Most people know that Milton is still the fastest growing community in Canada. And there are probably only a few who aren't aware that the Milton District Hospital is under-served, under-funded, and too small to serve a community which now sits at 90,000.
Despite awareness programs and a petition to the provincial government whose job it is to fund hospitals, we have yet to see any funds come to Milton for hospital expansion.
The province's share of hospital capital costs is 90%, conditional upon the hospital's commitment to the other 10% plus 100% of costs for beds and equipment. Millions and millions of dollars.
A motion came to the May council meeting asking town staff to look for alternative ways to fund the necessary funding shortfall. That report is due at the June 28 council meeting.
I look forward to hearing what my fellow councillors and the public have to say but initial feedback from the community on this matter is concerning me.
Milton Hospital doesn't serve Miltonians exclusively. Some people are referred from Halton Hills, some from Oakville, some from outlying areas.
Given that hospital care is provided regionally through Halton Healthcare Services, any proposed surtax should also be regional in nature. It stands to reason that the matter should be dealt with by Halton Regional Council rather than Milton Council.
This is a matter for which I will push hard at Regional Council when I am elected Regional Councillor this fall.
Let me know your thoughts.
Jan
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Milton and Multiculturalism
Further to the topic of the infamous Notice of Motion, there is little I can add to what Mike Grimwood has said below.
Although a probable mis-attribution, the Motion quotes Edmund Burke (more likely Leo Tolstoy in his book "War and Peace"), as saying "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing". If we sweep this under the rug, if don't speak to it, this evil will triumph.
I was born in New Zealand and to think that the country of my birth was lumped in as a moral and political cesspool offended me deeply. I know my feelings are shared by other New Canadians, one of whom said he was sickened when he read that Motion. He couldn't even discuss it with his wife, he had her read it for herself.
When I, and others, became citizens of Canada, we took the following oath: "I swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfill my duties as a Canadian citizen."
I am proud to be a Canadian, and I am proud to be have been elected to serve my community, the residents of the Town of Milton.
Although a probable mis-attribution, the Motion quotes Edmund Burke (more likely Leo Tolstoy in his book "War and Peace"), as saying "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing". If we sweep this under the rug, if don't speak to it, this evil will triumph.
I was born in New Zealand and to think that the country of my birth was lumped in as a moral and political cesspool offended me deeply. I know my feelings are shared by other New Canadians, one of whom said he was sickened when he read that Motion. He couldn't even discuss it with his wife, he had her read it for herself.
When I, and others, became citizens of Canada, we took the following oath: "I swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfill my duties as a Canadian citizen."
I am proud to be a Canadian, and I am proud to be have been elected to serve my community, the residents of the Town of Milton.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Milton and Multiculturalism
To get some background on this issue, it's important to read a proposed Notice of Motion which came to council May 16 and which was subsequently declared Out of Order by the mayor. Click here for the link.
Mike Grimwood was one of two registered delegates, who, due to the mayor's ruling was unable to speak. I have been given permission to print his presentation here. His is first, then Joanna Matthews'. She is Executive Director, Halton Multicultural Council.
Delegation to Council, May 17, 2010
Re: Councillor day’s Notice of Motion
I understand that this Notice of Motion is not being voted on today, but may be considered for the September 27th Council meeting. I believe the impetus and content of the motion is sufficiently unfriendly and important, that an immediate response is required.
In my considered opinion, the spirit which animates this notice of motion, as evidenced in the correspondence accompanying it, is abhorrent; the notion and intent of the motion itself is odious and offensive, and the rationale behind the motion, if one is so generous as to give it that credence, is so deeply flawed that it is without any merit whatsoever.
The motion attacks a fundamental democratic right enshrined in Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedom – “Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly” .
Canadian citizens can vote without threat of coercion or exclusion by the state or political factions or politicians themselves – this is one of the greatest strengths of Canadian democracy, and it cannot be abandoned, ignored or brushed aside, which, as I see it, this motion demanding.
The loyalty of Canadians to their Parliamentary democracy is not displayed through the cheap political trick of a signed piece of paper – simply coming out to vote shows that people believe in the Canadian Parliamentary system and are loyal to Canada’s principles. This motion suggests we should be putting more barriers and hindrances to this expression of support and loyalty. What absolute rot!
By happenstance, I am now reading a book from Milton’s public library – The Pursuit of Glory, Europe 1648-1815, by Tim Blanning (Viking). I had come upon a section dealing with the reaction of European craft guilds to changes in Europe in the 18th century, and when I read the correspondence which accompanies this reprehensible notice of motion, that section came back to me with references made in this correspondence:
“many (guilds) were showing all the negative conservatism of a vested interest overtaken by events: dogged devotion to old techniques (an “oath of loyalty” perhaps?), suspicion of innovation “kangaroo courts known as human rights commissions” perhaps?), resentment of competition (“native sentencing circles” perhaps?) and xenophobia (“multiculturalism”, perhaps?). They were particularly determined to confine guild membership to “their kind of people”.
I leave it you to determine if you find parallels between the 18th century and now.
Much as this motion and the accompanying correspondence disgust me, though, I’m glad it has been brought forward. Certainly, I have a better understanding of the author and his views of Canada and Parliamentary democracy, voting rights and the second freedom enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Certainly, it is better to bring these issues to the fore, rather than letting them fester like maggots in a wound. As the onetime president of the University of Chicago opined – “ A civilization in which there is not a continuous controversy about the important issues is on the way to totalitarianism and death”.
The notion to impose a totalitarian measure such as a mandatory oath of loyalty as a condition of voting eligibility is an important issue, and, no matter that I believe it is a reprehensible, odious and anti-democratic suggestion, it needs to be debated, if only to reaffirm the pre-eminence of democratic principles in Canadian governance.
So too should there be debate on our judicial system. We have seen the current federal government adopt a “lex regia” approach, as expounded in the code of Justinian – “quod principi placuit, legis habet vigorem” – the will of the prince has the force of law. The current government clearly, to my mind, believes it has the force of law in its hands, rather than Parliament, and believes its ideology should be paramount. This is another matter which goes right to the heart of Canadian Parliamentary democracy, and though I totally disagree with the government, and am committed to the pre-eminence of Parliament, freedom of opinion takes precedence, and the matter should be debated.
The suggestion though, that countries such as the United States, Great Britain, Japan, South Korea, Poland, countries which are our allies in the war against terror, and every other democratic country in the world, are “cesspools” is not something for debate. The suggestion that the citizens of these countries – citizens of many who are fighting against terrorism on behalf of Canadians as well as their own country-people – are the dregs and sewage of humanity is grotesque and appalling. It is greatly reminiscent of the spirit of the Nazi superior Aryan race credo – a worthless, unfounded credo which one would have hoped had been confined forever to the dustbins of history. Sadly, this spirit has been resurrected – it is an infamy, and it should be treated with absolute contempt and dismissed back to oblivion and opprobrium.
Michael Grimwood
Milton, Ontario
And here is Joanna Matthews' presentation...
My name is Joanna Matthews and I am the Executive Director of a charitable organization whose mission is to enable every individual regardless of race or ethnic origin to participate as full and active members of this community by fostering mutual respect and understanding. We are a full service settlement organization and we assist newcomers who choose Halton as their home.
When I first worked for the Halton Multicultural Council, my job was to provide anti-discrimination workshops within the Region of Halton Schools. As an icebreaker activity, I would always ask the children to stand and then be seated only when the scenario applied to their family. We would start with anyone who was born outside of Canada…please have a seat…next anyone whose parents were born outside Canada, take a seat…next grandparents, great grandparents…and so on until only those who were native Canadian, our aboriginal people were left standing. This activity established for all that at some time in their family’s history they had been a newcomer to this land.
Our last Canadian Census demonstrated that Canada is more dependent than ever on immigration, as we are not repopulating ourselves at a rate that will sustain the population growth needed for our economic development. Knowing this we see the evolution of our country’s history that moves from a selective or exclusive immigration policy to a more inclusive immigration policy.
To this end, Canada also ensured that all Canadians were recognized for their uniqueness and cultural diversity. During the 1970s, Multiculturalism was introduced as a way to recognize this growing cultural diversity. This became entrenched into official policy in Canada’s Constitution Act 1982.
In 1988, Canada further protected Cultural Diversity through the Preservation and Enhancements known as the Canadian Multiculturalism Act (1988). It acknowledges the rights of all ethnic groups in Canada to preserve and share their unique cultural heritage. It also guarantees equal opportunity for Canadians of all origins.
Many of us here today know someone from any number of ethnic groups, faith communities, countries of origin, genders, sexual orientations that work hard, play by the rules, are good family people, are faithful and law-abiding good citizens of Canada.
Many of us here today know someone from any number of ethnic groups, faith communities, countries of origin, genders, sexual orientations who are deceitful, do not play by the rules, are unethical and hurtful.
Many of us here today hold bias and prejudice in our hearts. Some is based on our experiences, what we have heard from others or from the media, but it is the broad sweeping brush that paints an entire group of people in one light that becomes problematic for Milton. In addition, it is a person who is in a position of power, such as you, town councillors, who have a duty to be rational, reasonable, fair and just in the face of fear mongering that could become problematic for Milton.
This statement of Request presented here today is unnecessary because it already exists. It is called the Oath of Citizenship and it is a legally binding oral and written contract intended to ensure that new Canadian citizens promise to obey the laws and customs of their new country, fulfill their duties as citizens, and recognize the authority of the monarch and the personification of various entities and concepts.
It states…..
I swear / affirm that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to her Majesty “Queen Elizabeth” Queen of Canada, her Heirs and successors and I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfill my duties as a Canadian Citizen.
Many schools and communities in Canada host citizenship ceremonies allowing present day Canadians the opportunity to reaffirm their own commitment to Canada, while new Canadians take theirs for the first time. With that said, I respectfully request that Council not move this item forward.
Thank you,
Joanna Matthews
Mike Grimwood was one of two registered delegates, who, due to the mayor's ruling was unable to speak. I have been given permission to print his presentation here. His is first, then Joanna Matthews'. She is Executive Director, Halton Multicultural Council.
Delegation to Council, May 17, 2010
Re: Councillor day’s Notice of Motion
I understand that this Notice of Motion is not being voted on today, but may be considered for the September 27th Council meeting. I believe the impetus and content of the motion is sufficiently unfriendly and important, that an immediate response is required.
In my considered opinion, the spirit which animates this notice of motion, as evidenced in the correspondence accompanying it, is abhorrent; the notion and intent of the motion itself is odious and offensive, and the rationale behind the motion, if one is so generous as to give it that credence, is so deeply flawed that it is without any merit whatsoever.
The motion attacks a fundamental democratic right enshrined in Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedom – “Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly” .
Canadian citizens can vote without threat of coercion or exclusion by the state or political factions or politicians themselves – this is one of the greatest strengths of Canadian democracy, and it cannot be abandoned, ignored or brushed aside, which, as I see it, this motion demanding.
The loyalty of Canadians to their Parliamentary democracy is not displayed through the cheap political trick of a signed piece of paper – simply coming out to vote shows that people believe in the Canadian Parliamentary system and are loyal to Canada’s principles. This motion suggests we should be putting more barriers and hindrances to this expression of support and loyalty. What absolute rot!
By happenstance, I am now reading a book from Milton’s public library – The Pursuit of Glory, Europe 1648-1815, by Tim Blanning (Viking). I had come upon a section dealing with the reaction of European craft guilds to changes in Europe in the 18th century, and when I read the correspondence which accompanies this reprehensible notice of motion, that section came back to me with references made in this correspondence:
“many (guilds) were showing all the negative conservatism of a vested interest overtaken by events: dogged devotion to old techniques (an “oath of loyalty” perhaps?), suspicion of innovation “kangaroo courts known as human rights commissions” perhaps?), resentment of competition (“native sentencing circles” perhaps?) and xenophobia (“multiculturalism”, perhaps?). They were particularly determined to confine guild membership to “their kind of people”.
I leave it you to determine if you find parallels between the 18th century and now.
Much as this motion and the accompanying correspondence disgust me, though, I’m glad it has been brought forward. Certainly, I have a better understanding of the author and his views of Canada and Parliamentary democracy, voting rights and the second freedom enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Certainly, it is better to bring these issues to the fore, rather than letting them fester like maggots in a wound. As the onetime president of the University of Chicago opined – “ A civilization in which there is not a continuous controversy about the important issues is on the way to totalitarianism and death”.
The notion to impose a totalitarian measure such as a mandatory oath of loyalty as a condition of voting eligibility is an important issue, and, no matter that I believe it is a reprehensible, odious and anti-democratic suggestion, it needs to be debated, if only to reaffirm the pre-eminence of democratic principles in Canadian governance.
So too should there be debate on our judicial system. We have seen the current federal government adopt a “lex regia” approach, as expounded in the code of Justinian – “quod principi placuit, legis habet vigorem” – the will of the prince has the force of law. The current government clearly, to my mind, believes it has the force of law in its hands, rather than Parliament, and believes its ideology should be paramount. This is another matter which goes right to the heart of Canadian Parliamentary democracy, and though I totally disagree with the government, and am committed to the pre-eminence of Parliament, freedom of opinion takes precedence, and the matter should be debated.
The suggestion though, that countries such as the United States, Great Britain, Japan, South Korea, Poland, countries which are our allies in the war against terror, and every other democratic country in the world, are “cesspools” is not something for debate. The suggestion that the citizens of these countries – citizens of many who are fighting against terrorism on behalf of Canadians as well as their own country-people – are the dregs and sewage of humanity is grotesque and appalling. It is greatly reminiscent of the spirit of the Nazi superior Aryan race credo – a worthless, unfounded credo which one would have hoped had been confined forever to the dustbins of history. Sadly, this spirit has been resurrected – it is an infamy, and it should be treated with absolute contempt and dismissed back to oblivion and opprobrium.
Michael Grimwood
Milton, Ontario
And here is Joanna Matthews' presentation...
My name is Joanna Matthews and I am the Executive Director of a charitable organization whose mission is to enable every individual regardless of race or ethnic origin to participate as full and active members of this community by fostering mutual respect and understanding. We are a full service settlement organization and we assist newcomers who choose Halton as their home.
When I first worked for the Halton Multicultural Council, my job was to provide anti-discrimination workshops within the Region of Halton Schools. As an icebreaker activity, I would always ask the children to stand and then be seated only when the scenario applied to their family. We would start with anyone who was born outside of Canada…please have a seat…next anyone whose parents were born outside Canada, take a seat…next grandparents, great grandparents…and so on until only those who were native Canadian, our aboriginal people were left standing. This activity established for all that at some time in their family’s history they had been a newcomer to this land.
Our last Canadian Census demonstrated that Canada is more dependent than ever on immigration, as we are not repopulating ourselves at a rate that will sustain the population growth needed for our economic development. Knowing this we see the evolution of our country’s history that moves from a selective or exclusive immigration policy to a more inclusive immigration policy.
To this end, Canada also ensured that all Canadians were recognized for their uniqueness and cultural diversity. During the 1970s, Multiculturalism was introduced as a way to recognize this growing cultural diversity. This became entrenched into official policy in Canada’s Constitution Act 1982.
In 1988, Canada further protected Cultural Diversity through the Preservation and Enhancements known as the Canadian Multiculturalism Act (1988). It acknowledges the rights of all ethnic groups in Canada to preserve and share their unique cultural heritage. It also guarantees equal opportunity for Canadians of all origins.
Many of us here today know someone from any number of ethnic groups, faith communities, countries of origin, genders, sexual orientations that work hard, play by the rules, are good family people, are faithful and law-abiding good citizens of Canada.
Many of us here today know someone from any number of ethnic groups, faith communities, countries of origin, genders, sexual orientations who are deceitful, do not play by the rules, are unethical and hurtful.
Many of us here today hold bias and prejudice in our hearts. Some is based on our experiences, what we have heard from others or from the media, but it is the broad sweeping brush that paints an entire group of people in one light that becomes problematic for Milton. In addition, it is a person who is in a position of power, such as you, town councillors, who have a duty to be rational, reasonable, fair and just in the face of fear mongering that could become problematic for Milton.
This statement of Request presented here today is unnecessary because it already exists. It is called the Oath of Citizenship and it is a legally binding oral and written contract intended to ensure that new Canadian citizens promise to obey the laws and customs of their new country, fulfill their duties as citizens, and recognize the authority of the monarch and the personification of various entities and concepts.
It states…..
I swear / affirm that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to her Majesty “Queen Elizabeth” Queen of Canada, her Heirs and successors and I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfill my duties as a Canadian Citizen.
Many schools and communities in Canada host citizenship ceremonies allowing present day Canadians the opportunity to reaffirm their own commitment to Canada, while new Canadians take theirs for the first time. With that said, I respectfully request that Council not move this item forward.
Thank you,
Joanna Matthews
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
At the council table - May 10, 2010
On the council agenda last night:
• Official Plan Review.
• Boyne Survey Secondary Plan.
• Intensification Study
• Staff and council salary increase
Official Plan will go to council June 14 for ratification and forwarding on to the Region for approval. However, they can do nothing with it until such as the province approves the Region’s Official Plan Amendment (ROPA 38). So, until that time we live with our current existing plan.
Boyne Survey draft secondary plan, basically still a concept plan, was approved. This will bring a further 50,000 people to Milton. This plan has been in our future for 10 years now. Still to come: financial reports, staging/phasing arrangements, sub-watershed reports, etc., before a shovel ever goes in the ground – expected in spring of 2013 – providing there are no OMB appeals to hold things up.
Intensification Study follow-up report provided more detail on a number of issues. The addition of public art in the public realm; Urban Design Guidelines; density and height bonusing; pre-zoning (the ability to do so, so newcomers will know what is in store on neighbouring properties); height of new buildings on the north side of Main Street (near Thompson) and the stepping back of multi-storey buildings from the street to create a better relationship between one-two storey buildings across the road.
The Staff and Salary increase report proposed a 2% across the board for non-unionized employees and council. For councillors it amounted to $43.33 per month. Milton council is the lowest paid in the GTA .
There are some who say council shouldn’t vote for it’s own pay increase but as I’ve said before, under the municipal act council is responsible for every single action of the town. There is no one else who can vote for a councillor increase except the voter at election time.
As to employees, reviews are annual, and with an across the board increase of 2% it’s barely covering the cost of living increase. Town employees are not unionized and if we let them slip compared to other towns/cities, we stand to lose the ground we have. Our employees are well-trained and well regarded by other municipalities. I had no problem supporting the 2% increase. There are two unions at the town – IBEW (2.5% increase effective March) and Fire (3%, also effective March), I think it makes little sense to withhold an increase to the rest of Milton’s permanent and part time employees.
back to council increases – there was a public group assigned a number of years ago to address council pay because council dragged so far behind other comparable municipalities. It was out of that committee that was the current format of increases geared to town staff annual increase came to be.
In an election year, you can expect anything to happen. And it does. And it did.
We met from 6:30pm yesterday and I got home at 11:30. We covered a lot of ground.
• Official Plan Review.
• Boyne Survey Secondary Plan.
• Intensification Study
• Staff and council salary increase
Official Plan will go to council June 14 for ratification and forwarding on to the Region for approval. However, they can do nothing with it until such as the province approves the Region’s Official Plan Amendment (ROPA 38). So, until that time we live with our current existing plan.
Boyne Survey draft secondary plan, basically still a concept plan, was approved. This will bring a further 50,000 people to Milton. This plan has been in our future for 10 years now. Still to come: financial reports, staging/phasing arrangements, sub-watershed reports, etc., before a shovel ever goes in the ground – expected in spring of 2013 – providing there are no OMB appeals to hold things up.
Intensification Study follow-up report provided more detail on a number of issues. The addition of public art in the public realm; Urban Design Guidelines; density and height bonusing; pre-zoning (the ability to do so, so newcomers will know what is in store on neighbouring properties); height of new buildings on the north side of Main Street (near Thompson) and the stepping back of multi-storey buildings from the street to create a better relationship between one-two storey buildings across the road.
The Staff and Salary increase report proposed a 2% across the board for non-unionized employees and council. For councillors it amounted to $43.33 per month. Milton council is the lowest paid in the GTA .
There are some who say council shouldn’t vote for it’s own pay increase but as I’ve said before, under the municipal act council is responsible for every single action of the town. There is no one else who can vote for a councillor increase except the voter at election time.
As to employees, reviews are annual, and with an across the board increase of 2% it’s barely covering the cost of living increase. Town employees are not unionized and if we let them slip compared to other towns/cities, we stand to lose the ground we have. Our employees are well-trained and well regarded by other municipalities. I had no problem supporting the 2% increase. There are two unions at the town – IBEW (2.5% increase effective March) and Fire (3%, also effective March), I think it makes little sense to withhold an increase to the rest of Milton’s permanent and part time employees.
back to council increases – there was a public group assigned a number of years ago to address council pay because council dragged so far behind other comparable municipalities. It was out of that committee that was the current format of increases geared to town staff annual increase came to be.
In an election year, you can expect anything to happen. And it does. And it did.
We met from 6:30pm yesterday and I got home at 11:30. We covered a lot of ground.
Sunday, May 9, 2010
Library Chat
Let ‘s talk about the library.
With shovels already in the ground, the subject of the Bruce Street Library closing has received a lot of press.
There are two aspects to the concerns expressed by the public:
1. The perceived closing of ‘another’ service in the Downtown Milton area; and
2. It is a blow for seniors dependent on the library being in the neighbourhood.
3. I could add, speaking for north rural residents, the new location will be even further away for them.
With respect to “another” service leaving the downtown area, many link the library to Quality Greens’ closing. These are two distinct issues. One private (Quality Greens) and the other public – the library. While I’m on the subject, I would have preferred an A & E Centre/Central Library complex to be closer to the town hall creating a true civic centre, something that would have brought people downtown instead of sending them east.
Regardless, the writing on the wall was writ by the council sitting prior to the 2003 elections. While the disposition of the current library property has yet to be determined, it will be the subject of public consultations, which will begin shortly.
Many people favour, at the very minimum, a library pick up/drop off site in the area. This will entail a cost: will council support that cost? Given there has been no support from this council or previous ones, to even extend the hours of operation, in fact, the library board was forced to cut costs by closing the Beaty Branch at 8pm, it remains to be seen what a new council will do. Using volunteers is not an option as Library staff is unionized.
Justifications for moving out of Bruce Street, are:
• Insufficient parking
• Insufficient room for programs
• Inefficient and costly building maintenance
• too close to the new central library for effective service to the public, over-servicing one area
• Lack of accessibility – a huge consideration and cost given the imposition of new provincial legislation.
Some people have suggested the Bruce Street site be used for a new Seniors’ Centre but with over 800 members, and programs running daily, I doubt very much that there would be sufficient room.
We will have to await the consultant’s findings. In the meantime, let's chat.
With shovels already in the ground, the subject of the Bruce Street Library closing has received a lot of press.
There are two aspects to the concerns expressed by the public:
1. The perceived closing of ‘another’ service in the Downtown Milton area; and
2. It is a blow for seniors dependent on the library being in the neighbourhood.
3. I could add, speaking for north rural residents, the new location will be even further away for them.
With respect to “another” service leaving the downtown area, many link the library to Quality Greens’ closing. These are two distinct issues. One private (Quality Greens) and the other public – the library. While I’m on the subject, I would have preferred an A & E Centre/Central Library complex to be closer to the town hall creating a true civic centre, something that would have brought people downtown instead of sending them east.
Regardless, the writing on the wall was writ by the council sitting prior to the 2003 elections. While the disposition of the current library property has yet to be determined, it will be the subject of public consultations, which will begin shortly.
Many people favour, at the very minimum, a library pick up/drop off site in the area. This will entail a cost: will council support that cost? Given there has been no support from this council or previous ones, to even extend the hours of operation, in fact, the library board was forced to cut costs by closing the Beaty Branch at 8pm, it remains to be seen what a new council will do. Using volunteers is not an option as Library staff is unionized.
Justifications for moving out of Bruce Street, are:
• Insufficient parking
• Insufficient room for programs
• Inefficient and costly building maintenance
• too close to the new central library for effective service to the public, over-servicing one area
• Lack of accessibility – a huge consideration and cost given the imposition of new provincial legislation.
Some people have suggested the Bruce Street site be used for a new Seniors’ Centre but with over 800 members, and programs running daily, I doubt very much that there would be sufficient room.
We will have to await the consultant’s findings. In the meantime, let's chat.
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Building new schools in Milton
Posted on February 13th, 2010, by Jan at http://www.janmowbray.ca/
School lands. School lands are set aside by the town through the planning exercise – so many per expected population per area. There are quite a few planned. Schools are planned next to parks and trails for the benefit of children and the neighbourhood at large.
All lands are privately owned, most likely by a developer. The school board negotiates the purchase of the lands from the developer. The province will not build any new schools until the current ones are at capacity (or overcrowded), and have the required enrollment for a new school.
It’s the school board's job to force the issue. From my understanding the Halton School Board has a done a good job in that regard as several schools are set to be built in Milton.
The province has a per capita dollar amount for schools. To any suggestion that the town buy the land and hand it over to the school board makes no sense. Taxpayers already pay an education tax (a big portion of our property tax bill) and to expect the town of Milton to raise tax money to buy land to hand over to the school boards wouldn’t lower the education tax – it would result in a double tax whammy - and wouldn't result in a new school anyway until after the enrollment requirement is met.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)