The significance that the…

The significance that the current provincial government is placing on Bill 66 and labeling it ‘Open for Business' is misleading and lacking in real detail. The specifics of what is being proposed are deliberately being withheld. The actual gist of what is being forced on Ontario residents and taxpayers is regressive and entrenched in an all too familiar agenda of attempting to turn back the clock. This is just dangerously delusional. It is disingenuous and misleading to imply that eliminating the checks and balances or so-called red tape that has been determined to be essential, due to the costly repercussions of previous backward thinking Ontario governments, can now be considered in the best interest of Ontario’s economy.

I would suggest that this “troubling trend of businesses looking outside of Ontario, and other competitive jurisdictions” that you mention in your message has been very much accelerated by the substance of the messages the current provincial government has been sending to potential investors. The petty personal agenda of premier Ford is embedded in the agenda of the current provincial government. This narrow-minded master plan labeled Bill 66 amounts to much more than just the ridiculous disruptions during the recent municipal elections in Ontario. The last-minute challenges to Toronto’s council numbers has become very much characteristic of the knee jerk decisions, without consideration of the perverse long-term unanticipated consequences, which certainly doesn’t impress upon potential investors that Ontario is in good hands. This is one of several small-minded foolish attempts on the part of the current premier of Ontario to shine a spotlight on himself that absolutely does not provide Ontario residents and taxpayers with the assurance that is needed to convince them that he and the current provincial government are capable of responsibly representing Ontario.

You say that you have heard loud and clear from municipalities and so-called job creators. You should now have the opportunity to hear loud and clear from the nonpartisan forward-thinking component of Ontario business, residents and taxpayers who confidently recognize the value of careful discretion when their provincial government is fixated on eliminating the checks and balances that have proven to be a steadfast mainstay of Ontario’s past successes. The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing already has a tool to bypass municipal legislation and allow development anywhere in Ontario, it is called the Minister’s zoning order. Why create a new tool when you already have one that has the same effect? Calling legislation enacted to protect farmland, drinking water, and natural areas unnecessary and outdated is not reasonable. It very much appears that the current provincial government wants to make our environment an area they think can be exploited to fabricate employment numbers in their favour.

Municipal government and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs data show that there is currently a surplus of employment land within existing city boundaries to develop new businesses. In fact, many municipalities are seeking to convert these lands to other uses, like residential because of the lack of demand from industry to develop these lands. Many of these lands are near highways and or transit, which is very attractive to new businesses.

In addition, development approvals have been held up by sprawl developers who in the past appealed all regional official plans to the Ontario Municipal Board. They did this in order to secure more land for subdivisions than needed, but they were unsuccessful as there was more than enough land for development purposes. These appeals slowed Official Plan implementation by an average of over 3 years. Research by the Neptis Foundation also shows there is over 100,000 ha. of land available within existing urban boundaries for housing development. This is an area the size of Mississauga and Toronto combined and will meet regional population growth projections for decades to come.

Schedule 10 of Bill 66 makes it clear that the prohibitions against development contained in the Greenbelt Act, Clean Water Act, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act, the Lake Simcoe Protection Act, the Great Lakes Protection Act, and the Places to Grow Act will not apply to “Open for Business By-Laws”. These by-laws can be initiated and passed by any municipal government without public notice. They are then forwarded to the Ontario government for approval. They cannot be appealed to the Local Planning Appeals Tribunal.

This change could open the floodgates of multiple municipalities opening protected areas to development at the behest of developers, who are large election campaign contributors at the municipal level. Many of the costs of development will be borne by local taxpayers for the additional infrastructure required.

It is obvious from your message that it is a form letter sent out in a bid to announce the current government’s resolve to turn back the clock in Ontario to what they believe were sound principles of governance in the past. It is therefore understandable that your form letter has also been automatically sent to someone belonging to a group of Concerned Citizens of Ramara who has already experienced the true scope and capability of our current provincial government when it comes to taking constituent concerns seriously.

The response your office provided is irresponsible, obstructive and far short of what rural Ontarian's should expect from their provincial representatives. The very sad conclusion is that the people who took advantage of Ramara Township’s inability to apply and enforce their Fill Bylaw are also watching. The excess fill is still being marketed to anyone who is willing to make a fast buck and now the current provincial government wants to further diminish the availability of environmental regulation with Bill 66. Improvements to environmental regulations are needed so municipalities like Ramara Township are given the oversight from the provincial government that has been demonstrated as lacking. If the current provincial government considers Bylaws as Red Tape, then Bill 66 most certainly should not be passed. Not that bylaws are currently anything to be taken seriously in Ramara Township anyway.