Mississauga, ON: On Friday, October 25, Municipal Affairs Minister Steve Clark announced that the Province will no longer be pursuing its top-down approach to municipal and regional governance. It will no longer follow through on its promise to redraw municipal and regional boundaries in an effort to find efficiencies and reduce costs. Instead Queen’s Park is making up to $143-million available to municipalities across Ontario to assist them in finding ways to lower costs and improve services. This decision comes after months of consultation and after the province announced cuts for public health care units, child care, ambulance services and others.

Here is what MIRANET (Mississauga Residents’ Association Network) knows so far:

• Michael Fenn (former Ontario Deputy Minister) and Ken Seiling (former Waterloo Regional Chair) were appointed in January 2019 to review Ontario’s eight regional municipalities; Peel being one of them. These were paid appointments. How much did these appointments cost the taxpayers of Ontario?

• After ten months, 8,500 submissions, and nine consultation sessions with individuals and organizations to find ways to improve municipal and regional government, the Ford government has decided to halt this process and stay with the STATUS QUO. How much did this consultation process cost the taxpayers of Ontario?

• Regions and municipalities were left scrambling to respond, many being forced to hire expensive consultants working under tight deadlines to conduct their own analyses of the options. In the case of Mississauga and the Region of Peel almost $1-million was spent ($60,000 for a post card campaign by the Mayor’s Office; a $300,000 impact analysis by Deloitte for the Region of Peel; a $600,000 impact analysis by Ernst and Young). What was the total cost to the rest of the taxpayers across the province?

• Ratepayers’ Associations and special interest groups, like MIRANET, had to marshal their limited resources in a short period of time to craft their submissions to the Special Advisers. How much did their time and effort cost?

Does the $143-million being offered by the Provincial Government cover the costs of the consultation process as well as municipal budget cuts which have already been implemented? Also, we would like to see the results of the impact analysis as they may indicate efficiencies and cost savings that could help municipalities now. After all, we paid for this.

This government did not have a mandate to redraw municipal and regional boundaries; nor did it have a mandate to cut public service sector jobs. On the contrary, they promised no jobs would be lost. Perhaps it is time for the Regions and Municipalities of Ontario to renegotiate their legal relationship with the Province? While municipalities are creatures of the province, they are also the engines that drive its economy – any tinkering on the fly could make them seize up and stop working.

The Lisgar Residents’ Association (a non-partisan group of community-minded volunteers)

invites you to a

Federal Election Candidates Debate

for the riding of Mississauga-Streetsville

Conservative – Ghada Melek
Green Party – Chris Hill
Liberal – Gagan Sikand
NDP – TBA

Tuesday, September 24, 2019
7:00pm-9:00pm

@ St. Simon Stock Elementary School
6440 Lisgar Dr, Mississauga

Meet the candidates. Come with your questions.

MIRANET’s comments on Bill 108 were covered by Peel Weekly News. See below for full text of MIRANET’s submission.

MIRANET’s Bill 108 Concerns

The Mississauga Residents’ Association Network (MIRANET) is a city-wide network of residents’ associations.  MIRANET notes that Bill 108 (More Homes, More Choice Act, 2019) has received second reading in the Legislature.  The period for public comment closes on June 1, 2019.  More time should be permitted for public input when Bill 108 proposes to amend 13 statutes. We have serious concerns about the Province’s proposed Bill 108.

Economists on all sides of the political debate have authored numerous studies demonstrating that “trickle down economics” is a failure. There is no evidence to support that a reduction in Development Charges (DCs) will lead to more affordable housing. There is no mechanism to ensure that these cost savings will be passed on to the home buyer. Home prices respond to supply and demand. This reduction in DCs is tantamount to an industry subsidy for developers at the expense of the taxpayer.

Mississauga has been developing a comprehensive housing strategy in consultation with residents and stakeholder groups which will utilize inclusionary zoning.  This may be negated by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing who will have the power to restrict the City’s Official Plan and override municipalities. Who will benefit? Only the developers.

Municipal taxpayers must not subsidize the highly profitable development industry; we are already burdened enough by the high property taxes we pay. In a free market, Developers must be able to stand on their own two feet. The proposed changes will increase red tape and staffing requirements. The Municipality will be assuming greater financial risks due to the reduced development charge payment schedules. The Municipality must not assume the financial risk if Developers go bankrupt, are sold or move. WILL THE PROVINCE MAKE UP FOR ANY REDUCTIONS IN DC REVENUE?  

The community benefit charge could be the most significant of all the proposed changes. In the current Planning Act, “Section 37/Community Benefits” are known as bonus zoning, applying to sites that see height and density increases, beyond current zoning. The Developer contributes a portion of the land value uplift to help off-set the impact of this unexpected and increased development. This puts the amount back into the community that is receiving the extra height/density. The Bill proposes that the term “Community Benefit” include: Section 37 contributions, soft services development charges (e.g. library, recreation and parks, and other services traditionally subject to the statutory ten per cent deduction under the Development Charges Act, 1997); and payment in lieu of parkland dedication.

The legislation indicates the new “Community Benefit” will be capped at a prescribed percentage of the value of the lands, rather than a per-unit type of charge. If the cap reduces what the City can collect, there could be impacts on the tax base or service levels. MIRANET suggests the value of land bears no relationship to the projected number of residents living on that land who will require Municipal services.  A Complete Community has parks, libraries, and recreation facilities which make it a liveable community.  The Premier’s Bill 108 will deny us these benefits.  Who wants to live In a concrete jungle?

The shortened time lines under the proposed streamlined Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) will no longer allow for meaningful public consultation and will generate much greater staffing and resource requirements for the City’s Planning Department. Municipalities are already struggling to meet the current timelines. This will cost more money. WILL THE PROVINCE COVER THESE COSTS?

After years of public and stakeholder consultation, the Province implemented changes to the seriously flawed OMB model, introducing the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) that gives more power to Municipalities and residents. The Province’s new model returns power to Developers. Will Bill 108 have the effect of taxpayers partially funding developments? We certainly hope not.

Does being open for business mean taxpayers are expected to foot the bill? IS THIS GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE?

MIRANET

Mississauga Residents’ Association Network

31 May 2019

MIRANET’s remarks to the Regional Government Review panel presented on 8 May 2019 have been published in the Peel Weekly News. Please see below for the article.

MIRANET responds to regional governance review – Peel Weekly News, 16 May 2019

On 8 May 2019, MIRANET presented to the Peel Consultation of the Regional Government Review. MIRANET’s remarks and press release are below.

MIRANET’s Thoughts on Regional Government Changes

Good afternoon. We are Sue Shanly and Charlene Haupt from MIRANET–the Mississauga Residents’ Association Network. We are a Network of Residents’ Associations across Mississauga and are here today to voice the concerns of our members about the future of the City of Mississauga and the Region of Peel.

Frankly, we struggled with your brief as outlined in the email invitation. There was no methodology or standard of measurement given by which to provide you with meaningful feedback. Further consultation with the online Terms of Reference was also not helpful.

1. Introduction

Is half a day enough time for you to listen to the questions and concerns of a region of over 1 million people made up of 3 different municipalities? You are here today – for a few hours during the day – to decide the fate of an almost five decade old union that has more than tripled in population, created numerous jobs and unprecedented prosperity for all, and is now jointly responsible for billions of dollars of infrastructure which will be around for many decades to come. It takes a lifetime of marriage to form a strong union. A union of two individuals produces shared offspring. It also creates joint liabilities – a house, a car. In terms of the region, this translates to regional services and regional infrastructure. A divorce almost always creates unhappiness and unintended consequences – constant legal wrangling and costs, neglected offspring and broken individuals. The same could happen to the Region should it allow the City of Mississauga to leave.

We are not saying that this union is perfect – there is certainly room for improvement. However, you cannot change something unless you know what is working and what is not. Change for the sake of change may end up breaking something that did not need fixing in the first place.

2. Lack of Time and Information

Given the complexity of this issue MIRANET feels we do not have enough time or information to make a thoughtful, educated decision. What is the urgency? We have been presented with two reports thus far: the Deloitte Report commissioned by the Region of Peel; and the Corporate Report from the City of Mississauga. Mayor Crombie has criticized the Deloitte Report for “having an agenda.” As citizens of a democracy we are entitled to an unbiased report conducted by a third party.

3. The Marriage Option

More time for review of the three options is needed: amalgamation, secession, and status quo. Or as we refer to them: marriage, divorce and counselling. Why is the Province rushing the marriage when it will be such a complicated decision? How will this process be any different given the complexity of Toronto’s amalgamation whose negative impacts are still being felt today and which did not create the efficiencies that were expected? The report from the Institute on Municipal Finance and Governance (IMFG) in 2013 concluded that the two-tier option was preferable in terms of costs and ability to govern effectively. The report from the Fraser Institute, a conservative think-tank, published in 2015, concluded that Ontario amalgamations in the 1990’s did not yield any benefits. Not only do we face increased operating costs and therefore taxes, but we also face the potential reduction in the number of Councillors, making it harder for our voices to be heard. At this point we are concerned that we are headed for a shot-gun wedding. And as the old adage goes: marry in haste, repent at leisure.

4. The Divorce Option

Our second option is divorce, which has been endorsed by the City of Mississauga as outlined in their Corporate Report, which is partly based on information that is 16 years out of date. It is impossible to draw any conclusions supporting divorce based on the information currently available. What mechanism would be put in place to separate capital investments or ongoing liabilities such as waste dumps? Who will be accountable? How will service transfers be decided and managed? What are the contingency plans? How long will the divorce take? Will there be sufficient time for the divorce to proceed in an orderly manner? Is there a dispute resolution mechanism in place? Or will we be contending with utter chaos and mounting legal bills for years to come? We have nothing but questions in search of answers.

5. The Status Quo Option

The final option is maintaining the status quo. According to the City’s own Citizens’ Satisfaction Surveys (the most recent being 2017) 89% of residents rated the overall quality of life as excellent or good, and 71% were satisfied with the City’s municipal government. The greater issue seems to be lack of dedicated funding from the Provincial Government.

To date we have not seen or been given access to any studies which identify inefficiencies within the current two-tier system of government. If we knew exactly what the problems were, we could then formulate appropriate solutions. Isn’t the simplest option usually the best? Or in other words: it ain’t broke, it just needs some minor adjustments.

6. Concluding Thoughts

Throughout this entire, very short and very chaotic process, three things stand out:

1. The one-sided focus on taxes and costs. There has been no mention of investments, investments in people. In our democratic society we have all agreed to pay taxes in order that these monies may be redistributed for our mutual benefit. Every tax dollar is an investment in ourselves, in our neighbours and in our future. Every line item within the regional and municipal budgets is an investment in the residents of Peel and Mississauga and in our shared values. We should not just be looking at absolute costs but at returns on investment, something that leading economists the world over are advocating.
2. This process lacks transparency and therefore legitimacy. We currently have no unbiased information at our disposal, nor do we have any real input into the final decision. We have not been given the yardsticks by which the special advisors will be measuring regional governance, decision-making and service delivery – they were not provided in the emailed brief nor were they provided in the online Terms of Reference. A robust democracy requires access to credible and reliable information, an electorate willing to spend the time to educate themselves on the issues and a government prepared to listen, learn and acquiesce to the will of the people.
3. The residents of Peel should ultimately be the ones to decide the fate of their region. By this we mean the electorate; this is not a decision that should be left to either the province or our Municipal Councillors where neither has been given a mandate to do so.

Regional Review Consultation Press Release – 8 May 2019

More than 100 residents from wards 1 and 2 filled the Royal Canadian Legion in Port Credit to hear the City of Mississauga’s rationale for becoming a single-tier entity, independent of the Region of Peel.  Other options such as amalgamation with its municipal siblings Brampton and/or Caledon, or staying within Peel Region with efficiency “tweaks”, were not thought by Mississauga Council to be the most fiscally prudent action to undertake.

The feeling in the room seemed to be split with some supporting the City’s stance, while others thought amalgamation would be a better option. Still others thought staying within Peel Region would be more beneficial for our future.

Starting May 2^nd the City of Mississauga will start a mail campaign to residents where they can send a postage-paid pre-addressed postcard to the province to show their support for Mississauga’s independence.  Many thought that options on that postcard could have been made better simply by including a “NO” option.

Mississauga’s position is based on a report first released by the city back in 2003 but updated this year.  Brampton prefers to cite the Region of Peel’s 2019 report it commissioned by Deloitte instead.   As a result of March 28 debate at Peel Regional Council, a third financial report is underway involving input from all 3 municipalities and Peel Region, in the hope for its completion prior to the May 22 deadline for submissions. Most agree this is an unlikely outcome.

Regardless of what the report indicates it will probably have no bearing on the final outcome for two reasons: Elected Mississauga reps spoke on residents’ behalf without advance consultation, and ultimately the Premier and his Cabinet can decide our fate without disclosure of recommendations of the Report concerning the Regional Municipal Review.

All in all May 1 was a very spirited evening.

You can read more about the evening here:

Mississauga Wards mull secession during town hall – http://edition.pagesuite-professional.co.uk/infinity/article_popover_share.aspx?guid=0d25cf18-d679-4156-95f4-8941233d7aef

Mississauga Demands New Report on Costs Involved in Separating from the Region of Peel

The Mississauga Residents’ Association Network – MIRANET – will have its 2019 Annual General Meeting on April 10 at the Port Credit Legion.

Our Guest Speaker is Ryan Clarke, President of Advocacy Solutions.

Ryan Clarke is the president of Advocacy Solutions. He helps advocates synthesize advocacy campaigns, amplify campaign messaging, and engage and influence key decision makers through the development and implementation of impactful advocacy strategies. Since founding the practice in 2003, Ryan has spoken about advocacy across Canada and internationally, teaching and training thousands of people how to make their voices heard.

A member of the Law Society of Ontario, Ryan was called to the Ontario Bar in 1995 and practiced exclusively in the area of family law for almost three years. He then became a Special Assistant to the Ontario Minister of Energy, Science and Technology, serving as policy advisor on all issues within the Science and Technology Division. Ryan joined Glaxo Wellcome (now GlaxoSmithKline Inc.) in 1999 as Senior Manager, Public Affairs specializing in public policy and government relations at the municipal, provincial and federal levels.

Ryan holds both an Honours B.A. and a Master’s Degree in Political Science from McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, and studied law at the University of Western Ontario.

As well as being a member of the Canadian and Ontario Bar Associations, Ryan is an active member of several business organizations, including the Ontario Chamber of Commerce. A former member of the Biotechnology Council of Ontario, Ryan was previously a government appointed public member of the Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario, having served as Chair of the Legal and Legislation Committee.

Interested citizens and resident associations are requested to attend. Please RSVP to Sue Shanly at sshan[AT]rogers[DOT]com

On March 9^th Sven Spengemann, MP for Mississauga-Lakeshore, held an information session for citizens on the topic, “Plastics in Our Oceans and Lakes.”  The turnout was much greater than expected for a Saturday morning, estimated to number about 300 people.  Before the presentations began, people were offered coffee and tea while they visited various displays and talked with dedicated local environmental groups working towards the reduction of plastic pollution in our water ways and oceans.

The morning was started by a smudging ceremony to bring clear thinking and cooperation within the gathering.  Sven welcomed everyone, introduced the speakers and spoke about the purpose of the morning.  Presentations were then given from a variety of speakers’ viewpoints but the main message was the dire condition of our Great Lakes and oceans due to plastics.  The audience heard the following troubling information from a number of speakers:

In Mississauga less than 12% of plastics are recycled.

In the Great Lakes 80% of the litter is from plastics, including microbeads from textiles.

There are no plastic return programs in Ontario.

Every year 8 million tonnes of plastics enter the oceans, half of them in just the past 13 years.

For example, garbage in the Don River is mostly single use plastic.

And 500 million plastic straws are used every day.

A presentation from the Canadian plastics industry included the following:  there are 2600 plastic companies in Canada ; they employ 82,000 employees; it is a $24.3 billion industry.  They support a goal of 100% of plastics being reused, recycled, and recovered.  Reducing production was not mentioned.

Scientists at the University of Toronto are now using satellites to measure significant plastic contamination found in coastline waters around the world.

The morning ended with a message from Sven about the dangerous level of Great Lakes and ocean plastics pollution and the need for everyone to take part in reducing it with single use plastic being  an early target for reduction in Ontario.  The audience was then invited to ask questions of the speakers.  The morning was very successful in terms of attendance and in new and renewed  dedication in the participants  to confront  the all-important  problems of plastics pollution.

– A Report from MIRANET member, Whiteoaks Lorne Park Community Association