text:
Terry Whitehead Continues to Harass and Bully City Staff: Integrity Commissioners Say – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

June 19, 2022
The City of Hamilton’s Integrity Commissioners write Ward 14 City Councillor Terry Whitehead is continuing to harass and bully municipal staff, and they are slapping him on the wrist, again.
The Commissioners state Whitehead has violated the Council Code of Conduct three times.
They hope that this time, he will finally stop harassing City of Hamilton staff.
The Commissioners write that Whitehead declined to “resolve the complaint through circumspect acknowledgement, meaningful recognizance and genuine heartfelt apology.”
This is why they recommend Whitehead be penalized 15 days pay for each violation, a total pay suspension of 45 days.
City Council will decide if they accept the findings and recommendations during their meeting this coming Wednesday.
Council can suspend Whitehead’s pay for up to 90 days for each violation, in total up to 270 days.
The latest report was published Friday afternoon as part of Wednesday’s Council agenda and covers Whitehead’s violations of the Code between November 4, 2021, and February 9, 2022.
They find Whitehead to be retaliating against the City Clerk, the City’s Executive Director of Human Resources, and other members of Council who fulfilled the requirements of their respective roles in sanctioning Whitehead in November for his long campaign of harassment and bullying against the City’s Chief Roads Official.
Whitehead targeted City Clerk Andrea Holland for performing her statutory duty by publishing the November 2021 Integrity Commissioners report.
The City Clerk is bound by the Municipal Act to publish City Council agendas.
On November 4, 2021, Whitehead appeared unannounced at the City Clerk’s Office inside City Hall. Whitehead recorded the meeting and provided the Commissioners.
“A review of the recording … makes it quite evident that his intention … was to challenge the Clerk and to strong-arm the Clerk, in an effort to prevent her from placing the Report before Council,” The Commissioners report.
The Commissioners state Whitehead threatened the Clerk by stating, “I just want you to understand the consequences of your actions.”
The report states Whitehead stated he was “having fun” because he is “a millionaire.”
Whitehead “proceeded to chastise and berate the Clerk about placing the Report on the Council agenda for the following week,” the Commissioners write.
The next day, Whitehead contacted the City’s Executive Director of Human Resources Lora Fortana late in the afternoon, leaving a “threatening” voice mail message.
In the message, Whitehead states “I just got off the phone with my lawyer, a couple of lawyers actually” stating, “I feel really bad. I was giving you the benefit. Anyway, I hope you understand that no hard feelings. I have to do what I have to do.”
Whitehead is represented by real estate lawyer Jack Restivo, who wrote an odd legal letter in response to the November 2021 report.
Hamilton’s Integrity Commissioners, Jeffrey Abrams and Janice Atwood-Petkovski distinguish themselves from other Ontario municipal integrity commissioners by taking a more ‘conciliatory’ approach to misbehaviour by municipal politicians.
Atwood-Petkovski is a retired City of Hamilton City Solicitor.
As Integrity Commissioners, Abrams and Atwood-Petkovski allow municipal councillors to have complaints dismissed by apologizing to them as Commissioners.
In the first two incidents in this report, they write that Whitehead declined to apologize. Had he apologized, he could have avoided sanctions.
“Time was spent canvassing with the Councillor opportunities to resolve the complaint through circumspect acknowledgement, meaningful recognizance and genuine heartfelt apology,” they write.
Abrams and Atwood-Petkovski dismissed numerous past complaints involving Whitehead using their ‘conciliatory’ approach.
Abrams and Atwood-Petkovski write Whitehead committed further Code of Conduct violations as they were canvassing him for an apology.
During the Council meeting on February 9, 2022, Whitehead claimed to be having technical difficulties.
He falsely blamed the City Clerk for the difficulties and publicly berated and belittled the Clerk numerous times during the meeting.
In private chats between councillors during the meeting, Ward 15 Councillor Judi Partridge complained that Whitehead engaged in “threatening and aggressive” behaviour.
The Commissioners write, resulting from Whitehead’s behaviour, Partridge “does feel some anxiety and stress about returning to ‘in person’ attendance at City Hall, given that her office is located directly across from Councillor Whitehead’s.”
The Commissioners make three findings of wrongdoing against Whitehead.
They find his actions constitute reprisal against the Executive Director of Human Resources for providing information to the Integrity Commissioner, that his harassment of the City Clerk violates the Council Code of Conduct, and similarly, his behaviour towards Partridge constitutes further harassment.
The Municipal Act allows the Commissioners to recommend sanctioning Whitehead up to 90 days of salary for each violation.
They determined to recommend Council dock Whitehead for 45 days’ salary in total for the three offences.
There are 145 days between Wednesday’s Council meeting and the end of this Council term on November 14. Council is not limited to this term when they impose a penalty.
If Council decides to sanction Whitehead at the maximum 270-day penalty for the three offences, it will carry into the next term if Whitehead is re-elected.
The Commissioners state Whitehead’s harassment and intimidation of others is unacceptable and constitutes “a threat of reprisal against a Complainant or any other person for providing information to the Integrity Commissioner.”
“We strongly urge the Councillor to seek support which may be available to assist him in wrestling with the personal health
challenges which burden him,” they write in their concluding comments.
City Council will vote on the sanction to be imposed upon Whitehead during Wednesday’s Council meeting which begins at 9:30 am.


text:
Thoughts on the IELECT McMaster Research Shop Report – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

June 12, 2022
What are the issues in a municipal election?
Depends on who you are talking to, where they live, and which race you are talking about.
Hamilton (and most Canadian) municipal elections usually have a single wedge issue, and maybe a theme or two in addition to that.
Year 2000: Amalgamation
2003: Building (or not) the Red Hill Valley Parkway
2006: Mayor Larry Di Ianni’s Municipal Elections Act violation convictions
2010: Where to build the stadium
2014 & 2018: Building (or not) the LRT
What will be the overriding theme of this election? All signs point to trust and change. People do not trust a City Hall already caught in three major cover-ups this term, and they want change.
What do people want change to be?
Between wards, the answer is likely to vary. Even within wards, the issues of concern can vary between neighbourhoods.
The only means candidates have to determine the issues is by canvassing door-to-door and listening to residents.
IELECT Hamilton, a citizen organization advocating for change on City Council, ran a voluntary survey asking people’s opinions on the six IELECT themes: Infrastructure, Economy, Leadership, Environment, Community, and Transportation.
Between its launch in May 2021 and September 25, 2021, there were 2007 survey responses.
McMaster University’s Research Shop recently published an analysis of these 2007 responses.
Most of the respondents to the survey identify as living in the Lower City (wards 1 to 4), with fewer respondents living in the suburban communities of Wards 9, 11, 12, 13, and 15.
The Research Shop took the survey responses and conducted a series of spatial analyses which provide insight, especially for candidates.
For example, Question #2, “I feel safe walking to stores, schools, parks, and restaurants in my neighbourhood.”
Plotted by postal code centroid, a cluster of people living along Stoney Creek’s lakefront communities strongly disagree with this statement.
This information is useful to any candidate in Ward 10. Walkability is an issue people in this neighbour agree needs to be addressed. Candidates now know to focus some energy on this.
In Ward 7, we see a cluster of concerns along Fennell Avenue in the area of Upper Wentworth. Candidates can focus on this in their canvassing of nearby homes.
Affordability is going to be a key issue in this campaign.
We already knew, from past IELECT materials, that the responses to “It’s easy to find an affordable place to live in Hamilton” were overwhelmingly negative.
The spatial mapping confirms this is a city-wide concern.
Every candidate will need to have a housing plan included in their platform.
Looking at the spatial trends in the data, we can see patterns more clearly.
Data on the questions regarding public transit service helps to identify pockets where people selected “strongly disagree” to questions regarding access and reliability to transit. It also shows where people feel they are getting good service. A candidate can focus their messaging using this data.
Interestingly, both people who agree and disagree about receiving good HSR service agree that Council is not ‘investing smartly’ in the HSR system.
Here’s where candidates have to determine a political equation. Are people willing to pay to have more investment into transit?
It will be interesting to see if and how candidates use the data.

source: news-thepublicrecord

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


text:
TPR Files Request for 7-Eleven Liquor License Application Appeal Records – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

June 12, 2022
The Public Record filed a request to Ontario’s License Appeal Tribunal for the documents being considered by this Tribunal regarding the liquor license applications filed by 7-Eleven for their Hamilton locations at 415 Melvin Avenue and 622 Upper Wellington Street.
Both applications are scheduled to be heard this coming week.
The application for Melvin Avenue will be heard on Tuesday and Wednesday. The hearing for Upper Wellington will be heard Thursday and Friday.
In a letter issued to the parties on June 7, the License Appeal Tribunal is giving the applicants an opportunity to request a confidentiality order at the beginning of each respective hearing.
Hamilton City Council is formally objecting to the applications and will be sending lawyers to the hearings this coming week.
Additonally, Ward 8 Councillor John-Paul Danko is acting as a private citizen in personally objecting to the application for the Upper Wellington location. [Municipal politicians must engage with provincial Tribunals as “private” individuals, but can speak in their community leadership roles.]
There are no other individual parties in the Upper Wellington hearing.
Two private individuals are listed as parties to the Melvin Avenue location hearing. They are DeWitt Shainline and Lehaina Andrews.
The Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board sent letters objecting to the applications.
The Licence Appeal Tribunal has ruled in favour of 7-Eleven in four of the appeal hearings conducted these far in other municipalities.


text:
Whitehead Slapped on the Wrist by Council, 45 Days Pay for Three Serious Conduct Violations – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

June 22, 2022
Hamilton City Council voted 14-0 to slap Ward 14 Councillor Terry Whitehead with a 45-day pay suspension for continuing to harass and bully both City of Hamilton staff and other councillors.
This represents a penalty of 15 days for each serious violation of Council’s Code of Conduct, as they try to discourage him from continuing to harass and bully others at City Hall.
The Municipal Act allows Council to suspend pay for 90 days for each separate incident.
Whitehead’s pay was suspended for 30 days in November 2021 following a report regarding his years of targeted harassment of the City’s traffic safety staff and others.
Whitehead blames an ongoing serious medical condition for his behaviour, and today announced he will be taking another medical leave.
The latest Integrity Commissioners report involves three separate incidences.
Whitehead showed up in the City Clerks’ Office unannounced on November 4, 2021, to berate and intimidate the Clerk to not publish the Council agenda containing the first public Integrity Commissioners report involving his misconduct.
The next day, he left a threatening intimidating voice mail message to the City’s Executive Director of Human Resources.
During a February 9, 2022, Council meeting, sent disrespectful bullying and intimidating chat messages to Ward 15 Clr Judi Partridge.
During today’s debate, a few members of Council expressed concern that Whitehead was violating the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act by participating in the debate.
The Act contains an exception allowing that councillors “may take part in the discussion of the matter” when a council is debating Integrity Commissioner reports they are the subjects of.
“I’m struggling to understand how a councillor who has received an Integrity Commission’s report on their behaviour, it’s not a conflict for them to participate in the debate before Council?” asked Ward 9 Clr Brad Clark. “I can’t recall a councillor who’s been on the other end of an integrity commissioners report actually debating it and calling questions and proposing amendments, it seems to me to be clear conflicts.”
“I don’t disagree. And on a personal level, that’s a personal choice,” stated Mayor Fred Eisenberger in response.
“I did check with the Clerk and there’s nothing to prevent the councillor from engaging in this issue in this manner. So I think it’s regrettable that he’s chosen to do so but he has chosen to do so and that’s his right as a councillor.”
Whitehead’s engagement in today’s Council debate regarding his own misbehaviour struck all the cords of Whitehead’s typical performances of the past decade.
He blamed others for his own actions, opening, “I want to thank my council colleagues. You know, there’s an old saying I forgive my enemy. Because at the end of the day, they don’t know what they do.”
He remains upset about traffic calming on Aberdeen Avenue. He continues to falsely claim staff mislead the public regarding traffic studies regarding Aberdeen, and falsely claims staff apologized to him.
He berated staff, again, and claimed his actions are “in the context of accountability.”
Whitehead claims to be ‘fighting the good fight’, against staff.
He again specifically berated the City Clerk and the City’s Executive Director of Human Resources.
“The reality is, is that when you’re holding somebody accountable for an action … I am always the underdog … you’re doing your best to represent and hold people accountable.”
Later in the meeting, after Ward 1 Councillor Maureen Wilson and Ward 3 Councillor Nrinder Nann introduced a motion to forbid Whitehead from attending City Hall, Whitehead argued that we need to fight bullying but that he is not a bully.
“Where do you draw a line in that context of holding people accountable, versus what they call bullying? So bullying exists, and we need to fight it, no question.”
He then announced he is going back on medical leave.
“I won’t be coming back to City Hall. So this motion will not be necessary,” he stated.
The majority of Council were “uncomfortable” with sitting in judgement of their colleague, noting public pressure for them to act definitively to end Whitehead’s bullying and harassment of staff.
The Wilson/Nann motion was watered down in amendments to state that Whitehead be requested to give advance notice before attending City Hall and staff be directed to review options in response to the motion. A report will be presented at a future council meeting.
There are two remaining scheduled Council ratification meetings before August 19 when Council is expected to be declared lame-duck prior to the October 24 municipal election.
Ward 2 Clr Jason Farr noted it was “verbal harassment in both cases, not physical” and that he was “very uncomfortable when we’re talking about mental health issues in an open forum such as this, let alone the other health issues.”
He added the proposal to restrict Whitehead from City Hall was “very unorthodox. We’ve never done this before.”
Mayor Eisenberger said, “I do have some discomfort” with prohibiting Whitehead from City Hall. He acknowledged the “important requirement to provide a health and safety work environment” saying he wants a staff report.
“I would prefer that we get some advice from some of our security people and some of our HR staff,” the Mayor stated.
Clr Clark stated, “There’s an inherent power imbalance between an elected official and the civil service who work with the elected officials … When councillors walk into their office unannounced, it feels like the bosses coming in to criticize me or put me in my place or correct something that I’ve done.”
Clark said Council needs to be mindful of the legal limitations that Council cannot prevent Whitehead from exercising his rights and responsibilities as an elected official.
“We want to make sure that what we are doing is protecting our employees without getting ourselves into a legal quagmire that reverses that out and we have challenges at that point.”
Ward 11 Clr Brenda Johnson supported the amendments for a staff report, but noted if “this was any other employee with this type of background, this type of history, we would not be sitting here on this debate … this is this is case closed.”
“We all know that councillors and mayors should be held to a higher standard, but not a double standard,” Johnson stated.
Clr Partridge says her safety concerns are “very real.”
“I have not experienced this behaviour directly aimed at me before,” she stated.
“I will tell you that my concern about coming into the office is very real. As one of my colleagues mentioned, do I go to security? do I ensure that there’s always someone on the floor with me? I don’t want the confrontation.”
“Nobody should have to feel that way. And this is coming from someone who’s not easily intimidated. I just don’t want to deal with it.”
Clr Wilson said Council needed to act firmly today.
“Integrity Commissioner has found against Councillor Whitehead, and I think it is incumbent on us to uphold and affirm our confidence in our staff,” she stated. It is “our responsibility to uphold a safe workplace to ensure that that safety is afforded and accorded to all members.”
Ward 12 Clr Lloyd Ferguson said Council’s reputation is being damaged by these incidents.
“I heard a commentator … on CFRP the other day saying that Hamilton Council is terribly dysfunctional. And so why would Andrew Horwath ever want to be mayor of Hamilton?”
Clr Farr noted this report’s incidents of Whitehead bullying and harassing staff occurred in the days prior to the November 10, 2021, Council meeting on the last IC report involving Whitehead.
Farr asked Integrity Commissioner Janice Atwood-Petkovski if Whitehead has obeyed the condition passed November 10 that he only communicate with the City Manager and General Managers.
“We have not had anything of that nature brought to our attention,” Atwood-Petkovski stated.
“I guess that’s an indicator, at least, that the Councillor is respecting so far what has been his penalty to date,” Farr stated. “I can’t anticipate, especially with what he said about wanting to take a leave, that we should have any issues going forward.”
“I hope that my good friend Terry is doing okay,” Farr closed his remarks.
The Integrity Commissioners stated in their report they offered Whitehead opportunities to apologize for his misconduct. They state he declined to do so.
Clr Partridge said she would not have accepted an apology.
“There is a pattern of behaviour with this individual, and the pattern is to bully to rant to threaten and then when called out, apologize. And to me, accepting that apology is enabling the behaviour and the pattern to continue.”
Council voted 14-0 to suspend Whiteheads’ pay for a total of 45 days, representing 15 days penalty for each incident.


text:
After Denial at the Ontario Land Tribunal, Ancaster Lovers Lane Homeowner is Back Again – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 14, 2022
Back in April, I noted an unusual Ontario Land Tribunal ruling in which the OLT overturned a Committee of Adjustment minor variance approval.
In the case, 64 Lovers Lane Ancaster, the owner sought decreased lot setbacks to permit the construction of a large L-shaped home and an in-ground backyard pool on their corner lot property.
The City’s planning staff recommended approval. The CoA agreed and approved it.
Neighbours appealed to the OLT. At the OLT, the owner failed to call evidence while the neighbours hired a registered professional planner.
With the OLT denial, the owners can no longer pursue their initial plan.
This week, the owners came in front of Hamilton’s Committee of Adjustment with a small version of their original plan to seek new variances.
With the OLT denial as binding precedence, the City’s planning staff are required to recommend denial of the variances requested.
Citing the denial recommendation, the majority of members on the Committee of Adjustment indicated they would recommend denial of the new application.
The owner requested a tabling to amend their application further and negotiating with City planning staff to gain a recommendation for approval.


text:
BRIEF: New Noise Study Underway on City Centre Development Application – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 29, 2022
The owners of the City Centre Mall at 77 James Street North have commissioned a new noise study as their plans for a tall building redevelopment on the Downtown Hamilton property.
The owners, IN8 Developments, sent the City their final Site Plan application on April 4, 2022. City staff responded with comments.
Thursday, July 28, consultants were on the site completing an updated noise study.
This indicates there will be more revisions to the development plan in the coming weeks.
Noise studies are a critical component to development approvals. They determine noise mitigation requirements which is especially important for residential uses.
Once the City’s planning staff and developer reach an agreement on the Site Plan approval, it is expected minor variances will be required at the Committee of Adjustment.


text:
Toronto Arbitration Ruling Undermines HSR Union LRT Successor Rights Arguments – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 6, 2022
Who will operate Hamilton’s Light Rail Transit vehicles is a point of contention, so much so that it derailed the initial B-Line LRT agreement.
Hamilton City Council voted in October 2017 to demand the provincially funded LRT be operated by Hamilton’s local public transit agency, the Hamilton Street Railway.
The resulting delay caused a final LRT agreement to not be signed prior to the 2018 provincial election.
The Ontario Progressive Conservative Party won the 2018 provincial election, and cancelled Hamilton’s LRT the following year.
In May 2021, the federal government committed to fund 50 percent of five light rail projects in the Greater Toronto-Hamilton Area, including Hamilton’s B-Line. This revived the project, which is now moving forward.
The issue of who will operate Hamilton LRT line remains unresolved.
A new ruling from Ontario’s Labour Relations Board, involving a LRT line in Toronto, indicates Metrolinx can choose to contract private operation of LRT lines without violating the successor clauses in local transit union contracts.
Labour Relations Board Vice-Chair Patrick Kelly rejected union arguments that by replacing bus service along Eglinton Avenue in Toronto, the new provincially built LRT line is a successor service required to use TTC union employees.
“Nothing in the hands of Metrolinx (or Crosslinx or Bombardier) can be traced to the TTC, except arguably the work itself (of providing transit service) to which, as the jurisprudence makes clear, bargaining rights do not attach,” ruled Kelly.
The Eglinton LRT is the first LRT built by Ontario’s Metrolinx agency. Hamilton’s LRT will be constructed by Metrolinx using a similar private partnership model.
The TTC is operating the vehicles, but Metrolinx has contracted capital and vehicle maintenance to a private contractor, Bombardier Transportation.
The union representing TTC maintenance workers, Amalgamated Transit Union Local 113, filed a grievance against both the TTC, the Ontario Government’s Metrolinx, and the Crosslinx private partnership.
ATU 113 sought a declaration that the successor rights in its collective agreement with the TTC were violated by Bombardier conducting maintenance work on the Eglinton LRT vehicles. They argued that the LRT is a replacement service to existing TTC bus operations, and therefore the successor clauses of their collective agreement apply.
Vice-Chair Kelly determined Section 16(2) of the Metrolinx Act permits Metrolinx to operate local transit service, that while the Eglinton LRT was a previous idea of both TTC and City of Toronto planning, it is independent of the TTC.
“Metrolinx has not drawn upon the life blood of the TTC,” Kelly wrote. “Whatever benefit Metrolinx may have derived from the TTC’s initial planning and pre-work on the Eglinton Crosstown LRT, it does not constitute TTC’s business or part of its business or, metaphorically, its lifeblood.”
“Metrolinx has, independently of the TTC, overseen the creation of a transit system. Nothing in the hands of Metrolinx (or Crosslinx or Bombardier) can be traced to the TTC, except arguably the work itself (of providing transit service) to which, as the jurisprudence makes clear, bargaining rights do not attach,” Kelly ruled.
The contract between the City of Hamilton and ATU Local 107 mirrors the successor rights language of the agreement between the Toronto Transit Commission and ATU 113.
Effectively, this ruling means Metrolinx can choose who operates and who maintains Hamilton’s LRT.


text:
City Announces First “Safety Enhancement” Changes to Main and King Streets Following Deaths Earlier this Year – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 6, 2022
Hamilton’s Chief Road Official Edward Soldo writes the City is acting this summer to make Main and King Streets safer.
The changes include decreasing the number of lanes on Main Street to four from five, changing traffic light timings, allowing pedestrians advance time to begin crossing intersections before traffic, restricting right turns on red, removing rush-hour parking restrictions, and studying automated speed enforcement cameras.
However, City Hill will not implement significant pedestrian safety improvements at Hamilton’s two most dangerous intersections because slowing traffic could delay HSR public transit buses.
The changes follow a May 11, 2022 vote at City Council directing staff to act immediately to decrease the number of pedestrian deaths and fatalities along both King and Main Streets.
Hamilton recorded its 14th road fatality thus far in 2022 earlier on Tuesday, a few hours before the City released this report. 11 of the 14 fatalities involved pedestrians.
The number of pedestrian deaths per year is increasing in Hamilton. Prior to 2021, the annual number of pedestrian deaths in Hamilton averaged 5. There were 9 pedestrian deaths in 2021.
The City’s own speed data includes that speeding is the norm along Main Street. The City recorded average speed data which found cars at the 85th Percentile Speed exceeding the posted speed limits.
Along Main Street, the 85th percentile speeds recorded were:
Between Balsam Avenue and Connaught Avenue: 57 km/h
Victoria Avenue and Wellington Street: 56 km/h
Queen Street and Ray Street: 59 km/h
Hwy 403 off-ramps and Macklin Street: 75 km/h
The posted speed limit along Main Street is 50 km/h.
Soldo writes the City will repaint lane markers along Main Street between Dundurn Street and Sherman Avenue to be four lanes from the existing five lanes.
“This measure will help reduce the number of side swipe collisions throughout the corridor due to substandard lane widths and provide a pedestrian buffer adjacent to the south side sidewalk,” Soldo writes.
The repainting is “scheduled to be completed by the end of August.”
The City plans to prohibit right turns on red at all intersections along Main Street between Dundurn Street and Gage Avenue with the exception of four.
Public Works staff’s report states this pedestrian safety enhancement will cause queuing delays for public transit at the intersections of James Street, John Street, and Wellington Street. This is the reason staff will not implement turn restrictions at these intersections.
The intersection of Main Street and John Street is Hamilton’s most dangerous according to the City’s own annual collision statistics.
The annual collision report states “the intersection of John Street South and Main Street East experienced the highest number of fatal and injury collisions [across Hamilton] from 2017–2021 (28). Of the 28 collisions, none were fatal.”
Due to the frequency of collisions at the intersection, the City stopped replacing collision bollards there.
The intersection of Wellington Street and Main Street is Hamilton’s second most frequent location for collisions, with a five-year average of 26 collisions between 2017 and 2021.
Staff write they are not restricting right turns from Hughson Street South onto Main Street due to it being used primarily by construction vehicles. LiUNA is building a new tower at 75 James Street North, the construction vehicles from this project exit onto Hughson Street which is the rear of the property.
“This will make the pedestrian crossings safer as drivers will not be blocking crosswalks due to limited sight lines at many of the intersections,” Soldo writes as the reason for implementing no right turns.
Soldo’s report to Council does not include any statement regarding restricting left turns on red between one-way streets.
Soldo’s report states he will be recommending restricting right turns on red along King Street with the “exception” of “intersections with transit stop locations”. The King Street changes will be made public in August.
The City will implement leading pedestrian intervals “at all the signalized intersections along the Main and King Street corridor.”
This will allow pedestrians to begin crossing intersections before vehicles get a green signal.
The City of Toronto states this “is particularly helpful for older pedestrians, as they may take longer to occupy the crosswalk following the start of a “walk” indication, making them less obvious to turning motorists.”
Soldo’s report states the City will be adding “temporary bump outs in order to provide protection for parking along the north side of Main Street and shorten the crossing distances across intersections for pedestrians.” The locations of bump-outs are not listed in the report.
Cars will be allowed to park along Main Street’s north side during rush hours, and overnight parking will be allowed along Main Street East alongside residential neighbourhoods.
Paid parking metres will be removed “outside of the downtown core” to encourage vehicles to park along Main Street. There will be a two-hour time limit during daytime hours.  Overnight parking will be permitted.
To improve pedestrian safety for people crossing to and from City Hall, the City will “add additional 2 hour paid parking near City Hall on the north side.”
As well, paid parking will be added on both sides of Main Street between Gage Avenue and The Delta intersection where King Street and Main Street cross.
Soldo writes the City will make the pedestrian crossing in front of City Hall a “pedestrian scramble.” Soldo does not explain how a pedestrian light can be a scramble intersection. Summer’s Lane, the driveway in front of the Convention Centre, only permits one way of traffic northbound towards King Street. Cars cannot enter Main Street from Summers Lane.
Pedestrian scrambles are most easily described as four-way intersections where all vehicle traffic is stopped to allow pedestrians to cross in all directions, including diagonally.
Hamilton’s pedestrian crossing labelled as a scramble will be unique, there are no known examples of a pedestrian crossing being called a scramble.
The intersection of Yonge Street and Dundas Street is a proper scramble crossing.
Hamilton City Hall continues to reject calls for actual pedestrian scramble lights at major pedestrian crossings such as King Street and James Street or MacNab Street and York Boulevard.
Soldo writes “staff are investigating the feasibility of installing an Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE) location on Main Street.
Proposed locations include between Dundurn Street and Queen Street, Gage Avenue and The Delta, as well as along King Street between Dundurn Street and Locke Street, Emerald Street and Wellington Street, and Gage Avenue and Lottridge Street.
Soldo writes he will present ASE options to Council on August 10, 2022.
The report can be read here.


text:
City Hall Moving Forward With HVAC Renovation to Redirect Warm Exhaust Air – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 20, 2022
The City of Hamilton is moving forward with renovating City Hall’s HVAC system to discourage homeless individuals from gathering around City Hall.
Since City Hall opened in 1960, warm exhaust air has exited near the back doors of the building.
At the beginning of 2022, the City’s senior-most managers stated the warm air exhaust was attracting homeless people to loiter behind City Hall.
Using emergency delegated authorities, City Hall managers installed hoarding at the rear of City Hall, claiming that people loitering near the entrance posed a “fire hazard” and the “Fire Code” required the City to act.
Hamilton City Manager Janette Smith made unsubstantiated claims that Hamilton Police seized a firearm from a person and another person was wielding a six-foot spear.
The City could not provide details of these incidents, and the City stated they did not log the dates they occurred.
Asked about the alleged incidents, Hamilton Police stated they needed more information to search their records to confirm if they received weapons or firearms complaints at City Hall.
Hamilton Police issue press releases nearly every time they seize a firearm.
There was no press release regarding this alleged firearm.
It was not just the unsubstantiated claims that were embarrassing for City Hall.
The initial hoarding was flammable, in violation of the Fire Code. It was installed without a permit, in violation of the Building Code. The City replaced its initial hoarding.
The City has not disclosed the costs incurred installing and replacing the hoarding.
Following this, the City of Hamilton hired consultants to plan a renovation of the City Hall HVAC system.
The consultants presented some of their renovation plans to the City’s Heritage Permit Review Sub-Committee this week.
“There’s been a number of problems,” said City of Hamilton Director of Facilities Rom D’Angelo.
He stated there were “occupational health and safety problems accessing the building, as well as the overcrowding and encroaching into the doorway created a Fire Code situation.”
The City plans to move the vents to the upper portion of the external rear wall, where the warm air will “dissipated a lot a lot quicker so that there wouldn’t be that accumulation of warm air to kind of promote the gathering of folks there as Rom touched on,” said consultant Dave Thompson of WalterFedy.
The new vents will be on both sides of the rear exit area.
This will ensure the area is as cold as the surrounding environment during winter.
The Heritage Permit Committee is a Local Board under the Municipal Act, and the Act requires the City to make public all documentation presented to the Committee.
The City of Hamilton is not releasing the plans.
The Municipal Act provides no effective recourse to require municipalities to obey public document laws.
The City of Hamilton is not disclosing the cost of the renovations or the overall budget related to this project.


text:
COLEMAN: Twenty-Five Years Ago, Andrea Horwath Brought Change, Can She Do It Again – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 26, 2022
Twenty-five years ago, Hamiltonians were cleaning up from the environmental disaster that was Plastimet.
They were growing concerned that City Council was no longer looking out for ‘what is best for people’ and that a stagnant council full of decade-long career politicians who no longer fought ‘for the concerns of the community.’
Environment. Trust. An Old Guard.
As it was then, it is now.
In Downtown Hamilton’s Ward 2, residents sent their decades-long Alderman packing by a relative newcomer.
Today, she is a serious mayoral candidate.
Back then, that day’s Old Guard dismissed her.
Only two weeks before his defeat, incumbent Alderman Bill McCulloch mockingly dismissed all challengers to his reign, “I know that they are saying ‘get rid of the old people.’ Let me suggest the ward needs one person with experience. If all of sudden they were to get rid of everyone with experience, the new people wouldn’t know where the washroom is.”
The October 31, 1997 edition of The Hamilton Spectator ran that quote, with McCulloch adding, “People may want to make a decision to get rid of one of us and keep the other.”
After 31 and 25 years on Council, McCulloch and Vince Agro were defeated by 35-year-old Andrea Horwath. [Before amalgamation in 2001, the were two aldermen per ward]
“I’m hearing people really want a change at city hall. Everywhere in the ward people are saying it,” Horwath said during the campaign, and she earned her victory.
The year prior, Horwath co-chaired the committee that organized the largest march in Hamilton’s history, the February 23, 1996 Day of Action, in protest of the Progressive Conservative government of Ontario Premier Mike Harris.
Horwath was the community organizations co-chair, having earned much praise and credibility for her tenant advocacy as a community development worker at McQuesten Legal Services and as co-chair of the Hamilton-Wentworth Coalition for Social Justice.
As Ward 2 Alderman, and later Councillor post-amalgamation, Horwath represented a downtown and surrounding neighbourhoods devastated by deindustrialization, recessions, and urban decay.
Horwath leveraged the relationships she built prior to joining City Council to steer the Downtown Partnership.
Tasked to create a vision to restore Downtown, in 1998, the Partnership recommended converting one-way streets back to two-way traffic.
Horwath worked to convince a skeptical opposed Regional Council to implement the recommendation.
In 2000, during its final meeting before dissolution, Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Council passed converting James Street and John Street to two-way traffic.
Horwath continued to represent Ward 2 until 2004 when she was elected to the Provincial Parliament.
What will be her priorities as Mayor between now and 2026?
She was not answering platform questions today, prompting a CBC journalist to challenge her non-answers by stating, ” some people say that they are expecting more boldness in your opening in your introduction to this mayoral race.”
“We’re not here to announce all of the pieces of what this campaign is going to look like,” Horwath stated.
“I’m here to share with Hamiltonians that I am going to be walking across the street to file my nomination papers.”
The mayoral race is now underway.
Labour Day is already the unofficial kick-off of the “real” race, which likely is why Horwath did not answer many questions today.
She’ll have plenty of endorsements to announce during the coming weeks.
The endorsements will come from across the political spectrum.
As the late Jack MacDonald, a Progressive Conservative who served as an Alderman and Mayor, wrote in one of his 1997 columns:
“Andrea Horwath is a bright young mother who has a demonstrated concern for people. Some will wonder about her NDP background, but that does not bother me. Over the years I have found no difficulty working with NDP people: Bill Foley, Bill Scanlon, Sam Lawrence and others. A concern for a better city motivated their actions. Of course they felt obliged to sing the company song from time to time, but in the end the city came first. The best current example is Alderman Dave Wilson. No member of council is more respected for his ability and integrity. Andrea Horwath is that type of person.”
Referenced Hamilton Spectator Articles:
“Heart problems: A declining downtown and fallout from Plastimet fire top issues in Ward 2.” The Spectator, Oct 31, 1997, pp. A8
MacDonald, Jack. “10 Hamilton challengers who’d be good on council.” The Spectator, Oct 22, 1997, pp. A9.


text:
Coleman’s Notes: On Council Attendance, Standards and Fines for Missing Meetings – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 13, 2022
Hamilton’s city councillors are notoriously neglectful of their duty to show up to work on time, and remain until the job is done.
Countless meetings have been cancelled this term of office. The City’s physician recruitment program has effectively stalled as that committee did not make quorum for two years.
The inability of this council to show up to meetings and remain during them is a symptom of the underlying problems which manifest themselves in dysfunctional inefficient meetings.
It is costly in both trackable costs including staff wages, consultant and lawyer fees, and stalled projects.
Thousands of Hamiltonians are without a family doctor. Council is not doing its little part in recruiting them, for two years, the City’s Physician Recruitment Committee failed to make quorum for two years between 2019 and 2021.
Hamilton city councillors could not be bothered to bother to show up at City Hall for a year, and then could not be bothered to open their laptops working from home during the pandemic.
As then Hamilton Chamber of Commerce CEO Keanin Loomis said at the May 2021 no quorum meeting of the Physician Recruitment Committee “we need to make some decisions here and it is hard to do so when we are unable to achieve quorum.”
[The crisis in family medicine is the result of systemic problems which can only truly be solved by Queen’s Park. The need for the City to incentivize the recruitment of family doctors is arguably yet another example of provincial downloading.]
Under the Municipal Act, quorum is “a majority of members“, 50 percent plus one. In Hamilton, nine of sixteen members of Council at their full meetings.
Quorum is lower for smaller committees.
Hamilton’s City Clerk recently redefined the word “majority” to include a tie as a “majority”, lowering the threshold for quorum.
The Municipal Act does not define “majority” because it is a common word with a commonly understood meaning. Hamilton is once again the exception to the rule.
With dozens of cancelled meetings, and hundreds of meetings beginning late during this term of Council, it is little wonder some people are proposing to tie councillors’ pay to council attendance.
This is not a solution.
It is responding to a symptom. It does not address the underlying disease.
It is impractical.
The job of city councillor does not lend itself to easy performance measures.
How does one define attendance for the purposes of councillor pay? By the number of meetings attended, by the number of missings missed, by the number of votes cast, by the number of votes missed?
Every few years somebody creates a bubble chart or similar visualization noting that councillors vote together on a large (usually 90 percent or more) number of votes. Let’s take a recent meeting as an example, June 22, 2022.
There were 32 votes during this meeting. 28 of those votes were “unanimous”. Many of these can be described as “housekeeping” votes. Many of the votes occurred in short succession. In theory, a councillor could participate in hours of discussion and debate, step out to use the washroom (or some other reasons), and miss a group of quick succession votes. Meanwhile, another councillor could miss nearly all of the meeting, log in briefly for votes, and the paper record makes it appear they participated more than the other councillor.
Assigning weight to the importance of votes is extremely subjective.
Let’s use “showing up on time” as our metric. It can be consistently and easily measured at every meeting.
What happens if a councillor merely opens their laptop for a few moments at the beginning of the meeting and does not attend the remainder?
Clearly, we cannot use this measure on its own.
Do we create some sort of formula based upon all of the above? Who will enforce the formula, who will consider requests for exemption, and determine the validity of reasons such as “city business”?
Do we involve the Integrity Commissioner at their hourly billing rate?
To what purpose?
Effective representation is the true issue to be addressed.
We need to elect better city councillors. Good people who consistently show up to work.


text:
Coleman’s Notes on Keanin Loomis’ Housing Plan Announcement – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 22, 2022
Hamilton Mayoral candidate Keanin Loomis stood in front of a Stoney Creek tall building development under construction and pointed to it as an example of residential development he supports.
On a major arterial road, with 20% of the units being market affordable, the 19-storey rental building at 870 Queenston Road is adding 219 units to Hamilton’s housing mix.
“Our Homes for Hamilton plan will see us double the pace of homebuilding in Hamilton,” Loomis stated.
“That means we must build in areas that are already serviced by sewers and roads. We must deliver as many housing units as possible around critical transit nodes where people live, work, shop and play.”
Loomis’ plan has six key planks: Commit to a firm urban boundary, modernize municipal zoning by-laws to speed up homebuilding, lower the affordable housing rate, build more housing nearby transit, advocacy for federal/provincial affordable housing funding, and “being held accountable.”
During Thursday’s press event, I asked Loomis for more specifics on definitions of affordable housing and how he defines it.
He stated the City’s present definition of 125% of the average market rate as affordable “doesn’t make sense.”
As Mayor, Loomis will launch a review of the rate to modernize the definition, similar to what Toronto has done. Toronto now defines affordable based upon income percentile.
Loomis says he will consult with a range of stakeholders.
Specifically asked if this be a Housing Summit, Loomis stated, “I would only do that if it’s actually going to accomplish something.”
On Residential Zoning Reform, I noted to Loomis that a new Residential Zoning Bylaw is being presented for City Council approval in early 2023 and the foundation of the plan is already public.
City Council will vote in August on zoning reforms to allow multiplexes as-of-right in more residential zones.
I asked “What’s missing .. or what do you want to change” in the forthcoming amendments.
He stated he wants to ensure both developers and non-profits can build more easily. He will eliminate the parking requirement for secondary dwelling units, stating the City needs to provide good transit to ensure successful intensification.
On Tower Renewal, the term used for the extensive retrofits needed to residential apartment buildings which are now 50 to 60 years old, Loomis states he wants to leverage financing to enable the conversion of this housing stock to cooperative housing and ensure there is not displacement of affordable housing stock.
Loomis was asked by HCN’s Kevin Werner about tall buildings, such as the proposal at 310 Frances Avenue [the three tall buildings on the Stoney Creek waterfront] and at Eastgate Square.
Loomis stated there must be balance in development.
He is supportive of density at Eastgate Square “this is the node for the Beeline LRT. It’s the whole reason for the Beeline LRT. That’s why I have been fighting for this for pretty much more than a decade.”
“It’s to achieve exactly that,” he stated in referencing adding density along the B-Line corridor to add housing and address affordability.
He says denser developments much improve communities by creating the amenities that walkable communities need.
Loomis says people should have “within 15 minutes access, shopping, access their job, recreation,” etc.
As Mayor, he wants to hire more planners at City Hall to decrease planning application processing times, especially with coming changes to the Planning Act that will require the City to refund application fees if the City does not process files within firm deadlines.
The demand for Registered Professional Planners is very high, with the private sector able to offer higher pay than the government sector.
I asked, “how do you, as a municipal leader, within the constraints of the municipal budget, attract tap talents and planners to the City of Hamilton when competing against the private sector?”
“A City job should be a good job. It should be a job that people are proud of where they are able to contribute to their communities and also have that work-life balance that they’re trying to achieve,” Loomis stated.
Loomis says he will address the toxic work culture at Hamilton City Hall. The existing culture discourages good people from applying to work there and causes good employees to leave for other places.
“I think that you will see that there will be a lot of people willing to work for the City of Hamilton, once we have a regime change.”
In this, Loomis is correct.
Hundreds of Hamiltonians get up each day and commute to work for other municipal governments.
These Hamiltonians, some of who are registered professional planners, would love to also work in Hamilton.
Getting residential zoning reform right early in 2023, coupled with public transit expansion – including an overhaul of the HSR’s routes -, will enable housing to be built.
This will enable gentle intensification within neighbourhoods.
Loomis’ plan can work as short as it may seem on paper.
It is not that Hamilton needs a housing revolution. We need a City Hall that enables the building of new housing.


text:
Coleman’s Notes on the O-Show 100 Days Until the Election Episode – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 22, 2022
In this week’s O-Show, Laura Babcock and Graham Crawford discuss the state of Hamilton’s municipal election with just under 100 days to go until Hamiltonians go to the polls on October 24.
Keanin Loomis is running a serious campaign for the mayoral chair, Bob Bratina is registered but not yet campaigning, and Andrea Horwath is campaigning but not yet registered. There is plenty to discuss.
Crawford says Horwath should focus on the job she just campaigned for in June: Member of Provincial Parliament for Hamilton Centre.
“She’s my member of Provincial Parliament. I just voted for her again. And she just got rehired, re-elected. And then 10 minutes later, the word is she’s going to step down. She certainly stepped down as leader. But now the question is, Is she going to step down from the job we just rehire her for?” stated Crawford.
“I don’t think that is appropriate. I just don’t think you should job hop.”
Babcock’s, who has expressed similar sentiments on social media, said, “When I speak to people outside of social media. When they hear the name Andrea getting into the race, they say, Ah, good, Andrea, I know her she’s going to help with poverty, she’s going to help with affordable housing.”
People do not yet know enough about Loomis, she stated. His campaign is working hard to introduce him across the region.
Will it be enough against both Bratina and Horwath?
Will Horwath and Loomis split votes with similar visions?
Babcock and Crawford discussed the terrible toll of pedestrian fatalities on Hamilton’s roadways thus far in 2022.
Already, there are more pedestrian deaths during the first six months of 2022 than the usual average for an entire calendar.
Crawford noted that Hamilton Police Chief Frank Bergen’s reported statement the police service dedicated ‘more than 250 hours in the past year to patrolling high-risk collision intersections, along with cracking down on stunt driving and speeding’ translates to less than 45 minutes per day.
They discussed the continuing failure of Hamilton’s civic leadership to effectively address road safety issues.
Watch the episode on YouTube here.


text:
Hamilton Community Benefits Network Formally Made LRT Stakeholder – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 20, 2022
The Hamilton Community Benefits Network, a coalition group formed to ensure community voices are heard during the construction of Hamilton’s Light Rail Transit Line, is now formally an LRT “stakeholder” with a seat on the City’s Light Rail Transit Sub-Committee.
Karl Andrus of the HCBN delegated to the LRT Sub-Committee on Monday requesting City Council formally recognize HCBN.
HCBN members include labour groups, environmental organizations, community organizations, social service agencies, and community associations.
Councillors on the sub-committee unanimously, and quickly, approved the request.


text:
Hamilton Expects LRT Construction Will Begin in 2024 – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 20, 2022
Construction on Hamilton’s 14-kilometre, 17-stop B-Line Light Rail Transit Line is expected to begin in 2024.
“Metrolinx project plan is to start the procurement process sometime end of this year,” City of Hamilton LRT Director Abdul Shaikh stated Monday to City Council’s LRT Sub-Committee. In terms of major construction, they are planning to do in 2024,”
Shaikh used 2019 design plans to illustrate the route during his presentation.
The plans displayed were created prior to the fall 2019 cancellation of the LRT project when the Ontario Progressive Conservative government stated costs had inflated.
The project was revived in 2021 when the Federal Liberal Government committed to funding 50 percent of the project with the provincial government matching with 50 percent of the $3.4-billion budget.
The City’s traffic and transportation Directors state that the 2019 plans will change to reflect Council’s decision to convert Main Street to two-way traffic and the City’s new complete streets guide.
“The assignment that we’re doing for Main Street is going to take into account the … elements approved by the latest Complete Streets guideline,” stated Mike Field, Acting Director of Transportation Operations. ” We’re also forwarding some information to the consultant who’s working on the Main Street project about LRT and coordinating with [the LRT] office to make sure that those two things are integrated together.”
Field said the “intent is that partial conversion of Main Street would occur to help deal with the construction of LRT and the traffic that would be impacted on King Street during the construction.”
The Main Street conversion plan will go to City Council in early 2023, Field stated.
Converting Main Street to two-way traffic “opens a new opportunity” to “reconfigure the ramps to the 403,” said Hamilton’s Director of Transportation Planning and Parking Brian Hollingworth.
“Last week [City] staff met with MTO [Ministry of Transportation Ontario] to start broaching that topic of modifications to the 403 ramps.”
The LRT Sub-Committee will next meet in September.


text:
Joey’s Notepad: If Someone Notable Is There, I’ll Report It – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 27, 2022
After today’s Andrea Horwath campaign launch announcement, a person tweeted that her opponent Keanin Loomis had shown up at Horwath’s campaign announcement.
I was concerned. How did I miss that?
They tweeted he gave an interview to CHCH. I went to YouTube, the interview was at 8:30 a.m. and down the street from Horwath’s 9:30 a.m. announcement.
During Horwath’s announcement, I looked around the crowd on Commonwealth Square and did not see anyone I recognized from other campaigns.
Much later in the day, a few people wondered if one of the people in the background during Horwath’s announcement was former Hamilton MPP Paul Miller.
It would be quite the story if Miller were there, afterall, as Ontario NDP leader Horwath booted him from the party.
Miller was not there.
In the post-COVID age of livestreaming and routine video conferencing, I (and other journalists) show up to ensure we do not miss the stories we need to share with you.


text:
Joey’s Notepad: The Township of Zorra’s Four Day Work Week and Municipal Government – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 20, 2022
With 31 full-time staff, the Township of Zorra Ontario (pop. ~8400) is not a place one expects to be the focus of local government academics.
The Township’s four-day work week COVID pivot has generated much attention and drew the interest of York University’s Zachary Spicer and Western University’s Joseph Lyons who wrote a paper analyzing the pilot.
The paper, published this week in State and Local Government Review, details why Zorra decided to make a four-day work week permanent and discusses why doing so will help address some of the challenges facing smaller rural municipalities.
As noted by the authors, smaller municipalities cannot compete with large municipalities on compensation and must find ways to attract talent such as better work-life balance such as flexible working arrangements.
In Zorra, the compressed four day work involves a nine hour day (8:00am to 5:00pm) with only a 30-minute lunch break and one 15 minute break.
Some employees worked Monday to Thursday, others worked Tuesday to Friday.
For citizens, the Township office was open this additional hour each day.
####Could a Modified Workday Work in Hamilton to Improve Resident Services?
The City of Hamilton is having extreme difficulty filling vacant positions. [See all the jobs listed as “re-post” meaning nobody applied to the original or previous postings.]
Much of this is because Hamilton City Hall is known for its toxic work culture and qualified people do not apply.
A modified work day will not resolve the culture problem.
Hamilton City Hall, and the City’s administrative offices, all operate on a 8:30am to 4:30pm schedule. City Hall is open five days a week. Some of the other administrative offices are closed some days of the week.
The HSR ticket office, and lost and found, only operates during these hours. This means, as an example, secondary school students must take time off school to have their PRESTO cards processed by the HSR.
Could a flexible schedule, with evening hours, be a win-win for both staff and residents?
Similiarly, would opening the City’s small business centre one or two evenings per week, with staff working a four-day work week, be a similar win-win?
The Township of Zorra is limited in its ability to conduct evening hours due to having only 32 total staff to do everything from running City Hall to cutting the grass.
The City of Hamilton has over 9,000 permanent employees.


text:
Joey’s Notes: Members of Provincial Parliament, Resignation, and Municipal Elections – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 26, 2022
Hamilton Mayoral candidate Andrea Horwath has until August 19th at 2:00 p.m. to resign her seat as MPP for Hamilton Centre.
Horwath announced her candidate to be Hamilton’s next mayor earlier today. She confirmed she will resign as a MPP in the coming days.
The Municipal Elections Act states members of the Legislative Assembly can be nominated candidates, “but, if” they are still a member “as of the close of nominations on nomination day of the election, the nomination shall be rejected by the clerk.”
Nomination day is the third Friday in August. Nominations close at 2:00 p.m. that day.
The MEA was amended in 2002 and clarified this deadline. Prior to 2002, the timing was open to the intepretation of individuals municipal clerks.


text:
Joey’s Notes: Weighting Privacy in Public Planning Applications Posted by Municipalities to the Internet – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 26, 2022
Ontario’s Information and Privacy Commission is weighing in again regarding the balance between the statutory obligation of municipalities to make Planning Act applications publicly available and the considerations of privacy in making those documents available online.
A resident of Toronto applied for a building permit. The permit required minor variance approval from Toronto’s Committee of Adjustment.
All Planning Act applications are public records. Section 1.0.1 of the Planning Act states, “Information and material that is required to be provided to a municipality or approval authority under this Act shall be made available to the public.”
The City of Toronto posts full minor variance applications online, with no redaction. Applications include personal information including a persons name, address, and email.
Following the online posting, the applicant states they received ‘a barrage of unwanted calls and/or emails from unscrupulous individuals/companies contacting her about their project as well as receiving phishing emails.’
The IPC report states because the Planning Act states applications are public records, the City is not required to redact personal information.
Nonetheless, IPC Adjudicator Alanna Maloney writes municipalities should implement “data minimization principles” to avoid posting personal information online.
The City of Hamilton already redacts personal emails and phone numbers from online CoA application postings. Additionally, the City redacts personal addresses and similar information in most public meeting documents posted online.
Original, unredacted, Planning Act documents remain available upon request.
“This office has issued guidance material related to identity theft encouraging individuals to minimize the amount of information they give out, especially online, and recommended organizations not put scanned copies of signatures on their website,” Maloney reminded the City of Toronto in their report.


text:
LiUNA Files Two Non-Decision Appeals to OLT – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 25, 2022
Two developments associated with LiUNA’s development arms are going to the Ontario Land Tribunal instead of City Council for a decision – 186 Hunter Street East and LiUNA Gardens in Stoney Creek.
Ontario’s Planning Act allows developers to appeal for “non-decision” by a municipal council 120 days after filing an Official Plan Amendment application.
LiUNA’s Wellington Hamilton Non-Profit Housing Inc. project at 186 Hunter Street proposes to build a 12-storey residential building with 104 residential units.
A percentage of the 104 units will be affordable using Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation definitions. The percentage is not yet set.
LiUNA’s Fengate Liuna Gardens Holdings LP project along Lake Ontario at 526 Winona Road proposes two 24-storey residential and two 15-storey buildings along with five townhouse blocks.
In total, the Winona Road project proposes to add 1212 units of residential housing.
Development applications were filed to the City of Hamilton in January. Both non-decision appeals were filed in June, days after the 120-day appeal thresholds were met.
The City of Hamilton states the applications were under review when the appeals were filed.
The City’s planning staff had not completed the work to provide comments to the developer.
Responding to questions regarding the appeal filed for the Winona Road project, City of Hamilton Chief Planner Steve Robichaud wrote, “at this point in time, the application is considered to be premature and the City would therefore be opposed to the application.”
“In accordance with standard practice, Legal staff will be seeking instructions from Council on the appeal,” Robichaud wrote.
Large applications, such as these, usually take months to complete initial reviews. In the past, LiUNA has not filed non-appeal decisions.
The Lakewood Beach Community Council says City Council needs to create a plan to better respond to non-decision appeals.
“With the changing environment and future outlook for what will likely be more appeals of this nature, now more than ever, residents need to elect local representatives who think and act differently,” the LBCC wrote in a statement.
“We can’t continue to be reactive. Council needs a proactive plan of action.”
LiUNA’s planning agent, Matt Johnston of Urban Solutions, states that LiUNA will be informing nearby residents of the appeals.
“Notice is anticipated to go to all residents within 120m and any others who made written submissions to the City,” he stated. “The OLT will prescribe how notice of the hearing is issued.”
The OLT has not yet issued instructions.
Residents will be able to file written statements to the OLT.
Recent changes to Ontario’s Planning Act will require municipalities to refund development application fees whenever they fail to meet statutory deadline deadlines.
Hamilton City Council will vote in August on reforms to the City’s planning policies in response to the changes to the Act.
Other developers are filing similar non-decision appeals.
The developer and City both state they plan to negotiate to see if a settlement can be reached before a full contested OLT hearing.
“It is anticipated that there may discussions with the applicant to determine if a negotiated settlement is possible,” Robichaud stated.
Council is expected to discuss the appeals in closed session in the coming weeks.
The OLT file numbers for the appeals are OLT-22-004063 for 186 Hunter Street East, and OLT-22-003989 for 526 Winona Road.


text:
Public Notice for Planning Committee Hearings Decrease to 7 Days – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 14, 2022
The City of Hamilton is decreasing the public notice period for Planning Committee hearings to 7 days from the present 17 days to comply with changes to the Planning Act implemented by the Ontario Progressive Conservatives Bill 108.
Beginning January 1, 2023, municipal councils will be required to make decisions on zoning bylaw and official plan amendment applications with shorter deadlines. They must refund application fees if decisions are not made within the new deadlines.
Zoning bylaws decisions must be made within 90 days, and official plan decisions within 120 days.
City Council will formally amend the City’s planning regulations during their upcoming August 3 Planning Committee meeting with ratification scheduled the August 12 Council meeting.


text:
Red Hill Inquiry: Gary Moore Testifies on Lack of Record Keeping – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 17, 2022
The man at the centre of the Red Hill Parkway friction report scandal returned to the stand Friday for more questioning by the Inquiry Commissioner and lawyers representing various parties.
Gary Moore, the City’s now-retired Director of Engineering, led the construction of the Red Hill Valley Parkway prior to its opening as a project manager. Shortly after the Parkway opened, he was promoted to Director of Engineering.
During his time as Director, Moore received consultant reports regarding friction testing.
Thus far, the Inquiry has learned Moore did not share the reports with anyone.
Instead, over the years, Moore repeatedly asserted there were no issues with friction on the Parkway.
On Friday, day one of what is expected to be his final five days of testimony, Moore was asked about the City’s record and document management systems, what records he kept, and how records were shared.
Inquiry Commission co-lead Counsel Emily Lawrence began with simple questions to Moore.
“Can you describe what your responsibilities as director of engineering services were, as they related to the Red Hill?” she asked.
“Well, I mean, after the road was built and opened and all of the payments were complete. I mean, the office was broken up. It didn’t continue to exist. So unofficially, you know, if anyone had a question that was likely coming to me is, as the person that was most readily available, and had the longest tenure still there. ‘So can you remember this? Or where might I find that? Or? What did they do? Here was a question that arose’,” Moore responded.
“I don’t know that there was anything formally on my job description that said I had any responsibility for it. You know, other than that? Other than my, you know, obviously, my interest in it.”
Throughout the day, Moore provided vague and evasive responses to questions.
The morning questions focused on the lack of record and document systems at the City of Hamilton.
Moore testified he did not keep many records during the period of 2009 to the mid-10s, because the City of Hamilton limited email storage to 25 megabytes, and he did not have a filing cabinet in his office for physical records.
“I had to eventually get a file cabinet. But originally, for years, I only had one drawer in my desk. So I virtually kept nothing, you know,” Moore told the Inquiry.
Lawrence noted that other professional engineers who testified in front of the Inquiry kept professional notebooks.
“Some of the engineers who have given evidence in this inquiry, they have certain notebooks, and they sort of make notes of their day-to-day interactions … did you have a practice of keeping a notebook like that, where you recorded the events of the day? For example?”
Moore responded he did not keep a notebook.
“Not specifically, I did have a notebook, but it was more of a Things To Do list, you know, call somebody or send Person X a copy of this. But again, as those things got done, I mean, it was so I might have, you know, written one thing to carry over to the next week and write that on, but they weren’t something that we’re, you know, kept for any type of record.”
Moore stated repeatedly the City of Hamilton did not have robust document retention practices, and that he was regularly reminded by Information Technology of storage limits.
He provided an example of a costly record deletion.
“A student left and deleted, you know, $100,000 worth of design work” and there were no backups of the files.
Moore stated this triggered the City to implement ProjectWise software.
“We decided to set up a ProjectWise so that things couldn’t be deleted. And they didn’t reside on just one person’s computer.”
Lawrence asked Moore questions about filing sharing permissions, shared network folders within the Engineering Division, and who had access to Moore’s network folders.
Moore testified that only he had access to his Director’s folder and hard drive.
Documents provided to the Inquiry indicate that Moore held an electronic copy of the 2013 Tradewind friction report that was emailed to him.
It is the burying/cover-up of this report, revealed to the public after the 2018 municipal election, which triggered the public outcry for a full independent Inquiry.
Thus far, the evidence is that Moore did not share the report with anyone else before his retirement in May 2018.
Evidence shows Moore uploaded the Tradewind report into the City’s ProjectWise system on May 15, 2018. Moore retired as Director of Engineering on May 25.
He was immediately hired into a new position working in the City’s LRT office.
Friday’s testimony focused on the events leading up to 2013.
Moore will return to the stand on Monday to respond to more questions from the Inquiry regarding events in the years that followed.


text:
Red Hill Inquiry: Lighting, Environmental Assessments, and Gary Moore – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 17, 2022
“I just can’t recall either way. I don’t. I’m not disputing that it may have taken place, but I don’t recall.”
This is how the City of Hamilton’s retired Director of Engineering Gary Moore responded when repeatedly confronted with the testimony of others stating he told them more lighting on the Red Hill Valley Parkway was prohibited by the original Environmental Assessment.
The Red Hill Valley Parkway Inquiry is exploring the power dynamics at Hamilton City Hall that enabled the burying of a 2013 friction report.
The 2013 Tradewinds report found low friction levels along part of the Red Hill Valley Parkway. Many of these low friction areas coincided with higher than average wet weather collisions.
Moore is at the centre of the scandal.
He had the report.
Thus far, evidence shows he did not share it with any other members of City staff or City Council.
Moore repeatedly stated there were no friction issues on the highway, and at times stated the parkway’s friction exceeded that of other similar roadways.
The Inquiry has also focused on the relationship between Council direction, the City’s senior public works managers, and how managers oversee and pressure consultants to change reports.
During the time period between 2012 to 2018, Hamilton city councillors repeatedly expressed concerns about lighting on the Red Hill Valley Parkway in response to complaints from Hamiltonians who stated they could not see clearly see the parkway’s lanes at night, especially during inclement weather.
Evidence before the Inquiry states Moore told people that the original Environment Assessment for the construction of the RHVP prohibited any additional lighting on the Parkway.
This has been the testimony of numerous City of Hamilton managers and directors, including  Mike Fields.
CORRECTION: Gord McGuire has not testified yet. In audio entered into evidence, McGuire stated “Gary’s response has always been, has been an Environmental Assessment done in the original Red Hill, that barred lighting 100%,because of the influence on the natural environment. We retained CIMA, we went through every document out there, there is no there is no exclusion for lighting on those facilities.” [http://rhvpi.ca/od/Documents/HAM/HAM0054128_0001.wma at approximately 00:49:32 – 00:52:07]
During the summer of 2018, after Moore retired, other City staff discovered the 2013 friction report that Moore filed in a shared document system days before his May 25, 2018, retirement.
This led to an extensive review of Red Hill documentation as the revelation to staff that the original Environmental Assessment did not prohibit additional lighting.
The Friday afternoon questions at the Inquiry turned to what Moore told people, and why Moore either believed or told people that the original EA prohibited more lighting.
Moore was evasive in responding to questions.
Moore stated people had a different interpretation of his statements or stated he did not recall.
His statement, “I’m not disputing that it may have taken place,” is significant in this context.
Inquiry Commissioner co-lead Counsel Emily Lawrence began her lighting questioning simply.
“In 2013, what constraints, if any, did you understand existed in respect of making changes to illumination on the Red Hill?”
Lawrence had to pose the question three times before Moore responded to the question itself.
“Well, there were physical constraints, but there was also the fact that what had been installed was what had been approved under the EA. [Environmental Assessment],” Moore stated.
Lawrence followed up Moore’s answer by asking him to elaborate on physical constraints.
Moore stated the Ontario Hydro transmission lines, which pass over the highway at the Mud Street interchange, “made it difficult, if not impossible, to implement lighting in that area. They won’t allow poles under their transmission lines.”
He said the bridges along the Red Hill Parkway were another constraint.
“I’m not sure that the bridges were, were built to accommodate to light standards, you know, on the bridges or on the parapet walls or the barrier walls that separated those certain areas. So there’s, there was a lot of physical constraints in that regard.”
Lawrence repeatedly asked Moore specific questions about the Environment Assessment, did it state that the Red Hill could not have more lighting, could not have full illumination?.
Moore repeatedly tried to redirect and rephrase the question.
Lawrence pressed, “My question was specifically that the EA didn’t have anything that had grappled with the issue of full illumination and rejected it. Is that right?”
Moore responded, “There are hundreds of documents in there and letters, so I’m not sure that that’s what level it’s rejected,” before going into a lengthy listing of other things.
Lawrence tried again, “Mr. Moore, if you can focus on my question and answer my question first … if you can really listen to my question … Do you see a distinction and that distinction I’m trying to get at is an EA that approves decision point, lighting, lighting, would be different than an EA that rejects expressly, full illumination.”
Moore replied, “My understanding is that that’s not the way the EA operates.”
“Okay, I’m going to move on,” Lawrence ended the line of questioning.
The remainder of the afternoon continued with questions that Moore responded to with a combination of “I do not recall” and evasive non-answers.
Moore returns to the stand Monday morning.


text:
The 155 Podcast Questions for Hamilton City Council Candidates in Ward 10 – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 11, 2022
The Public Record is interviewing all candidates running in the 2022 Hamilton municipal election. In each race, the candidates are asked the same questions in our podcast interview.
The questions give candidates the opportunity to articulate their platform while asking them to explain how they will make decisions during the four years they hope to sit on City Council.
The questions they will be answering are listed below.
Subscribe to The 155 Podcast on Google Podcasts, iTunes, or by RSS in your favourite podcatcher.
1. Who is [NAME]?
2. Why are you running?
3. Do you live in Ward 10, Yes or No?
3a. Does it matter if one lives in the community one seeks to represent?
4. How have you contributed to your community and our city?
5. What are two of your priorities for Ward 10 and two of your priorities for Hamilton as a whole?
6. What are three skills you will bring to elected office that makes you the best choice to represent Ward 10 on Hamilton City Council?
The following preamble leads to questions regarding honesty and transparency.
Let’s presume you are elected.
During your first few weeks, you will be briefed regarding what City Hall refers to as “Confidential Matters”.
We do not know what “confidential matters” are presently being withheld from the citizens of Hamilton.
All four councillors first elected in 2018 initially voted to support the Cootes Paradise cover-up, before three of the new councillors began voting against the continuing cover-up.
The Municipal Act prohibits members of Council from releasing information the majority of Council declares “confidential”.
7. What principles and advice will help you determine what information should be confidential and what information should be made public?
The Red Hill Inquiry will issue its report early in the next term of Council.
The revelations regarding how City Hall ignored problems on the expressway and the toxic culture at City Hall which silenced good people are shocking.
8. How do you plan to review and consider the final Inquiry report when the Honourable Justice Herman J. Wilton-Siegel releases the Commission’s findings and recommendations?
9. The construction of the B-Line LRT will begin during this term of Council. It will be the largest construction project in Hamilton’s recent history. How do you plan to respond to construction challenges and opportunities?
Before we turn to land-use planning, let’s have a lighter question.
10. What is something interesting or unique within Ward 10 that you believe the rest of Hamilton should know about?
City Council decides land-use planning and zoning. It decides where housing and businesses are located, and the type of housing and businesses which are permitted in locations.
Ward 10 has and will continue to experience significant population growth.
During the past two decades, this has primarily been north of the QEW and single detached homes in the eastern portions of Stoney Creek / Winona.
The Fruitland-Winona Secondary Plan, approved a decade ago, will see further growth. Additionally, low density large lot commercial sites along Highway 8 and Barton Street are being converted to mid-rise residential, often by order of the Ontario Land Tribunal which recently approved 11-storeys on Highway 8. Growth is coming, your job as councillor is to manage it to achieve optimal outcomes within the constraints of Ontario’s defacto planning law, the Provincial Policy Statement.
There are three questions on this topic.
11. Development in Stoney Creek has been done without much thought to transit and without adding transit service. The result is growing traffic issues. What is your overall transportation management vision for Ward 10, please explain how you will achieve the vision.
12. The City of Hamilton is updating its outdated city-wide residential zoning bylaws. The primary effect of this in Ward 10 is the updating of local regulations regarding Secondary Dwelling Units.  –  Ontario’s defacto planning law permits SDUs as of right. As Ward Councillor, at times you will have to balance the requirements of the PPS with local opposition to planning proposals. What is your planning philosophy and how will you handle contentious files which we know will be approved by the Ontario Land Tribunal if City Council decides to oppose them?
13. The conversion of large commercial lots to mixed-use residential is occurring across Hamilton. Already, there are applications on Highway 8 near Millen Road and near Dewitt Road. The City is finishing sewage upgrades along Dewitt Road which are fifty percent development charge funded – this means the City must approve new development in this area. Presently, there is no City planning policy specific to commercial to mixed-use redevelopment. What is your vision for this type of redevelopment and how will you achieve that vision?
14. Road safety is a significant issue across Hamilton, including in Ward 10. What is your overall plan to address road safety, please provide three detailed specifics of your plan, and how will you respond to opposition to changes?
Turning to governance and expertise. Let’s use the idea that it takes 10,000 hours to master a skill or trade and apply it to being a municipal councillor. One person cannot be an expert in all matters which come before Council for decision.
15. How will you gain the necessary learning to be able to make informed decisions – what reading do you do, what professional development will you look for, and what types of people will you seek advice from?
16. What are two changes you will propose to improve City services?
17. What are two changes you will propose to improve quality of life in Hamilton?
18. It’s 2026, The Public Record is writing a review of the four-year Council term that is just ending. What three words do you hope we will use to describe your term on Council, and what three words do you hope will describe Council as a whole?
19. Thank you, that’s the end of the prepared questions you were sent in advance. Do you have closing remarks you wish to share?


text:
The 155 Podcast Questions for Hamilton City Council Candidates in Ward 11 – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 23, 2022
The Public Record is interviewing all candidates running in the 2022 Hamilton municipal election. In each race, the candidates are asked the same questions in our podcast interview.
The questions give candidates the opportunity to articulate their platform while asking them to explain how they will make decisions during the four years they hope to sit on City Council.
The questions they will be answering are listed below.
Subscribe to The 155 Podcast on Google Podcasts, iTunes, Spotify or by RSS in your favourite podcatcher.
1. Who is [NAME]?
2. Why are you running?
3. Do you live in Ward 11, Yes or No?
3a. Does it matter if one lives in the community one seeks to represent?
4. How have you contributed to your community and our city?
5. What are two of your priorities for Ward 11 and two of your priorities for Hamilton as a whole?
6. What are three skills you will bring to elected office that make you the best choice to represent Ward 11 on Hamilton City Council?
The following preamble leads to questions regarding honesty and transparency.
Let’s presume you are elected.
During your first few weeks, you will be briefed regarding what City Hall refers to as “Confidential Matters”.
We do not know what “confidential matters” are presently being withheld from the citizens of Hamilton.
All four councillors first elected in 2018 initially voted to support the Cootes Paradise cover-up, before three of the new councillors began voting against the continuing cover-up.
The Municipal Act prohibits members of Council from releasing information the majority of Council declares “confidential”.
7. What principles and advice will help you determine what information should be confidential and what information should be made public?
The Red Hill Inquiry will issue its report early in the next term of Council.
The revelations regarding how City Hall ignored problems on the expressway, and the toxic culture at City Hall that silenced good people, are shocking.
8. How do you plan to review and consider the final Inquiry report when the Honourable Justice Herman J. Wilton-Siegel releases the Commission’s findings and recommendations?
9. The construction of the B-Line LRT will begin during this term of Council. It will be the largest construction project in Hamilton’s recent history. How do you plan to respond to construction challenges and opportunities?
Before we turn to land-use planning, let’s have a lighter question.
10. Ward 11 is a unique ward in Hamilton, and that’s why I’m going to break from tradition and ask you to share two unique and interesting things within the ward that you think the rest of Hamilton should know about.
City Council decides land-use planning and zoning. It decides where housing and businesses are located, and the type of housing and businesses which are permitted in locations.
Ward 11 has experienced significant population growth. The growth has been in a built form that requires the use of personal automobiles to access many services as well as jobs. Responding and improving the unique built forms of Mount Hope, Binbrook, and Glanbrook, while supporting agriculture and ensuring employment at the Airport, makes Ward 11 a complex ward to lead.
Growth is going to continue; your job as councillor is to manage it to achieve optimal outcomes within the constraints of Ontario’s defacto planning law, the Provincial Policy Statement.
There are three questions on this topic.
11. Decades ago, the Region of Hamilton-Wentworth struck a deal with developers to have them fund sewage services to the Glanbrook landfill in exchange for permissions to develop what is Binbrook today. There are growing demands for services in the community of Binbrook, but for many of those services, the population falls just short. This means, at present, people must travel by personal automobile to shops and services, students must travel by school bus to school, etc.
What are your planning goals for Binbrook during the coming term of Council, and how will you achieve them?
12. Mount Hope is experiencing similar challenges resulting from growth, and along Highway 6, the challenges of sprawl which has significantly increased traffic in recent years. The Airport is growing both its passenger and cargo operations.
What are your planning goals for Mount Hope and surrounding communities during the coming term of Council, and how will you achieve them?
13. The City of Hamilton is updating its outdated city-wide residential zoning bylaws. The primary effect of this in Ward 11 is updating local regulations regarding Secondary Dwelling Units. – Ontario’s defacto planning law permits SDUs as of right. As Ward Councillor, at times, you will have to balance the requirements of the PPS with local opposition to planning proposals. What is your planning philosophy, and how will you handle contentious files which we know will be approved by the Ontario Land Tribunal if City Council decides to oppose them?
14. Road safety is a significant issue across Hamilton, including in Ward 11. As an example, there have been numerous serious injury and fatal collisions along Upper James within the Ward.
What is your overall plan to address road safety, please provide three detailed specifics of your plan, and how will you respond to opposition to changes?
Turning to governance and expertise. Let’s use the idea that it takes 10,000 hours to master a skill or trade and apply it to being a municipal councillor. One person cannot be an expert in all matters which come before Council for decision.
15. How will you gain the necessary learning to be able to make informed decisions – what reading do you do, what professional development will you look for, and what types of people will you seek advice from?
16. What are two changes you will propose to improve City services?
17. What are two changes you will propose to improve quality of life in Hamilton?
18. It’s 2026. The Public Record is writing a review of the four-year Council term that is just ending. What three words do you hope we will use to describe your term on Council, and what three words do you hope will describe Council as a whole?
19. Thank you, that’s the end of the prepared questions you were sent in advance. Do you have closing remarks you wish to share?


text:
The 155 Podcast Questions for Hamilton City Council Candidates in Ward 14 – TPR Hamilton | Hamilton's Civic Affairs News Site

July 11, 2022
The Public Record is interviewing all candidates running in the 2022 Hamilton municipal election. In each race, the candidates are asked the same questions in our podcast interview.
The questions give candidates the opportunity to articulate their platform while asking them to explain how they will make decisions during the four years they hope to sit on City Council.
The questions they will be answering are listed below.
Subscribe to The 155 Podcast on Google Podcasts, iTunes, Spotify or by RSS in your favourite podcatcher.
1. Who is [NAME]?
2. Why are you running?
3. Do you live in Ward 14, Yes or No?
3a. Does it matter if one lives in the community one seeks to represent?
4. How have you contributed to your community and our city?
5. What are two of your priorities for Ward 14 and two of your priorities for Hamilton as a whole?
6. What are three skills you will bring to elected office that makes you the best choice to represent Ward 14 on Hamilton City Council?
The following preamble leads to questions regarding honesty and transparency.
Let’s presume you are elected.
During your first few weeks, you will be briefed regarding what City Hall refers to as “Confidential Matters.”
We do not know what “confidential matters” are presently being withheld from the citizens of Hamilton.
All four councillors first elected in 2018 initially voted to support the Cootes Paradise cover-up, before three of the new councillors began voting against the continuing cover-up.
The Municipal Act prohibits members of Council from releasing information the majority of Council declares “confidential.”
7. What principles and advice will help you determine what information should be confidential and what information should be made public?
The Red Hill Inquiry will issue its report early in the next term of Council.
The revelations regarding how City Hall ignored problems on the expressway and the toxic culture at City Hall, which silenced good people are shocking.
8. How do you plan to review and consider the final Inquiry report when the Commission releases its findings and recommendations?
9. The construction of the B-Line LRT will begin during this term of Council. It will be the largest construction project in Hamilton’s recent history. How do you plan to respond to construction challenges and opportunities?
Before we turn to land-use planning, let’s have a lighter question.
10. What is something interesting or unique within Ward 14 that you believe the rest of Hamilton should know about?
City Council decides land-use planning and zoning. It decides where housing and businesses are located, and the type of housing and businesses which are permitted in locations.
There are two questions on this topic:
11. The City of Hamilton is updating its outdated residential zoning bylaws. The zoning bylaws across Ward 14 are now decades old and do not conform with the Provincial Policy Statement – Ontario’s defacto planning law. With outdated zoning, the City of Hamilton is unable to present a principled planning position in front of the Ontario Land Tribunal. The new zoning, if compliant with the Policy Statement, will return local control over planning. What is your vision, and how will you achieve it?
12. Large commercial plaza sites are converting into mixed-use mid-rise development across Hamilton. There was one formal consultation conceptual plan submitted for a Meadowlands Plaza. At present, there is no City planning policy specific to commercial to mixed-use redevelopment. What is your vision for this type of redevelopment, and how will you achieve that vision?
13. Road safety is a significant issue in Ward 14, with numerous pedestrian deaths in recent years which have shocked and saddened the community. What is your plan to address road safety? Please provide three detailed specifics of your plan.
Turning to governance and expertise. Let’s use the idea that it takes 10,000 hours to master a skill or trade and apply it to being a municipal councillor. One person cannot be an expert in all matters which come before Council for decision.
14. How will you gain the necessary learning to be able to make informed decisions – what reading do you do, what professional development will you look for, and what types of people will you seek advice from?
15. What are two changes you will propose to improve City services?
16. What are two changes you will propose to improve quality of life in Hamilton?
It’s 2026, The Public Record is writing a review of the four-year Council term that is just ending.
17. What three words do you hope we will use to describe your term on Council, and what three words do you hope will describe Council as a whole?
18. Thank you, that’s the end of the prepared questions you were sent in advance. Do you have closing remarks you wish to share?