The propositions:
1. Support for a strong site alteration by-law, with emphasis on “strong.”
2. Renewed commitment to an annual allocation towards an environmental lands acquisition fund.
3. Standing firm in support of the prohibition against future country lot subdivisions.
4. The City’s Advisory Committees should be genuine bridges between the public and Council.
Michelle Reimer: Full response Excerpt:
“I will gladly support your concerns below and when elected I look forward to working with Greenspace Alliance to ensure they are adequately addressed.”
Larry Wasslen:
#1: “I support a strong site alteration bye-law. This is particularly important to prevent Rambo developers from destroying green space.”
#2: “I also support an annual commitment towards an environmental land acquisition fund. I would be interested in knowing your thoughts on how the city has been dealing with the Emerald Ash Bore problem.”
#3: “I also support standing firm regarding prohibiting country lot subdivisions. One of the most common concerns that I have heard during this election is the need to stand firm against unchecked developers from condos through entire neighbourhood complexes.”
#4: “I am also looking for more citizen input via the advisory committees. I would very much like to hear more of your ideas concerning how this cod be improved upon.”
Ellen Lougheed: “I strongly support the four (4) propositions from the Greenpeace Alliance.”
Jeff Leiper: Full Response Excerpts:
#1: “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.”
#2: “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.”
#3: “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: “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.”
Kathernine Hobbs: Full Response Excerpts:
#1: “Yes, I am strongly in favour of such a by-law. I see it as a natural next step following our decisions to not expand the urban boundary and not to allow country estate lots. … Penalties for violating such a by-law should have a real impact on the bottom line of perpetrators, rather than just being a ‘cost of doing business.’”
#2: “Yes, renewing our commitment towards the environmental lands acquisition fund should be made a priority in the next term of Council. While funding was critical for the Emerald Ash Borer strategy, the 2014-2018 Council has a duty to replenish the fund. I am also in favour of additional funding for this fund to come from strict penalties for site alteration and other environmental violations, in addition to a commitment to annual funding from the City budget.”
#3: “Yes, I support the prohibition against future country lot subdivisions. The City’s policy of promoting growth and new housing take a “villages first” approach not only preserves the rural landscape, it strengthens villages and will create stronger rural communities for the long term. I believe we need to take a more proactive look at rural development as well as urban development, and seek best practices among rural municipalities in Ontario and around the world.”
#4: “First and foremost, it is the Councillor’s duty to represent the public that elected them. …
Public consultation needs to be balanced between the most vocal, the most affected, the most interested, and the public at large. That’s why I’ve made it a priority to reach out to residents in different ways. … With regard to the Environmental Stewardship Advisory Committee itself, I agree that it should meet more often, that it should consult and engage more broadly, and that its membership should reach out to bring in greater diversity and depth of experience and expertise in the City’s decision making process.”
