It is my strong belief that Greenhill area residents should be given the opportunity to voice their views at next Monday’s Development Services Committee meeting.
Some of my constituents forwarded me the email they received from the Clerks Department yesterday which stated that the Clerk has decided their correspondence and requests to speak will not be permitted at the Monday, Sept 13, Development Services Committee meeting.
This is unfortunate and seems arbitrary and inconsistent considering that a Ward 1 resident made a delegation 3 years ago before the same Development Services Committee when he was appealing the C of A decision on the minor variances to the site plan for the Chartwell Phase 3 Seniors Residence on Ormond Dr. and Woodmount Dr.
He was permitted to speak at the Dec 9, 2019 DSC meeting when there was a staff Report DS-19-231 on the Agenda seeking direction with respect to the City’s party status regarding his appeal to the Tribunal. At that time the Development Service Committee members listened to his delegation and asked him questions.
The Appellant. and his neighbour actually spoke again at the Jan 13, 2020 DSC meeting and the representative of the Chartwell Respondent also spoke. This was all while their appeal to the Tribunal was upcoming. The Report DS-20-09 on the Agenda again was “Direction of City Staff Involvement Respecting Appeals to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal of Committee of Adjustment Decision concerning 1231 Ormond Drive, and 431 and 451 Woodmount Drive The Tribunal Hearing took place a few weeks later.
The Clerk may call the appeal of the C of A’s decision on 633 Greenhill a ‘legal proceeding’, but the appeal is part of the regular municipal decision making process.
The Commissioner of Development Services confirmed to me August 30th that there would be a Report on the Agenda concerning 633 Greenhill Ave. Denying the Greenhill Community residents the opportunity to speak to the Report and have their correspondence made public seems contrary to the guiding principle of the Municipal Act that Committee and Council meetings be open, transparent and accountable to the public.
For your information I will be posting this email on my social media accounts without naming who at the City I have sent this to. I consider it my responsibility as an elected representative to address my constituents’ concerns. It is not my intention to offend any member of staff.
Regards,
Rosemary
Some of my constituents forwarded me the email they received from the Clerks Department yesterday which stated that the Clerk has decided their correspondence and requests to speak will not be permitted at the Monday, Sept 13, Development Services Committee meeting.
This is unfortunate and seems arbitrary and inconsistent considering that a Ward 1 resident made a delegation 3 years ago before the same Development Services Committee when he was appealing the C of A decision on the minor variances to the site plan for the Chartwell Phase 3 Seniors Residence on Ormond Dr. and Woodmount Dr.
He was permitted to speak at the Dec 9, 2019 DSC meeting when there was a staff Report DS-19-231 on the Agenda seeking direction with respect to the City’s party status regarding his appeal to the Tribunal. At that time the Development Service Committee members listened to his delegation and asked him questions.
The Appellant. and his neighbour actually spoke again at the Jan 13, 2020 DSC meeting and the representative of the Chartwell Respondent also spoke. This was all while their appeal to the Tribunal was upcoming. The Report DS-20-09 on the Agenda again was “Direction of City Staff Involvement Respecting Appeals to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal of Committee of Adjustment Decision concerning 1231 Ormond Drive, and 431 and 451 Woodmount Drive The Tribunal Hearing took place a few weeks later.
The Clerk may call the appeal of the C of A’s decision on 633 Greenhill a ‘legal proceeding’, but the appeal is part of the regular municipal decision making process.
The Commissioner of Development Services confirmed to me August 30th that there would be a Report on the Agenda concerning 633 Greenhill Ave. Denying the Greenhill Community residents the opportunity to speak to the Report and have their correspondence made public seems contrary to the guiding principle of the Municipal Act that Committee and Council meetings be open, transparent and accountable to the public.
For your information I will be posting this email on my social media accounts without naming who at the City I have sent this to. I consider it my responsibility as an elected representative to address my constituents’ concerns. It is not my intention to offend any member of staff.
Regards,
Rosemary
