harbour West Neighbours Inc.
If built, the building will be the largest in Hamilton measured from base to top, but the 43-storey Landmark Place at 100 Main Street East will remain Hamilton’s tallest building in the lower city by geodetic height.
Kuwabara’s proposed building will have a geodetic height of 224 metres, Landmark Place’s geodetic height is 226 metres. (The Escarpment height at the foot of Hughson Street is 192 metres)
The difference is significant. If the City approves a building with a greater geodetic height than Landmark Place, it creates a precedent which can be used by other developers to challenge the Urban Hamilton Official Plan undermining the City’s array of zoning bylaws and secondary plans.
The plans for the building were announced tonight during a public meeting of the North End Neighbourhood Association, which was held online.
Kuwabara grew up in Hamilton’s North End, and has shown a special passion for this redevelopment project as lead architect for Waterfront Shores, the development consortium which won the City of Hamilton run competition to redevelop the Pier 8 site.
The latest changes to the development plan for Pier 8 are the result of negotiations between the various parties following Ontario Municipal Board appeals launched by Turkstra, Harbour West Neighbours (the neighbourhood appellants), Bunge Canada, and Parrish & Heimbecker Ltd.
Kuwabara’s proposal forms part of the settlement between the neighbourhood appellants, Waterfront Shores, and the City of Hamilton. The settlement was approved at the Ontario Municipal Board.
It requires a new Official Plan Amendment and new Zoning By-Law Amendment to be approved by Council. The new OPA and ZBA could be appealed by other affected parties.
All parties to the settlement committed to public engagement to ensure support for their agreement, and to avoid a separate appeal in the future.
(The industrial appellants’ appeals are ongoing, and involve different issues related to the interaction of the proposed residential development on the east side of Pier 8 with the Hamilton Port’s industrial operations. They are not parties to this settlement.)
The proposed tall building will see the density of the remainder of the large Pier 8 development decreased while at the same time “substantially” increasing the number of family units, says Calvin Brook of Brook McIlroy.
The City retained Brook McIlroy as independent consultants to produce the Pier 7+8 Urban Design Study, and had them review the changes submitted to the LPAT.
He says the building will show “something new and interesting is happening in Hamilton” and serve as a beacon to showcase the good things happening at Pier 8.
Brook says the proposed tall building will contain up to 400 units of housing. He says both the density and building design parameters enables family size units in the top third of the building above the 30th floor.
Up to 400 units, this enables additional family units because above 31 storeys “The scale of the other buildings will have fewer units”, Brook says. This enable more parking in the buildings to alleviate parking pressures”. There will be need for visitor parking for people coming from across Hamilton.
One of the key parts of the OMB settlement agreement is the City must providing sufficient parking at Pier 8 for all activities at the Pier. All parking needed for uses between Piers 5 to 8 must be north of Guise Street as part of the agreement.
Kuwabara says this site is unique on the Great Lakes because it is surrounded by water on three sides, offering him as an architect many elements to complement in his design.
Noting he lives in a tall building himself, Kuwabara says making the building family friendly is important to him.
Tonight’s online public meeting was the first of many consultation sessions the City of Hamilton plans to hold in the coming months says Alissa Mahood, Senior Project Manager – Community Planning & GIS in the City’s Planning Division.
Mahood said in normal circumstances, the City would’ve unveiled the plan in a large public forum with much advertisement. Due to COVID, the City cannot hold physical public meetings. Mahood said the City did not wish to delay releasing information to the public, and all parties agreed to consult the North End Neighbourhood Association as part of one of NENA’s regular meetings.
Around 75 people joined tonight’s online meeting, held using the Zoom platform.
Mahood says the City is working on more engagement plans and will be particularly focused on reaching people for whom internet video meetings are not an accessible platform.
The slides Mahood presented to NENA are available here.


text:
COLEMAN: The Mayor's Task Force Posturing All Around – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

May 19, 2020
OPINION
The Mayor’s Economic Recovery Task Force has already served its purpose: political posturing.
There is nothing the Task Force can achieve which could not be done faster by instructing City staff to look at best practices elsewhere and add a few innovative ideas locally. The only problem with the do more, do it faster approach? Politicians don’t get to take credit.
Hence why politicians create Task Forces.
Appropriate to the gesturing of creating a task force, Councillors postured and fought for nearly an hour of debate to create it.
The debate revealed the thoughts of councillors about what the focus of City Hall should be in the coming months, and showcased the divide on Council between the newer Council members Maureen Wilson, Nrinder Nann, and John-Paul Danko, and the Old Guard majority bloc.
The short version: the new Councillors want the task force to use an EDI (equity, diversity, inclusion) Lens, the Old Guard just wants a list of business sectors put on the task force, and for the Task Force to not make any contentious recommendations. One Old Guard Councillor was particularly concerned the Task Force will recommend lower municipal taxes.
Nann and Wilson submit that social issues and economic issues are tied together.
When they put forth child care as an important issue, an Old Guard Councillor dismissed this as a social issue that needs to be dealt with elsewhere.
Early academic journal submission data is showing early career women professors are not publishing as many single author papers as men right now, in fact, their research productivity is decreased. The consequences of this to their careers could be significant, they are at a disadvantage to male academics who it seems are enjoying more productivity due to COVID.
[Canada’s top soldier, Chief of Defence Staff General Jonathan Vance wrote two days after this Council debate the “the availability of day care centres” will be important to the Canadian Forces returning to full operational tempo in a COVID-19 environment]
Eventually, there is a vote, 3-12 against. Danko, Nann, Wilson are the three for some EDI lenses in composition of the Task Force.
Then a motion to add a representative of the Hamilton District Labour Council, Nann submits that workers need to be represented in how reopening and recovery is going to happen.
An Old Guard Councillor warns of “falling prey” to “infiltration” by “radical elements” if Labour is included in the Task Force. Others say the focus is on businesses, this is a distraction. Brad Clark, a former Ontario Minister of Labour, talks about the valuable contributions labour made at tables he sat at.
(Numerous times during the Council meeting, Councillors referenced “bringing people to the table”, “we need to get people together around the table” and other expressions understood in pre-COVID times”.)
By a close 8-7, Labour gets a seat on the Task Force. In favour: Eisenberger, Wilson, Farr, Nann, Jackson, Pauls, Danko, and Clark. Opposed: Merulla, Collins, Pearson, Johnson, Ferguson, Vanderbeek, and Partridge.
Now deciding who the Councillors on the Task Force. Clark, Danko, Ferguson, Nann, Partridge all express interest.
Chad Collins moves that Ferguson and Partridge be the two Councillors on the Task Force. Debate ensues, Wilson wants to add Nann to the Task Force, Collins says no, he’s moving for only his two and his motion has the floor.
Wilson says it will benefit the work of the Task Force to have a Councillor of a younger generation on it; Judi Partridge takes offence, accuses Wilson of making things personal. There’s some ugly back-and-forth,
Danko moves to amend the motion to add Nann, more debate ensues. Eventually there is a vote, 9-6, Nann is added to the Task Force with Merulla, Collins, Pearson, Ferguson, Vanderbeek, and Partridge opposed.
Then Council approves the creation of a now expanded Task Force, which will meet, present ideas, and submit a final report; likely after the Province has already reopened most economic activities and other municipalities have implemented their ideas.
The question now, will the report end up filed on the Mayor’s bookshelf right beside the HAmazon bid, or will something that wasn’t already happening be implemented by City Hall?


text:
Coleman's Notes: Is Hamilton Prepared for Commercial Tax Defaults on June 30? – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

May 25, 2020
June 30th is approaching, and property tax instalments to the City of Hamilton are due again.
On April 30, 83% of the properties paid their instalment, representing 82% of total taxes due. The City recorded 10.88% of properties as in arrears at the end of 2018, thus approximately 6% of properties are delayed in paying their instalment compared to this benchmark.
[There are many complexities to this figure, for the purposes of this piece, the rough estimate is sufficient to understanding the public policy challenging emerging which Council must address]
The April 30 payment percentage seems hopeful, but is not a good metric of the economic impact of COVID-19 upon the ability of property owners to pay their tax instalments.
Many instalment payments would’ve been made prior to the emergency closures of many businesses to slow the spread of the coronavirus. This is especially in the commercial property tax class as normal business practices mean the funds for payment would be set aside prior to March 15, and in many cases, the payment processes underway before Ontario’s state of emergency began on March 17.
When you walk in your neighbourhood tonight, take a moment to pause and look at your local commercial plaza. Many of them are anchored by restaurants and personal service businesses (hair salon, nail parlour, etc), there’s likely a convenience store, and some other retail operations.
We all know the state of the restaurant industry, they are unable to pay rent. The personal service businesses are similarly unable to pay rent.
The convenience store isn’t selling its usual amount of lottery tickets, people are not making unexpected trips to the store when they make the impulse buys these stores rely upon to make money. In fact, people are avoiding going to the store. The convenience could be in the situation it cannot pay rent.
The other retail operations, let’s say a pet store for this example, is in much the same situation. People are not going in with their kids to buy toys and treats for the family pet; some purchases are delayed, others are done online.
It is entirely possible the owner of your local plaza is receiving no revenue; and they are “having a heart” as the Premier asked them to, waiting until the economic rebounds to figure out a payment plan.
Many of Hamilton’s local plazas are small businesses themselves. They do not have liquidity to bridge the lack of cash flow caused by COVID.
Simply put, they have no cash-on-hand, and will be unable to pay the City tax instalment on June 30. Nor is it going to change before July 31st, Council has approved a penalty free tax deferral for all property taxes, thus the City of Hamilton is at risk of serious decreases to its cash flow this summer.
While next we’ll focus upon the big single tax accounts, the cumulative impact of many smaller account going into arrears is much more substantial. More so because the larger properties have much greater land value, and are more likely to be able to pay their back taxes in the near future.
“Data released by U.S. REITs during the week ended May 15 continued to show April rent collection by retail REITs to be the most impacted by the coronavirus pandemic, with regional mall and outlet center REITs collecting the lowest percentage of April rents of the group”, this from S&P Global Market Intelligence.
S&P’s data is collected from public filings of publicly listed companies in the United States.
Lime Ridge Mall, Hamilton’s largest single tax at approximately $7.5-million per year, is a “regional mall”. S&P reports on the filing of two United States regional mall operators which report 26 and 30% rent payments.
Canada’s largest mall property company, Cadillac Fairview, is privately held. The company told various media outlets at the end of April that it was collecting between 20 and 25% of rent at it various malls across Canada.
Lime Ridge Mall is On April 24, credit rating agency DBRS Morningstar placed bonds secured by the Lime Mall property “under review with negative implications“.
US Shopping Centres, the category of destinations such as our Centre on Barton in the Lower City, Meadowlands in Ancaster, and Heritage Green in Upper Stoney Creek, are reporting between 50 to 70% rent collection reports S&P.
Many big box stores offer at least one “essential service”, these were allowed to be fully open selling both essential and not-essential goods. As emergency regulations began to allow curbside pick-up, all box stores were allowed to operate again. Whereas, indoor regional malls stores (with the exception of those offering an essential service) remain under closure orders.
RioCan, the owner of most of Hamilton’s box outlet centres anchored by Wal-Marts, reports “the Trust has collected 66% of expected April gross rents“. They report a further 17% of their tenants have entered into deferral agreements.
RioCan states they have “approximately $1.0 billion of liquidity on a proportionate share basis as of March 31, 2020”. Thus, they’ll be able to make their property tax payments.
We don’t know what Cadillac Fairview’s liquidity is at present.
The penalty for late property tax payment is 1.25% with a 15% interest rate.
A large private company such as Cadillac Fairview, with billions in assets, can secure short and medium term financing at much better rates.
The “mom and pop” commercial plaza cannot secure financing; especially the plazas anchored by or significantly exposed to the hospitality industry.
This is to say nothing of single commercial properties, such as those on James Street, whose only ground-level tenant is a restaurant.
The penalties Council reasonably imposed upon tax defaults during usual economic times will impose a burden which could tip some of these small owners into bankruptcy.
Thus, Hamilton City Council will need to figure out how to adjust penalties to prevent prevent them being an unjust burden upon commercial owners who cannot pay due to COVID.
Ultimately, COVID is laying bare many of the fundamental problems with property tax as the primary means of funding municipalities.
[Aside, the City of Toronto (where this problem is much more pronounced)


text:
Council to Decide if Students Continue Paying For HSR UPasses During COVID Closures – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

May 5, 2020
The Public Record has learned that Hamilton City Council will decide next week if they will continue charging Hamilton Street Railway UPass fees to Hamilton’s post-secondary students at McMaster University, Mohawk College, and Redeemer University during current the COVID-19 closure of campuses.
City Council is taking a break from meetings this week, the matter was originally to be dealt during the now cancelled May 6 Council meeting.
TPR started the City asking about the UPass fee on April 28, receiving the response below on May 4.
“We have been in touch with the program partners and are reviewing the agreements”, Jasmine Graham, Senior Communications Officer for the City of Hamilton wrote. “Given timing for the re-start of the school year and the format it may take (online, etc.) are not certain, we are still working out the details. At this time, we anticipate to have an update within the coming weeks.”
The UPasses account for approximately 17% of the HSR’s revenue at over $7-million per year.
For McMaster students, the fee during the 2020/21 academic year will be $223.92 for a 12-month HSR pass. Mohawk students will pay $105.93 for each semester of four months. Redeemer students pay $193.74 for an eight month pass.
TPR has been unable to confirm if Mohawk is collecting the summer UPass fee, or awaiting a decision by Hamilton City Council.
TPR does not know if Council will be considering a refund to McMaster students for summer HSR fees they’ve already paid, nor if Council will consider pro-rated refunds for the final six weeks of winter term when campuses were closed.
The associations representing students at McMaster, and Mohawk, responded with non-committal statements to questions regarding their positions on the UPass fee during campus closures.
“What I can say at this time is the MSU is watching closely as the situation evolves”, wrote McMaster Student Union President Giancarlo Da-Ré. “We’ll work with our partners in the best interests of McMaster students. I will gladly share more with you when I can”.
“We value our partnership with the HSR and the City of Hamilton”, wrote Mohawk Student Association President Garrett Blair. “The decision to offer free transportation starting in March was a show of solidarity and a sign of good faith from the city. We are confident that this partnership will continue to serve our students well, as we continue to navigate the challenges posed to students and the rest of the community together”.
Redeemer University Student Senate President Samuel Vandeputte wrote “Although I do not have a perfect sense of the position of the student body, it does, generally, seem that there may need to be a possibility for some compensation for the loss of usage in the hypothetical scenario that Redeemer does not run in-person courses during the start of the 2020-21 school year.”
The present contracts between the City of Hamilton and various student associations are amended versions of the original 1995 agreement signed between the McMaster Students Union and then-Region of Hamilton-Wentworth.
It does not distinguish between physical and online classes; nor has there been a need to. Where student courses were already online, such as Introduction to Psychology, the course tutorials meet in-person on campus.
Thus, as written, the contract requires all students to pay the fee if enrolled in full-time studies.
Which brings us to a legal doctrine you will hear often in the coming months, frustration of contract. Blakes, Cassels & Graydon LLP’s summary is informative reading “Frustration applies as a matter of law where, through no fault of the parties, an unforeseen event renders performance of the contract radically different from what the parties had bargained for”.
Nobody bargained for campus closures, social distancing limited bus capacity, and full-time enrolment being entirely online.
The UPass is the first of likely many contracts Council will have to determine how to respond to frustrations caused by COVID-19.


text:
Flamborough HSR Bus Service Cost Now Split Between Waterdown and Hamilton Ratepayers – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

May 4, 2020
Hamilton City Council unanimously approved splitting the area-rated cost of local HSR bus service in Waterdown between ratepayers in Waterdown and ratepayers in the former City of Hamilton (Wards 1 – 8 and 14).
With the change, the $538,000 annual operating cost of the 18-Waterdown HSR bus route is funded 68.8% by Waterdown ratepayers and 31.2% by Hamilton ratepayers for approximately $370,000 and $168,000 respectively.
The report submitted to City Council recommending the change states “Ward 15 is benefiting from the change in the split of Route 18-Waterdown, which now allocates the Burlington Portion of the route to Hamilton, which was previously allocated to Waterdown.”
A spokesperson for Zegarac says the change is the result of Burlington Transit discounting their Route 1 bus service to Aldershot GO, and the HSR extending the 18-Waterdown bus to Plains Road to connect with Burlington Transit there. (The 1-Plains bus operates into Downtown Hamilton)
“When total kilometres increased between 2019 and 2020 (12.4% increase), it became inequitable to charge Flamborough as the kilometres operated in Waterdown did not change,” wrote Jacqueline Durlov in response to TPR questions. “All additional service kilometres were added in Burlington”.
In response to a follow-up question from TPR, Durlov says the HSR added one bus to peak service on the route due to the extension. “These additional hours not only provided time for the extended trips to take place but also improved operating time and reliability across the route”.
Without the change, the transit levy for the average Waterdown ratepayer would be $122 for this year. With the shift of part of the operating cost to Hamilton transit levy, the Waterdown transit levy is $109. The cost as part of the Hamilton transit levy is less than a dollar.
Under Hamilton’s area-rating transit policy, former suburban communities only pay transit operating costs based upon the service they receive.
Prior to this change, the 18-Waterdown bus was operating cost was fully paid by Waterdown ratepayers, including the portion running from Waterdown to Aldershot GO.
The City does not know how many of the riders of the 18-Waterdown bus reside in Hamilton.
Area-rating was implemented when Hamilton’s six former municipalities were amalgamated into one municipality in 2001 as a hold-over from pre-2000 practice of suburban councils purchasing transit service from the HSR. Since 2001, successive City Councils have punted the issue of transit area rated past each election.
The current Council created a Transit Area Rating Review Sub-Committee to review area rating. The Sub-Committee’s start was delayed in December when not enough Councillors showed up to its first meeting, and the sub-committee failed to make quorum. It met in February to create a framework for review.


text:
Hamilton City Manager Say "Higher Order Transit" Important to Hamilton's Growth – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

May 19, 2020
Hamilton City Manager Janette Smith says Hamilton will continue to need the construction of “higher order transit” in the near future as the city grows; even if there is a decrease in public transit ridership in the immediate aftermath of COVID-19.
Smith’s comments came in response to a series of questions from Hamilton Chamber of Commerce CEO Kevin Loomis during a video conference interview on May 11. Smith is asked about the Task Force at 31:30.
Smith was one of five members of the province Hamilton Transportation Task Force which was hastily created by Premier Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservative Government after they unexpectedly cancelled Hamilton’s B-Line Light Rail Transit project in December.
The Task Force, which met over a period of two months, was tasked with making recommendations of where to spend $1-billion the province says it is committing to transportation in Hamilton. [It remains murky what that commitment actually entails]
It’s recommendation:
“The Task Force’s preference is for an intra-city higher-order transit project that addresses the City of Hamilton’s transportation needs such as current and future demand and congestion.”
The Task Force did not firmly commit to any project providing an overview of possibilities which were already known and have been long debated in Hamilton.
The Hamilton Chamber of Commerce is leading the largest coalition of business and community groups in Hamilton’s history pushing for a resumption of the tender for the B-Line LRT project. Mayor Fred Eisenberger is speaking about finding federal funding for the project, the federal government is stating that it is reviewing the Hamilton B-Line LRT for funding; however, the funding model for transit infrastructure prior to COVID has been a cost sharing arrangement with municipal financial contribution.
Smith says LRT is one of the projects the City is putting forth to the federal government for any stimulus projects that provincial or federal government launch as part of COVID recovery initiatives.
The City has other public transit capital requests already submitted including requests for funds to build a new Hamilton Street Railway bus garage and more buses.
“COVID doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be investing in something like LRT”, said Smith.
Smith states there are questions about how COVID will impact Hamilton’s population growth projections. “Will it slow down?”, Smith said, answering her own question with “I still think more people will come. Hamilton is a desirable place to live”.
“We may not have huge congestion right now, but we will has more and more people come”, says Smith. “To move people around more effectively, we need transit”.


text:
Hamilton Public Library "accelerating" plans for pick-up service this summer – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

May 14, 2020
Hamilton’s Chief Librarian Paul Takala says the Hamilton Public Library “will accelerate our plans” for partial reopening of borrowing physical items this summer.
Takala’s comments come in response to today’s announcement by the Province that libraries will be allowed to operate pick-up or delivery services starting Tuesday.
The Province announced the lifting of a blanket ban on library borrowing as part of the “first stage” of the Provincial COVID reopening plan. Library facilities remain closed.
Asked if he expects HPL to open for pickup next week or the following week, Takala stated this “is unlikely”.
“I am sure we will be able in the summer, that is what we were anticipating”, Takala stated. He noted that the HPL’s plans are dependent upon what happens with the COVID pandemic.
HPL’s collection size is over 7-million materials, and is one of Ontario’s larger public library systems with 22 branches and 36 bookmobile stops serving an area of 1,138 km². (For comparison, Toronto is 630 km², Mississauga 292.4 km², London 420.6 km²)
The HPL pivoted online when the COVID state of emergency forced all branches to close and the bookmobiles to stop operating.
The HPL purchased additional online holdings, such as E-Books, and integrated its catelogue to include online materials from other libraries such as the Internet Archive.
Dozens of the libraries programs, such as Family Storytime, Book Clubs, and the Writer in Residence are now offered by video link. Central Branch concerts are online as well.
The Hamilton Public Library Board is schedule to meet by video conference on Wednesday evening.
The HPL’s Pandemic Plan is available online, it was created after the 2003 SARS outbreak.


text:
Hamilton Re-implements Citizen Planning Appeal Deadlines During COVID Emergency – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

May 19, 2020
The City of Hamilton is re-implementing statutory deadlines for citizens and affected parties to file appeals of City Council Planning Act decisions.
The Province of Ontario suspended all statutory deadlines as part of Provincial COVID State of Emergency, and the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal is not conducting any contested hearings until further notice.
On April 15, the Province granted municipalities the power to re-institute Planning Act statutory deadlines for filing appeals based upon local circumstances.
Hamilton, along with other municipalities such as Mississauga, moved quickly to re-establish appeal deadlines.
Other municipalities implemented the regulation with public notice in their Council agendas during the first week of May. Hamilton City Council did not meet the first week of May.
Planning Act notices were sent to households in various parts of Hamilton notifying residents they have 20 days to file their appeal of the planning decision which the notice is issued for.
Appellants must file their appeals by courier, mail, or by dropping at City Hall. The packages must include certified cheque or bank draft to pay the processing fee.
Other municipalities, in their public notices re-instating the deadlines, state the purpose is to prevent a backlog of planning appeals to be processed once the COVID Provincial State of Emergency ends and the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal begins processing appeals again.
At this time, May 17, the LPAT states mailed filings to the Tribunal “will experience processing delays”.
While citizens and interested parties are required to meet filing deadlines, the City continues to be except from appeal processing timelines.
The LPAT is presently only conducting settlement hearings, approving agreements between parties. No timeline has yet been announced for contested hearings


text:
"Pandemic is shining a light on the cracks in our society": Hamilton City Manager – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

May 19, 2020
Hamilton’s City Manager says the City cannot maintain its present supports for Hamilton’s homeless population in response to COVID-19 without provincial support and funding.
“I don’t think we will go back to the shelter system we had in the past”, City Manager Janette Smith told Hamilton Chamber of Commerce CEO Keanin Loomis during a video conference interview on May 11th.
Smith stated the City is prioritizing finding and placing homeless individuals and families into permanent housing; and utilizing hotel spaces to house people as they seek to be placed into permanent housing.
“Ontario is the only province where health and social services are on the property tax levy”, Smith said of the need for a comprehensive review of the relationship between municipalities and the province in the delivery of services and how they are funded.
Smith says the City will need to increase the square footage of congregate settings such as homeless shelters and long-term care homes to promote physical distancing in the future to prevent the spread of COVID and other respiratory issues.
The previously common practice of staffing long-term care with part-time staff who work in various facilities has temporarily been prohibited by the province, with care staff who used to have to work part-time in multiple facilities to make ends meet now working in one facility full-time until the province revokes the emergency regulation.
Smith expects that full-time staff will become a new normal.
The City is preparing for another potential health crisis this summer as temperatures increase and many Hamiltonians living in housing units without air conditioning will need cooling centres or other means to relieve heat stress. Heat stress can be fatal.
Many of the City facilities which operate as cooling centres will have decreased capacity due to physical distancing requirements, or may not be able to implement the necessary physical and ventilation changes to prevent the spread of the COVID-19 respiratory illness.
A “hot topic” is how Smith describes the discussion about if splash pads and swimming pools will be able to operate this summer. (It is not clear if she intended for a pun in the statement) Nobody is clear how pools will operating with physical distancing requirements, or if the City could afford to operate with significantly lowered capacity.
Smith says the City is planning for social supports to continue to be needed for months ahead, including things such as the outdoor portable toilet and hand washing station set up in front of Copps Coliseum.
The full video of Smith’s interview with the Hamilton Chamber of Commerce is available on the Chamber’s webpage along with all the Chamber’s other interviews: https://www.hamiltonchamber.ca/covid19/live-qa-open-forum-sessions/


text:
Summary of City of Hamilton COVID-19 Media Conference for May 1, 2020 – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

May 1, 2020
The City of Hamilton held its media call today. This call is run by the City Manager’s Office, and thus The Public Record is invited to participate.
The following is the summary of the press conference. Full video, as live-streamed by the City of Hamilton, is available on YouTube.
The press conference began at 3:30pm with Mayor Eisenberger opens noting May 1st is Doctor’s Day and thanking them for their “tireless work … we are forever grateful”
Here is a summary of Mayor Eisenberger’s remarks:
The Mayor then turned things over to Paul Johnson, Director of the City of Hamilton Emergency Operations Centre.
Summary of Paul Johnson’s remarks:
Hamilton Medical Officer of Health Dr. Elizabeth Richardson:
QUESTIONS FROM MEDIA
Samantha Craggs, CBC:
Mayor Eisenberger:
Craggs, follow-up:
Paul Johnson:
Joanna Frketich, Hamilton Spectator:
Mayor:
Johnson:
Dr. Richardson:
Frketich follow-up:
Dr. Richardson:
Matthew Van Dongen, Hamilton Spectator:
Johnson:
Van Dongen, follow-up:
Johnson:
Joey Coleman, The Public Record:
Dr. Richardson:
Coleman, follow-up:
NOTE: There is an error in my question. There is not a requirement for a Medical Certificate of Death to be filed in 48 hours, the Act states the a proscribed medical practitioner Certificate “shall, immediately after the death of a person, complete and sign a medical certificate of death”  It can take up to a year for a death to be registered with the registration division for a region. The City Clerks Office continues to register deaths at City Hall during business hours.
Dr. Richardson:
This was the end of the press conference.


text:
Summary of City of Hamilton COVID-19 Media Conference for May 15, 2020 – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

May 15, 2020
The City of Hamilton held its media call today. This call is run by the City Manager’s Office, and broadcast live to the public.
The following is the summary of the press conference. Full video, as live-streamed by the City of Hamilton, is available on YouTube.
What can you tell us of the staffing situation at The Rosslyn?
Paul Johnson:
City gets involved when staff shortage becomes critical, and the City is involved because it became worse in the past days.
Says the City can’t give exact details about the facility, but “You can assume from that staffing levels are low and challenging, particularly in this coming weekend”
Follow-up Question: What is the situation like there right now?
Paul Johnson:
We have a lot of people there ensuring care in there. It’s a 24/7 operation, the home is very receptive, and we are working as a team.
For Dr. Richardson, what is the new criteria to get a COVID test?
Dr. Richardson:
Beyond the key symptoms, the list of symptoms which now will result in a COVID test is expanding as more has been learned about the virus. Testing capacity has increased, and the number of tests available has increased.
The list of symptoms and testing guidance from the Province has increased, more information will be posted next week on the City website.
Follow-up Question: Can you share any details on the death today?
Dr. Richardson:
I was just informed of the death I have no further details.
[An email was sent to accredited email following this, and Manucdoc tweeted “ Hamilton Public Health has confirmed the city’s 26th covid-19 death. A 70-year old male from the Rosslyn died in hospital. The retirement home declared an outbreak on May 10th and has 23 confirmed cases. This is the first death“]
Who is it that have been sent in [to The Rosslyn], what are they doing, how many are there?
Paul Johnson:
I don’t have the listing, I don’t know where they are all from, and what role they are playing. They are many people helping there on the ground.
Follow-up Question: How many [residents/patients] from The Rosslyn are at Hospital? Is there a Code Orange at any hospital?
Dr. Richardson:
Seven are in hospital as of this morning
Not sure if they’ve declared a Code Orange, Dr. Richardson says she has not heard of one.
What is the status of mass testing at The Rosslyn?
Dr. Richardson:
They began mass testing on May 12th, outbreak declared May 10th
Follow-up Question: The Rosslyn was one of the homes issued a [public health] order last month, did they meet the order requirements?
Dr. Richardson:
All the requirements of the order were met. Yesterday, a new Order was issued to this home to ensure they continue to meet the conditions of the first order and standards required of homes.
All private courses will be open tomorrow, all of them were pretty much booked up yesterday. Why is it taking longer for the City to open its golf courses?
Paul Johnson:
Part of it is bringing back seasonal staff. The City had not scheduled their hours, and they need to undergo training before the City can reopen the courses.
It will be by next weekend that we hope to reopen Chedoke.
City needs time to get the courses ready with signage and changes for physical distancing.
Follow-up Question: Do you know when the 2020 rates for membership and tee off fees will be posted?
Paul Johnson:
We hope to have online booking for tee times in the coming days, the rates were already set in the 2020 munciipal budget.
Dale: Why can’t public washrooms be reopen in [public parks, conservation areas, and facilities]?
Dr. Richardson:
They are high contact areas, many things people touch in them. They are hard to keep sanitary and clean, and at this time the City isn’t able to keep them clean. The City recognize their importance, and is working on this.
Staffing challenges at The Rosslyn, why is that?
Paul Johnson:
Some of the staff have tested positive, this is a smaller facility that doesn’t have much staff to begin with compared to larger facilities. There is a province wide shortage of long-term care staff, and this is why the City and hospitals need to step in to assist with staffing.
Mayor Eisenberger:
Province has put out all call for experienced LTC staff to help iwth the Provincal response to add workers at LTCs.
What is the process, does the Home ask for help or does the City determine it must step in? What are the supports?
Paul Johnson:
It is all kinds of staff, nurses, support staff, and more. Various ways the response can be triggered.
City provides logistics supports, PPE, and connecting to Provincial supports.
How many deaths have their been at The Rosslyn
Dr. Richardson:
The new death today was a Rosslyn resident, a 70-year-old male.
Today, Toronto announced cancellation of kids summer camps, what is the timeline for Hamilton’s decision?
Paul Johnson:
It will be in the coming weeks, likely around the May 27 report to Council on staged reopening. Hamilton has not made its final call.
Reminder that health care system is safe, that if people need to call paramedics, seek emergency care, or seek urgent care, it is safe to do so, and they should do so.
Wishes everyone a good weekend.


text:
Summary of City of Hamilton COVID-19 Media Conference for May 8, 2020 – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

May 8, 2020
The City of Hamilton held its media call today. This call is run by the City Manager’s Office, and broadcast live to the public.
The following is the summary of the press conference. Full video, as live-streamed by the City of Hamilton, is available on YouTube.
What considerations went into not opening Albion Falls and the Escarpment Stairs
Mayor Eisenberger:
Paul Johnson:
Follow-up
How does getting back outdoors help mental health?
Dr. Harvey:
Can you update on the number of tickets issued.
Paul Johnson:
Follow-up
To Dr. Harvey, Toronto is tracking socioeconomic and demographic data, groups calling for Hamilton to do this, are you considering do this as well
Dr. Harvey:
Will the City will monitoring trails this weekend to ensure people are respecting the rules this weekend?
Mayor Eisenberger:
Paul Johnson:
Mayor Eisenberger asks Dr. Harvey to give advice to vulnerable populations
Dr Harvey:
Follow-up
Are driveway meet-ups, with distance, lawn chairs set up with distance, similar setups, appropriate? What are you thoughts on this?
Dr. Harvey:
What is the plan if people are not physical distancing and they get reckless?
Mayor Eisenberger:
Paul Johnson:
Follow-up
Is there a timeline for reopening Albion Falls and Escarpment Stairs?
Paul Johnson:
Media receiving numerous reports of an outbreak at Macassa Lodge, can you confirm?
Dr. Harvey:
Follow-up
Can you tell us how this [false positives] happen?
Dr. Harvey:
Would Hamilton consider mass testing, random community testing to find asymptomatic carries of the virus?
Dr. Harvey:
Follow-up:
Asks for more detail on how the Macassa false positives happened
Dr. Harvey:


text:
Are You 21 Coffee Cups Apart? – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

June 22, 2020
The City of Hamilton wants young adults to ask themselves if they are within 21 coffee cups of each other.
Following a few weeks of young adults being over-represented among new COVID-19 positive test cases in Hamilton. Of the new COVID-19 positive cases during the past 10 days, 63% are among people under the age of 30.
Thus, the City of Hamilton is buying social media ads with graphics about social distancing – ranging from the effective keep one Sobi bike apart to the graphic saying to keep 21 coffee cups apart.
In a press release announcing the campaign sent by City of Hamilton Communications Officer Jacqueline Durlov, the City states:
“In order to effectively communicate with this group in a way that resonates and increase the appeal of following Public Health recommendations, a campaign has been developed that focuses on providing them with the information they need, in a visual style that appeals to them”.
Here are the graphics being used to advertise to young people.


text:
City Council to Look at Rent Reductions for Farmers' Market Vendors After Sending Arrears Notices – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

June 7, 2020
Hamilton City Council will look at providing a 75% rent reduction to vendors at the municipally owned Hamilton Farmers’ Market.
This comes after the City’s automated billing systems issued rent arrears notices to vendors in the market. The arrears notices were issued automatically, sixty days after April 1st.
Vendors tell The Public Record the notices were very concerning. A vendor who operates a food business said their “heart sank” with concern they could face eviction from their stall.
Once TPR reported upon the notices, vendors state the City informed them of plans to provide COVID rent relief.
Ward 2 Councillor Jason Farr, who no longer sits on the Hamilton Farmers’ Market Board, says Ward 7 Councillor Esther Pauls will introduce the motion at an upcoming City Council meeting to provide 75% rent relief.
The Public Record asked Farr the following question by email:
“What is your position in regards to charging full rent to Market Vendors during COVID, including those which are closed due to public health orders signed by the Medical Officer of Health”
Farr responded is “supportive” and will second Pauls’ motion.
“It is necessary that the City support local small businesses in whatever way we have at our disposal and we need to set an example that this is the right thing to do”, writes Paul in response to The Public Record.
“We are planning on bringing forward a motion, first to the [Market] Board and then to Council for 75% rent relief to the vendors for the months of April, May and June. This proposal would be similar to the terms offered by CERCA where the tenant only pays 25% of their rent”.
Pauls says the Market is going to continue to support vendors, within the limitations of the Municipal Act.
[The City is not allowed to provide “Obvious undue advantage” to any business, thus cannot provide supports not generally available to non-Market businesses, Section 106 of the Municipal Act]
The Market is assisting vendors to obtain PPE, increasing cleaning within the Market, and preparing plans for when the Province allows for dine-in or patio food services.
The Market Board meets Monday night, the meeting will not be streamed. The Office of the City Clerk has not yet completed a plan for online streaming of all City of Hamilton public meetings.
Hamilton City Council is not meeting this week, and the next Council ratification meeting is scheduled for June 25.


text:
City Report on Economics of Live Music Venue Released, What Will City Hall Do? – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

June 11, 2020
Hamilton’s live music venues are few and in danger of economic collapse, says a 37-page report commissioned by the City of Hamilton on the viability of live music venues.
Prior to COVID, the average operating margin for a venue in Hamilton was 4%.
“28% of venues’ revenues coming from municipal grants, this is a critical component for their financial sustainability”, reads the report. “Various sources such as event rentals, alcohol, food, coat check, etc” according for the remaining revenue, with only 2% of revenues coming from ticket sales.
Completed prior to COVID, the report lists four major issues facing live music in Hamilton:
The report paints a bleak picture of the short-term viability of live music venues “the
business models for small to medium venues (capacity of 100 to 350 persons) requires
sold out shows along with revenues from food and beverage, etc. to remain viable”.
The Canadian music industry says the majority of music venues it spoke to in March could not sustain themselves past September due to COVID closures. “Only 4% will be able to keep their business going for up to a year”, an industry press release stated on April 1.
There are 1,100 full-time equivalent jobs produced by Hamilton’s live music venues, says the report.
Among the suggestions contained in the report, the authors suggest the City explore “tax breaks for cultural venues” to assist them in managing increased property tax costs due to rising property values.
Presently, Ward 2 City Councillor Jason Farr is seeking to shut down The Corktown Pub, one of Hamilton’s oldest music venues. Farr refuses to state why he is vetoing the pub’s patio application. The application meant all the requirements of law, and received full approvals from City of Hamilton staff.
Farr is refusing to say why he is vetoing, and ignoring all questions regarding his veto.
The issue of mid-size venues continues to a significant barrier to music growth in Hamilton. Mid-size venues seat between 250 and 1200 people.
The report includes interesting stories of what is working.
One artist discussed how the I Heart Hamilton blog helped to grow their audience online, which then directly led to her getting a show. And another discussed how they were relatively unknown until their performance at Supercrawl, which led to someone in the crowd specifically seeking them out following the show to offer then another gig.
The consultants for the report are Nordicity Group Ltd. The contract was awarded at $39,200, in a non-competitive bid.


text:
Committee of Adjustment Holds First Video Conference Meeting – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

June 28, 2020
Hamilton’s Committee of Adjustment, where “minor” variances from zoning rules and regulations are granted, resumed hearing on Thursday using an online video conference meeting format.
After about 30 minutes to get comfortable with the WebEx video conferencing format, the meeting flowed very efficiently and similar to in-person meetings.
What makes CoA most interesting is how the gradual zoning amendments which change neighbourhoods over time are dealt with there.
The size of houses is increasing throughout Southern Ontario, two examples of how this is happening via minor variances at Committee of Adjustment. Also an example in which CoA constrains the rate of change in existing neighbourhoods to prevent development which significantly differs or unreasonably impacts neighbourhoods..
In Flamborough, two properties were approved for houses covering 26% of the total lot, whereas zoning permits 15%. These approvals have been granted to other properties in older parts of Waterdown. Concerns expressed by neighbours related to drainage of properties.
In the West Hamilton neighbourhood of Kirkendall, the area’s mid 20th century bungalows are being transformed into single-family detached homes of between two and three storey heights.
A home on Chatham Street was approved to build upper-level extensions over the existing bungalow. The neighbouring properties have previously changed to single-family detached homes.
The Deferral – 315B Aberdeen Avenue
Update (Jan 2021): The Committee of Adjustment eventually approved this application. Neighbours appealed the approval to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal. At LPAT, the neighbours and owner reached a settlement.
On the south side of Locke Street, at 315B Aberdeen Avenue, an application to construct a two-storey detached home draw a large number of delegations of concern. 24 people registered. Many of the issues of urban intensification were discussed, a driveway onto an arterial roadway, the ownership of unassumed public alleyways, and safety in dense areas.
While CoA only deals with a narrow scope of Planning Act rules – the issue of alleyway ownership is not in front of CoA – people do bring forth their overall concerns, and the CoA listens. Thus, while all that was in front of CoA is to build the front yard much closer to the neighbourhood property (3.6m whereas the bylaw requires 12.0m), the CoA fully considered the full project and its impacts.
The proposed home is actually in the center of the block surrounded by backyard, only accessible by the alleyway, and is a rarity in Hamilton – a separate lot alleyway house.
The proposal to have a large home in this spot has more impact on neighbouring properties than would be the usual case on a street-fronting property.
The Kirkendall Neighbourhood Association delivered a good delegation outlining their concerns. Looking at the full application file, there were definite flags for the CoA, thus the neighbourhood delegation providing the needed reasons for CoA to defer the file.
As you can see in the image a few paragraphs above, the proposed house is quite large, even more so in the context of being in an alleyway. In the image directly below, you can see the proposal has four bedrooms, four washrooms which is uncommon for a traditional single-family home.
CoA deferred a decision for two weeks, to visit the site of the application to determine for themselves the merits of the variance request.


text:
Hamilton Police Board Promises Change Without Changing – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

June 11, 2020
The Hamilton Police Services Board says they accept the scathing findings of an independent investigation into the multiple failings of Hamilton Police Command prior to, during, and after violence at the 2019 Hamilton Pride Festival.
My commentary on the report is here:
Independent Investigation into Police Response to 2019 Attack on Hamilton Pride Reveals a Broken Police Command
During a video conference meeting, members of the Board voted unanimously to “accept” the findings. They promise they will implement the 38 recommendations, but their words reveal a resistance to change, and a serious lack of understanding of the need for reform
revealed in the report.
See tweets from Sarah Jama, Cameron Kr, and Lyla Miklos for a good capture of the community reaction to Police Board comments.
The Hamilton Spectator captured the Police Board apology from the video stream, and have uploaded it to YouTube.


text:
Hamilton's Rural Cannabis Growing 150-Metre Separation Rule Now in Effect – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

June 5, 2020
Hamilton City Council passed a by-law in September 2018 requiring all new or expanding cannabis growing operations in the rural area to have a 150 metre setback from neighbouring properties.
The by-law was appealed by three cannabis growers. Two withdrew their appeals after reaching agreements with the City of Hamilton. Red Hill Cannabis Inc was the only remaining appeal remaining after the settlements, and last week the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal dismissed their appeal as abandoned after RHC failed to respond to requests for filings and did not attend hearing.
With the dismissal, the 150-Metre separation distance requirement of By-Law 18-266 is now in force and effect.
Red Hill Cannabis operated the infamous growing operation at 286-288 Green Mountain Road in Upper Stoney Creek. The site vented nauseous smells which forced people to close their windows, the smell penetrated into homes away, and in 2017, a series of shootings occurred in proximity to the growing facility. This facility was the poster child cited by politicians and City staff in passing the requirement to keep rural growing operations away from neighbouring properties.
The facility is no longer in operation.
Ward 11 Councillor Brenda Johnson, who represented the area prior to ward boundary changes in 2018, says she is “thrilled” the appeal is dismissed.
“I hope this decision sends a strong message to those who are considering growing large amount of cannabis plants that they ensure the greenhouse is built using 2020 standards and is located at least 150 metres from neighbouring homes.”
Ward 9 Councillor Brad Clark, who now represents the area, says “it is my hope that the 150 meter radial separation for Grow-ops will prevent any future situations where residents become prisoners in their own homes due to the over-powering cannabis odours”.
Both Councillors say the City must be diligent to ensure the by-law is obeyed and a situation such as what the residents of this Upper Stoney Creek neighbourhood endured never happens again.


text:
HSR Announces Further Service Reductions Beginning June 28 – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

June 4, 2020
City Hall is reducing HSR service further beginning on June 28, with 14 bus routes seeing service reduced with many of the cuts focused upon evening and night service.
The HSR reduced service in March in response to the closure of businesses under the Province’s COVID State of Emergency. Since that time, the HSR has operated on an “enhanced” Saturday bus schedule. Some routes have “extra” buses added to respond to capacity demands, and weekday only routes operate on reduced schedules.
Saturday service requires fewer operators, which will enable the HSR to maintain service in the event a number of staff become infected with coronavirus and unable to work for the 14-day self-isolation period asked of anyone who tests positive for the virus.
The HSR lists the following cuts on their website:
The full summer schedules are on the HSR website here.


text:
Independent Investigation into Police Response to 2019 Attack on Hamilton Pride Reveals a Broken Police Command – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

June 9, 2020
COMMENTARY/OPINION
Ontario’s non-Indigenous police forces cite Peelian principles as the foundation of professional policing.
Peelian principles, more commonly referred to as “policing by consent” are named after Sir Robert Peel, who in 1829 created the Metropolitan Police in London, England.
Hamilton Chief of Police Eric Girt regularly cites these principles as foundational to his own policing practice.
The 125-page Independent Review into the Events Surrounding Hamilton Pride 2019, released to the public on Monday, is a damning indictment of the leadership of Chief Girt and his senior command staff.
The Report conclusively reveals HPS Command are failing to apply the principles they espouse, and are blinded by a focus upon Hamilton’s small anarchist community.
The Report reveals repeated organizational failings prior to the violence at the Pride Hamilton celebration on June 15, 2019, a breakdown in HPS communications and command during the violence, and repeated bungling by Chief Girt following the violence.
Instead of taking responsibility for their actions, HPS Command tried to shift attention away from their failings.
“The HPS’s inadequate preparation for Pride 2019 resulted in a failure to protect the public and Pride attendees during the event”, wrote Scott Bergman, the lawyer hired by the Hamilton Police Services Board to conduct the review.
“The HPS should unequivocally apologize to the community for its inadequate planning, the absence of communication with Pride organizers, and for creating the impression that the police response to agitators would have been different had the HPS been formally invited to the event”, Bergman concludes.
Underscoring the shortcomings of leadership documented in the Report, Chief Girt’s office responded to media questions Monday with a statement the Chief won’t be taking questions from journalists until Thursday afternoon.
Considering recommendation #34, that the Chief and HPS Command “should receive enhanced media training” in response to Chief Girt’s inept public statements in all of this, it is likely best the Chief is exercising his right to remain silent.
Reading the Report, it is clear, Hamilton needs a new Chief of Police.
A Police Chief with the ability to implement the Report’s recommendations, a Chief who will fix the serious organizational structure problems detailed in the Report, a Chief who fixes the command culture of the Hamilton Police Service, and provides the leadership needed to secure and maintain public respect.
The new Chief must immediately begin enacting the Report recommendations, not just the ones regarding more consultation, they must take action to implement the hard changes required within the Hamilton Police Service.
The Report states that the Chief should update the public on how they are implementing the recommendations in 12 and 24 months.  Thus a new Chief will need to act decisively.
Not only does the Bergman Report on its own detail why the current Police Chief is not the person to reform our Hamilton Police Service. At the same time Bergman’s report was released, an internal review conducted by Chief Girt’s office was released. That report differs significantly from Bergman’s, basically a “nothing to see here” document which proves once again that police are unable to investigate police.
As the Bergman Report details, Chief Girt and HPS command are unable to see the serious shortcomings within their organization, in many cases they are the problem.
Where does one begin to unravel the failings of HPS Command as detailed in this report?
Let us start at the beginning of the timeline provided by the Bergman Report report.
Hamilton Police did not inform the LBGTQ community their Community Relations Coordinator left  in January 2018. Pride organizers emailed the Coordinator’s email address in late 2018 and early 2019. The email address was active, with no autoreply and nobody monitoring it.
(That the Community Relations Coordinator could leave for another job in January 2018, the position left unfilled, and the community does not notice raises some serious questions of its own)
The Community Relations Office is part of HPS Command, and the direct responsibility of Chief Girt. The buck stops at Chief Girt, this is his failure.
Eventually, Pride organizers “were put in contact with the co-chairs of the HPS Internal Support Network (“ISN”). ISN is an internal support group for HPS members and civilian employees of the Two-Spirit and LGBTQIA+ communities.
“To my knowledge, the ISN had never before been a liaison or conduit between the HPS and Pride event organizers”, writes Bergman. “That is not the ISN’s role”.
This sets off a chain of miscommunications, the Hamilton Police officers who are ISN co-chairs believe they are meeting with Pride organizers for one reason, Pride organizers believe they are meeting with Police Officers with the authority to create the plans needed to ensure the safety of Pride events.
What happened when the meeting occurred in mid-April is disputed; however, out of the meeting the ISN members recommend HPS apply to have a recruiting booth at Pride.
The Pride organizers did not grant the request, Bergman writes these communications were cordial.
Hamilton Police have a sworn officer assigned as a member of the City of Hamilton Special Events Application Team which reviews all event permit requests. This officer failed to communicate with the East Hamilton Divisional police officer who was tasked with creating the operational plan for the Pride event.
“Indeed, the crime manager responsible for drafting the operational plan had no familiarity with and did not know what a S.E.A.T application was”, read the Report.
Two days before the events of June 15, an officer – not identified in the report – contacts the East Hamilton Division to share there is intelligence that street evangelists who’ve disrupted Pride events for years, including in Hamilton in 2018, may try to disrupt the 2019 event. The crime manager in the office on June 13 has a scheduled day off on June 14. Thus, two crime managers work on the report. The Independent Report hints at all the problems associated with the tight timeline, vague information, lack of familiarity with the matters at hand, and no clear lines of accountability.
This brings us to the disputed versions of the pre-Pride event phone call. As Bergman notes, for the purposes of the review, it is not necessary to reconcile the differing versions.
“What is abundantly clear from the two versions personally recounted to me is that there was a fundamental misunderstanding and breakdown in communication between the officer who drafted the OP for the HPS and the Hamilton Pride organizing committee”, write Bergman.
This brings us back to the failing of HPS Command, with no Community Relations Coordinator in the Office of the Chief of Police, swore police officers low in the hierarchy of the Hamilton Police Service are scrambling to do the work that Chief Girt has failed to do. Front-line officers are set up to fail.
Hamilton Pride organizers are provided with a phone number by the Divisional crime manager, Pride believes this number is given to them as a cellular contact to use during the Pride event. It is not, it is the Monday to Friday desk phone at the Divisional Crime Management Office.
Bergman writes “this mishandling of communication contributed to how the unfortunate circumstances unfolded on the day of the event and is addressed in greater detail in the recommendations below”.
The failures of Police Command create the snowballs which avalanche on June 15 allowing a hodgepodge of hateful street evangelists, white supremacists, and Yellow Vest movement members to disrupt the Pride celebrations at Gage Park, engaging in brawls with Pride Defenders. [The Report uses the terms Agitators and Pride Defenders to describe the two groups].
Four uniformed police officers, and two plainclothes officers, were posted to Gage Park to monitor for possible disruption of Pride. The report details the confusion among the police assigned as to how to patrol and prevent disruption. They don’t communicate with Pride organizers. Meanwhile, a large Hamilton Police presence, including the Public Order Unit, are deployed to City Hall to keep Yellow Vest members and counter-protestors separated. There is one sentence in the police Pride Operational Plan that the Divisional police officers could make a request to the HPS Command Duty Officer for support from the POU.
The following paragraph is indicative of the Command attitude towards the Pride event (the dispatcher knows all 9-1-1 calls are recorded, which makes this all the more shocking):
“At approximately 12:50 p.m., a member of the public (not a Pride organizer) saw the Agitators entering Gage Park from Main Street and called 9-1-1. The caller reported no disturbance or trouble at that time but told the 9-1-1 dispatcher that although they understood free speech and protesting, the presence of the Agitators and their signs was going to upset people and things could end badly. In response, the 9-1-1 dispatcher stated that “the organizers asked that police not go, not sure what we are supposed to do here…they don’t want police presence and makes it very difficult to respond to protest…will put it on the board for information but not sure what we are supposed to do…” The dispatcher created a formal call record and placed the incident “on the board.” The caller was never asked where the Agitators were in the park, nor did they provide that information”
The Police response to violence was delayed and disorganized. The report details why many in the Two-Spirit and LGBTQIA+ communities rightfully perceived the police response as being pro-Agitator.
This paragraph is illustrative:
“During this time, one of the Agitators’ apparent leaders continued to use his megaphone to amplify highly provocative and hateful messages toward Pride Defenders including “you’re full of hatred. Sexual deviance leads to more sexual deviance. It’s a fact…Nothing but violence.” HPS officers permitted this to continue without directing the Agitator to stop or confiscating his megaphone. As previously indicated, absent a permit, amplified sound is prohibited within City of Hamilton parks. The Agitators did not have any such permit”
But the Anarchists!
The Report reveals HPS Command fixated upon a small anarchist involvement among the Pride Defenders. A HPS Command which could not see beyond the Rabbit Hole they dug.
HPS Command is shown to complete disregard the very Peelian Principles they espouse.
Bergman’s findings specifically respond to the police command fixation. “The majority of Pride Defenders were not anarchists from The Tower”, he writes.
The arrest of Cedar Hopperton, a well known anarchist leader, for a speech Hopperton delivered during a public June 18 Town Hall hosted by the LGBTQ Advisory Committee at City Hall encapsulates the rabbit hole HPS descended down due to their obsession with the small group of anarchists believed to have been present at Gage Park on June 15.
[Local anarchists sprayed “Free Cedar” stencils with a rabbit as graffiti across Hamilton following the detainment of Hopperton]
Initially, Hamilton Police claimed they arrested Hopperton for being at Gage Park, a breach of Hopperton’s probation HPS Command falsely claimed. The Parole Board concluded Hopperton was not at Gage Park
This left HPS Command to rely upon their claim that Hopperton’s speech at City Hall June 18 constituted “incitement”. The Parole Board revoked Hopperton’s parole.
I was at City Hall on June 18, I heard Hopperton’s speech.
It was inflammatory, it was meant to stir the emotions of the crowd, and it failed to do so.
The crowd was not moved to anger, many members of the Two-Spirit and LGBTQIA+ communities present were willing to listen to Deputy Chief Frank Bergen who attended the Town Hall in uniform. Attempts to heckle Bergen out of the meeting were unsuccessful.
In the report, Bergman quotes a HPS senior officer  as stating anarchists have “hijacked the relationships that the police service have with the LGBTQ2+ community as well as with other marginalized communities”.
But the Anarchists!
Going back to my observations of the June 18 Town Hall. Hopperton and members of the anarchist community present failed to sway opinion in the room despite positioning themselves in a way to group dynamic against police.
In fact, a member of the LGBTQ community went up to the podium after Hopperton sat down and specifically rebutted the views espoused by Hopperton on behalf of the anarchists.
It is HPS Command which ‘hijacked the relationships that the police service have with the LGBTQ2+ community as well as with other marginalized communities’.
But the Anarchists! Indeed.
“The communities’ sentiment of being spied upon was reinforced after Hopperton was arrested on June 22, 2019 on the ostensible grounds of a parole violation for allegedly having attended Pride as a defender”, Bergman writes.
Bergman’s report details the meandering commentary of Chief Girt on CHML June 19 (pgs 62-64) during which the Chief attempted to justify the poor response of Hamilton Police on June 15.
Chief Girt refers to the HPS not being allowed a recruitment booth, “people, who either extreme left or extreme right wanting to engage in fundamentally criminal acts”, and hinted at the coming arrest of those bound by court orders.
Police arrested Pride Defenders in the days which followed; meanwhile, the Agitators – whose violence was well documented in videos and one of whom ‘helmet guy’ was known to police and the video evidence more than adequate to lay charges – were not arrested.
“Many were told by police that arrests could only be made if the victim provides a statement. This is not correct in law. While direct witnesses and a co-operating victim are typically the backbone for criminal prosecutions, police have discretion to lay charges if there are reasonable and probable grounds for believing a criminal offence has been committed”, Bergman writes.
Hamilton Police Command knew this, But the Anarchists!
Fast-forward to September 10, 2019, Chief Girt speaks on CHML. Here is how Bergman summaries Chief Girts statements this day (pages 66 & 67):
On September 10, 2019, the Chief appeared on the Bill Kelly Show for his regular Town Hall segment. This appearance was after the August 29, 2019 initial meeting that the Chief had attended with LGBTQIA+ community members that will be discussed below. Part of the Town Hall included a discussion of that meeting.
As part of that meeting, one of the community members had talked about how the police had worked with the LGBTQIA+ communities in the past on issues such as some men not having a safe space for sexual encounters, and sexual activity in public places. This is an issue that requires greater understanding from the police.
While discussing HPS’s cooperation with the LGBTQIA+ community on air, Chief Girt told Bill Kelly that “one of them (a community member) talked about the approach we had to take collectively for public sex in washrooms. And you’ve got the complaints perspective from families attending, Centre Mall, for whatever reason used to be kind of an epicenter. So, we worked collaboratively to say that we understand that, this may not be the best place to do it. I understand you’ve got consenting adults that want to do that, but it’s in a public place so kind of have to strike a balance there. It’s different than the bathhouse, it’s different than the other things that have gone on through the course of time, but my point is if you can work collaboratively to meet both objectives because the last thing we want to do is cause additional harm to whoever is involved in that activity. So we’re working towards that, we have another meeting coming up.”
Later in the segment, Chief Girt was speaking about the law and how he was required to uphold the law, especially the constitutional right to free speech even in circumstances where there are demonstrations and hate-fueled speech. The Chief stated that he is bound by what the courts have said about hate speech.
The Chief attempted to illustrate how laws and court interpretations of laws can and do change in progressive ways over time: “For example, we’ve had some recent amendments to the Criminal Code that have finally removed anal intercourse as a prohibited activity. Finally. And that’s after years and years of petitioning. So, when you have consenting adults engaged in it was fine. If you have conditions where you have a youth involved, that’s a whole other ball of wax but on the Code for years was this particular offence. Now with the change in times it hasn’t been enforced, for good reason.”
These comments were immediately condemned by the community and met with extraordinary disdain. Whatever the intent, the Chief’s comments were hurtful and incredibly harmful to many.
Time and time again, well respected leaders in the Two-Spirit and LGBTQIA+ communities expended their own social capital in organizing conversations with Chief Girt; they brought members of their community to the table.
Time and time again, Chief Girt made ill-advised (being generous) comments on CHML following these meetings were taken as inflammatory to the community.
Speaking with these community leaders in the hours following the release of the Bergman Report yesterday, they state each of the 38 recommendations must be implemented.
They can’t expend their remaining political capital within their own communities until there is substantial progress by HPS Command to address the numerous significant shortcomings revealed in this report.
This cannot be a check the box exercise. The Report revealed the present culture is one of “check the box”, and it is failing Hamiltonians miserably.
The report unpacks the experiences of one community stemming from a single event. It is limited, yet reveals so much.
Hamilton needs a new Chief of Police who does not just espouse Robert Peel’s principles, we need a Chief who lives them, implements them, and who will reform the Hamilton Police Service.
Police Chiefs are appointed for five-year terms, Girt’s term ends in May 2021. Girt will have served 35 years as a Hamilton Police Officer.
It is time to start the search for our next Chief of Police.
Many of the recommendations can be implemented in the coming 12 and 24 months; the systemic failings revealed require long-term leadership, likely beyond just five-years to implement and ensure change becomes culture.


text:
Joey’s Notepad: A LRT Proxy Debate on Upper James Transit Studies – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

June 28, 2020
We have no idea when Hamilton’s B-Line LRT project will be back at Council. City Hall is presently focusing upon on a 2026 Commonwealth Games as the COVID stimulus pitch.
Ontario Minister of Transportation Caroline Mulroney has the Hamilton Transportation Task Force Report on her desk, and she’ll decide what parameters will be applied to the $1-billion dollars the province is committing to Hamilton.
Due to COVID, the Hamilton Chamber of Commerce’s regular visits to Queen’s Park are not happening, thus there isn’t the ability for them to champion the project the same way they usually do, in the continuing absence of leadership from City Hall.
A staff report on the next steps to make Upper James Street more pedestrian friendly, includes a $550,000 budget line for detailed studies and planning for A-Line transit corridor. This caused a 30 minute debate as Councillors opposed to the B-Line LRT project questioned if spending on planning for transit on Upper James is premature.
Some of them want to see the $550,000 paid for out of that $1-billion commitment to transit in Hamilton.
It was Ward 9 Councillor Brad Clark, who ran for Mayor in 2014 and is positioning to be able to run for Mayor in 2022, who led off the debate. His arguments were similar to the past about the A-Line, with the addition of how the City of Hamilton’s fiscal state is very concerning during COVID and they need to save money wherever possible.
The debate gave us a flavour of where Council is at on the LRT file. Clark’s motion to defer any action on transit along Upper James failed on a 6-8 vote. It did not exactly break along LRT lines.
Ward 5 Councillor Chad Collins and Ward 6 Councillor Tom Jackson voted against Clark’s motion, and for the work. This reflects their pro-development stance, a delay to transit planning on Upper James will delay developers looking to build mid-rise buildings.
Nonetheless, the picture is becoming more clear, LRT’s path to nine votes in favour needs either Ward 13’s Arlene Vanderbeek or Ward 7’s Esther Pauls to be in favour, likely both.


text:
The Reopening: Spray Pads on Friday, City Pools to Follow – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

June 17, 2020
The City of Hamilton says 65 of the 68 spray pads in city parks will be turned on Friday as the Provincial Government lifts health restrictions related to COVID-19 as Hamilton enters “Stage 2” of Ontario’s COVID-19 stage plan.
Some city pools will reopen during the week of July 6, followed by the four outdoor summer pools (Birge, Green Acres, Inch Park, and Walker) during the week of July 13.
During a Council meeting on Monday, City staff stated that reopening work is underway for the pools.
Lifeguards need to be trained on new protocols for rescues and emergency first aid due to the risk of COVID-19 infection this year. The City states it is also needing to provision personal protective equipment to each pool location.
The City has not stated what the capacity restrictions for pools will be.