“I would like to thank the Greenspace Alliance for the hard work they do to protect our City’s environment. I am pleased to respond to your letter asking for support on four environmental and greenspace propositions. I support all four.
1. Support for a strong site alteration by-law, with emphasis on “strong.”
Yes. We have lost too many natural landscapes and woodlots over the past few years to clear-cutting for developments, often as proactive moves by developers to avoid limits on their future development plans. Having protection for landscapes as a future goal in the Official Plan is not the same as actually doing something. The City cannot simply pay lip service to protecting forested land. They must actually pass the bylaw they have been promising since 2003. As Councillor, I would strongly support enacting a site alteration bylaw. It needs to be enforceable and enforced, with penalties for violations that are substantial enough to act as effective deterrents. Similarly, the urban tree bylaw needs to be strengthened to actually protect significant trees in the urban area. I want action, not symbolic gestures, to protect our green spaces, woodlots, and trees.
2. Renewed commitment to an annual allocation towards an environmental lands acquisition fund.
Yes. The environmental lands acquisition fund should be for buying environmentally-sensitive land and only for that. It should be adequately funded, and not raided for other needs. One of the things I am most concerned about is the lack of transparency and true consultation to set the priorities in the City budget. At each budget time, I will fight for the priorities of my constituents, which clearly include preserving greenspace, environmentally-sensitive lands, and the urban forest.
3. Standing firm in support of the prohibition against future country lot subdivisions.
Yes. Council acted correctly in prohibiting the continued subdividing of rural land into estate lots. I support this policy. This helps to control urban sprawl and protects open spaces. I will not support any compromises to settle OMB appeals that result in allowing country lot estates.
4. The City’s Advisory Committees should be genuine bridges between the public and Council.
Yes. One of the main reasons I am running is that I do not believe that Council and City Staff conduct meaningful consultations and make decisions transparently. I hear this over and over again at the door. Council’s abolition of most of the City’s advisory committees is a symptom of this. I have a clear record on this: the community association I led opposed the abolition of Advisory Committees. The public needs to be consulted and informed in a variety of ways. The City has moved to forms of consultation, such as open houses and online comments that they can most easily control. I think this is wrong. Democracy can be messy, but it needs to be the cornerstone of our municipal government, with decisions made transparently and only after real consultation.”