FUN ADVOCACY POSITIONS

Municipal Conflict of Interest Act

Toronto City Hall council chamber

In January, 2021, we provided information on the Public Inquiry which recommended a conflict-of-interest overhaul for municipal councillors referencing Frank Marrocco’s report – Report of the Collingwood Judicial Inquiry, Transparency and the Public Trust.  One of his recommendations is to broaden the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act to expand the definition of the personal or family interest that can put a politician in a conflict of interest.

On March 5, 2021, the Government of Ontario announced it would be launching consultations with “municipal officials” to obtain input about how to strengthen accountability measures to ensure that members of council maintain a safe and respectful workplace. Those consultations will be led by Associate Minister of Children and Women’s Issues, the Honourable Jill Dunlop.

The Ontario government has launched a 90-day consultation (April 14 to July 15 2021) to obtain feedback on how to strengthen municipal codes of conduct. With the support of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), the province is working to better ensure that municipalities, councillors and heads of council maintain a safe and respectful workplace. 

Letter re: Bill 257 from 120 organizations

|
March - Ontario marshland

NOTE: Unfortunately, Bill 257 with Schedule 3 was passed on April 12, 2921. So MZOs no longer have to be consistent with the PPS (except in the Greenbelt).

We, the 120 undersigned organizations, strongly oppose Schedule 3 of Bill 257, Supporting Broadband and Infrastructure Expansion Act, 2021, which proposes to amend the Planning Act so that both existing and future Minister’s Zoning Orders (MZOs) would no longer have to be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS). We request that you remove this schedule from Bill 257.

By allowing the Minister to authorize developments that contravene the PPS, the proposed Schedule 3 changes would erode the very basis of planning in Ontario and would eliminate the benefits of this predictable, fair and principled planning framework for municipalities and other authorities implementing PPS policies. Given that MZOs are issued without public consultation or opportunity for appeal, these changes would also undermine the right of Ontarians to participate in important planning decisions affecting their communities.

Bill 245 Amalgamates Five Tribunals into One – why the haste?

|
LPAT - view of woods

UPDATE: Bill 245 received Royal Assent on April 19, 2021 and hence the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal no longer exists. It is now within the Ontario Land Tribunal.

Our major concern with the amalgamation of five tribunals, each of which deals with specialized areas of law and practice, is the potential loss of appreciation and sensitivity to the cases dealt with by these individual tribunals. Each tribunal requires adjudicators that have specialised expertise in the subject matter of the appeals that they hear, and in the interpretation of their home statutes, in addition to adjudicative expertise. The more specialised the tribunal’s jurisdiction, the more this would be an issue.

For example for hearings before the Conservation Review Board (under the Ontario Heritage Act) you knew you would be heard by someone who was familiar with and had appreciation for built heritage and had expertise in interpreting the Ontario Heritage Act. The subject matter knowledge and appreciation, and expertise in the interpretation of its “home statute,” will be impossible to meet with such a wide span of subject legislation to be concerned with. Given the diversity of statutes and subject matter over which the Ontario Land Tribunal will have jurisdiction to hear appeals, it may be difficult to make the case that members of this Tribunal, who are arguably intended to be “generalists” dealing with a number of statutes, will develop expertise in interpreting such an array of “home statutes.”

Bill 257

|
Ontario wetland - fall

NOTE: Unfortunately, Bill 257 with Schedule 3 was passed on April 12, 2921. So MZOs no longer have to be consistent with the PPS (except in the Greenbelt).

We are concerned, disappointed, and angry that you have introduced legislation that amends the Planning Act to provide that Ministerial Zoning Orders (MZOs) are not required and are deemed to never have been required to be consistent with Provincial Policy Statements (PPS) issued under subsection 3 (1); that is, except for such orders that apply to land in the Greenbelt Area.

This legislation, sneaked in as part of an omnibus bill dealing with unrelated matters, is unjust, authoritarian, and undemocratic. It curtails the municipal planning process and facilitates non-compliance with the Provincial Policy Statements. Worse, it is applied retroactively, apparently to attempt to avoid the Provincial Government being held to account in two ongoing court challenges; Duffin’s Creek and the Foundry.

Affordable Housing on Eastern Avenue Consultation (The Foundry)

The Foundry at night

This is in response to your Ministry’s request for input from residents’ groups and the public “on how some elements of the existing structures could inform development” of the provincially owned property at 153-185 Eastern Avenue. The request indicates that the Province of Ontario intends to “create new affordable and market housing, and community space, in response to numerous requests from the City of Toronto for increased affordable housing”.

The Court ordered the Province to continue the pause on demolition because there is compelling evidence that the Province has not met its own standards under the Ontario Heritage Act and has breached heritage-related commitments in a subdivision agreement.

We continue to oppose the use of a Ministerial Zoning Order (MZO) which allows the Province to bypass nearly all planning requirements set by the City. Our members are increasingly seeing a pattern of legislative activity involving the use of MZOs across the province, along with other coercive measures the Province is using to fast-track development without full and fair public consultation with those directly affected.

GTAW Highway – letter to Town of Caledon

Our concerns can be summarized as follows:

  1. The highways, if built, would encourage and facilitate an unprecedented level of urban sprawl in the GTA, which would destroy important green spaces and prime farmland.
  2. They will incur a significant cost to taxpayers which will be borne by the Provincial Government alone (the Federal Government has indicated it will NOT cost-share).
  3. People who live along the highway route (your residents) will suffer health impacts.
  4. Commuters will see little to no benefit from these highways.  And in any case the pandemic has drastically changed our commuting patterns.

2021 Budget Consultations

Money

FUN recognizes the significant fiscal challenges facing the Government of Ontario, especially in light of the current and continuing Pandemic. We also believe that investing in and maintaining physical, social and health infrastructure, all the while addressing the Climate Emergency are critical to the future well-being of all Ontario residents. And protecting green space improves mental and physical health, and moderates future health care and long term care costs.

Recognizing this, our organization offers the following recommendations for inclusion in the 2021 Ontario Budget.

Urban Infrastructure:

High functioning infrastructure is a key requirement to attracting and keeping businesses in Ontario. The provincial government should provide increased funding and support for urban municipalities to maintain and enhance their facilities, with an emphasis on “green” infrastructure.

FUN response to request for comments on MZO implementation

|
Construction - Toronto

The Ontario government can now extend its control beyond the matter of site specific zoning permission to all site details. Yet the government has not provided a principled rationale for why it has done so. Planning is the responsibility of municipalities within the framework of broad Provincial policies to allow municipalities the flexibility to deal with their issues and priorities.

The overriding question is why and when should MZOs be used in the first place. This government is using MZOs far more often than any government in the past. By making over 30 MZOs since its election in 2018, the current government appears to have decided that municipalities cannot be trusted to implement provincial priorities such as “affordable housing, long term care homes and other health care facilities”, and that the government feels it necessary to make decisions unilaterally and override the due process (including community participation) of local planning by municipalities. MZOs do not require community consultations, or to require the provision of any community benefits.

Public inquiry recommends conflict-of-interest overhaul for municipal councillors 

|
man writing

The results of a two-year inquiry requested by Collingwoods’ Town Council after an Ontario Provincial Police investigation into the partial sell-off of Collingwood’s electrical utility and alleged improprieties in how the proceeds were used to construct recreational facilities are in!

All Ontario municipalities require a better ethical infrastructure.

The Federation or Urban Neighbourhoods sent a Submission to the Government of Ontario on Nov 18, 2020 supporting the recommended amendments to the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act, urging the Ontario Government to act on these recommendations to protect the citizens of Ontario.

Conflict of interest overhaul recommended

Conflict of Interest

The results of a two-year inquiry requested by Collingwoods’ Town Council after an Ontario Provincial Police investigation into the partial sell-off of Collingwood’s electrical utility and alleged improprieties in how the proceeds were used to construct recreational facilities are in!

Frank Marrocco, Associate Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Ontario, just released his report – Report of the Collingwood Judicial Inquiry, Transparency and the Public Trust.

The Executive Summary states “undisclosed conflicts of interest marred many of the decisions made in respect to these two transactions, as did a series of unfair and precarious procurement practices. Combined, these factors left the transactions vulnerable to improper influence and cast doubt on both their legitimacy and the Town’s reputation.”