
It does appear that stores are responding which is positive. I am not aware of any Hamilton studies that measure the uptake of non-plastic bags by shoppers in the city. Hopefully they are using cloth bags etc in a more significant fashion. To me, this is the age-old argument about making change voluntary or mandating it via policy or legislation: my view is that we need both; in practice some folks will only respond when they are legislated to do so.
2. If you could change one thing about how council operates, what would that be and why?
This may sound minor, but there should be regular shifting of where each Councillor sits in Standing Committee, Committee of the Whole, and Council meetings. You’d be surprised at how the seating arrangement (currently alphabetical) influences Councillors’ comments and decisions on votes. On the other side of that, sitting beside a colleague that one doesn’t usually have much time for allows for better understanding and relationship-building. This sort of rotation could occur every three months for example.
3. What was the most useful criticism you have received as a politician and how did that change you?
I don’t know if this was entirely outward criticism or self-criticism but given my background on environmental and social justice issues, and concern with urban sprawl, early on in my tenure I tended to knee-jerk against pro-development interests, and my responses now are much more balanced (although I’m not sure that all would agree with that). Same goes with a keener focus on economic development, while still being passionate about ecological sustainability.
4. What are the top three issues in your ward and how do they reconcile against the greater interests of Hamilton?
1. Impact of Student Housing Proliferation in Ainslie Wood - Westdale (decreased quality of life, property standards/noise issues, folks abadnonding neighbourhoods leading to student-only areas/loss of balanced, multi-perspective neighbourhoods)
This issue is largely specific to the Ainslie Wood - Westdale (AWW) neighbourhoods around Mac, although it is now filtering into Kirkendall and Strathcona neighbourhoods. The area around Mohawk College portrays similar problems according to Councillor Whitehead. City-wide this affects our relationship with Mac as they have been very unhelpful in assisting with impacts of their large increases in undergraduate student enrolment, this leads to conflict, with students having a poor experience in AWW, making it less likely they'll want to stay in Hamilton, post-graduation.
2. Reducing Car Travel in Favour of Pedestrian and Cycling Improvements
This is a very important issue for many of my constituents and we’ve been working at installing bike lanes (did York Blvd, Dundurn Street coming, along with extending the rail trail, Longwood Rd next). We’ve undertaken a community-based walkability analysis for neighbourhoods in Ainslie Wood Westdale and our City-run neighbourhood master transportation plans have emphasized alternative transportation and implementation of the International Charter on Walking, signed earlier by Mayor Eisenberger. We are very supportive of LRT on King with two-way traffic flow on both King and Main. Hopefully our work can inspire other neighbourhoods.
3. Redevelopment of Brownfield/Greyfield Sites - Intensification
As discussed in the Spec, the former school board building at 220 Dundurn Street has been empty for many years and is really a blight in the neighbourhood. I have been working with our Bylaw department for the past two years to improve property standards, and most importantly we have a site plan approval for a new residential development. Another example of this redevelopment is the former Tim Hortons site at Aberdeen and Dundurn, where a condo development is planned. In these infill examples we’ll need to seek a balance between neighbourhood requirements and our mandate to promote intensification as outlined in the new City Official Plan. This will be a debate on sites across the City so again our work will provide examples for others.
5. If you could change a single decision that was made by council over the course of this term, what would that be and why?
It would be take the original staff advice and recommendations of the Hemson report to protect all of the available industrial land as employment land as required by the Places to Grow Act versus exempting the four-five properties that Council did, paving the way for additional big-box stores, and creating a need to find the lost employment land elsewhere, perhaps leading to a larger sprawl-style business park on important farmland around the airport. Specifically, the decisions to allow big-box developments at 50 Rd and Centennial Parkway are problematic.
6. In this present term, there has been sensational reporting on some of the antics that go on at council. Do you think that good news stories and accomplishments are under-reported?
Vastly under-reported due to the sensational-style reporting style of the media, especially the print media.
7. In some ways, you are a representative for our “environmental conscious”. Are we doing enough on that front and how do you balance environmental responsibility with fiscal constraint?
My view is that the health of the environment in Hamilton is the underpinning for success in our community. In this, I mean that if we don't take action (ie., spend more on transit and other alternative transportation choices to mitigate the impact of climate change and prepare our community for a peak oil and gas scenario) on the larger ecological imperatives such as climate change adaption and long-term prevention; poor air quality; protection of local farmland ensuring the ability to feed Hamiltonians, then the City of Hamilton will not be a place that industries and citizens move to; especially as the economy becomes more focused on knowledge industries requiring highly skilled workers who can choose where they wish to work.
8. Are we doing enough to address the needs of the poor in Hamilton? If we could do one thing differently, what would that be?
I would be so bold to state that we are leading the Province in this respect through the work of many, facilitated by the Roundtable on Poverty Reduction. The Province of Ontario and national and international jurisdictions have made this observation as well. Although we have been active on this area, the key activity we need is to work more on establishment and support for small business as they create most of Hamilton’s jobs.
9. Leadership is an important attribute of moving agendas forward. When embattled in controversial issues, how do you demonstrate leadership?
While I don't always achieve this goal, it is critical to remain calm, cool, and collected and most important, not to make the issues personal, despite the passion we all bring to issues.
10. I think we can all agree that Mayor Eisenberger has a tough job. What advice might you have for the Mayor?
Stay the course: as the term has carried on, Fred has vastly improved his skills as Mayor – a position that is tremendously complex and must be learned on the job as it is significantly different than the Councillor position that Fred held earlier. One piece of advice would be to continue communicating with Councillors on controversial votes, particularly those of special importance to him, towards attempting to reach consensus prior to full-out Committee of Council discussions.
Special thanks to Councillor McHattie for his contribution to "The Hamiltonian" and for his service to our city.
Visit him at http://www.brianmchattie.ca
Blog Policy Note: Bad language, name calling or other inappropriate posts will not be tolerated. Posts of this nature will not be edited. Rather, they will not be posted. Please keep your comments respectful.
Thanks for the interview.
ReplyDeleteBrian is a breath of fresh air, sanity and class amongst many other councillors whose characteristics are far less exemplary.
Yep. He makes the others look bad.
ReplyDeleteMy hat's off to Mr. McHattie on point #6. However, with
ReplyDeletehis response being much shorter than the question itself,
I sense some reservations. Ask Mr. Merulla this question
and we can expect an invective explicative regarding
the print media's editorial board.
Musing on point #7 I wonder about the Randall Reef. Are
we doing enough? The funds are available so where's the
BEEF?
Point #8 sticks to the ribs of point #5 regarding,
"establishment and support for small business
as they create most of Hamilton’s jobs."
May I please remind the reader of the life
Gary Santucci has captured outside his window?
http://thespec.com/News/Local/article/621525
"Another screen loops through still photos
Santucci has taken of empty storefronts
around his Ward 3 neighbourhood.
He is up to 275."
Number nine, the infamous three C's.
Passion engulfs strong leadership in either cold or hot
whereas vomit is lukewarm with the consistency of snot.
Ten, "...Mayor – a position that is tremendously complex..."
Agreed, and like a plumber, needs skills at fixing leaks.
I Liked Brian's answer to question 3. It's a tough question to answer frankly. But I think he did so.
ReplyDeleteCal
caldifalco@cogeco.ca
I have respect for Brian, but I disagree with point number five. One can not hide behind the Province, this was a local decision. With all do respect to the Province, they do not have all the answers. It also comes down to economics. I believe Council made the right decision. I'm tired of hearing how the Airport Business Park will expand onto farmlands. Last time I checked I wasn't eating sod. Hamilton is blessed with a huge rural area, the elimination of some "agricultural" lands around the airport will benefit the community far more than negatively affecting it. Time to cut the ties with Hamiltonians for Progressive Development as they are a group of two to three people with ties to CATCH and other anti-development types. Interview Mr. Desnoyers and ask him what he drives, where he lives, his home's proximity to the airport and where he works then you'll find out how "sustainable" his lifestyle choices are and that he is doing nothing more then protecting his own self-interests with respect to his home.
ReplyDeleteThankfully, we are in a democracy, where our local politicians more often than not represent the majority.
In response to the last comment by "Mr. Anonymous", your assertion that I have become so actively involved in the community because of my own "self-interests with respect to his home" - really!!
ReplyDeleteDo you or anyone else really believe that I would spend hundreds if not thousands of hours of my extremely valuable time battling these abudantly ridiculous planning issues with the city if I was only concerned with my home? Do you really believe that I would subject myself to the kind of derogatory remarks from individuals such as yourself who haven't the courage to stand behind their convictions and choose to hide behind a ficticious alias (Mr. Anonymous")? Do you really believe that I would spend countless hours in front of Council providing the input and feedback they ask for only to be personally attacked and insulted? If I was only interested in protecting the interest of my home even a reasonably intelligent individual would come to the conclusion that it would be a lot easier and far less aggravating to just move!!
Having lived in this CITY my entire life my actions are driven by a profound belief that this city is headed in the wrong direction and we cannot afford to make the wrong choices. There are many that might argue that the city is functionally bankrupt because of our inability to properly address the huge infrastructure issues we face.
Ignoring your rantings about me personally, the only real comment deserving a response is your point about the province and these recent conversions. Let us for the time being forget about the province and address the fact that City Council agreed to these conversions despite the fact they overwhelmingly go against the very principles and guidelines THEY created. This is fundamental lack of integrity. At what point do we stand by the concept of SAY WHAT YOU DO AND THEN DO WHAT YOU SAY. These conversions demonstrate how desperate we are for anything and how we are prepared to toss all common sense to the winds.
If you are at all interested in addressing the real issues and the real facts then let's have at it. This is not about me and if that is the best you can do it clearly demonstrates you haven't a clue about the real issues facing this city.
Finally, properly cooked and spiced - sod might not be that bad!
M. Desnoyers
Co-Chair
HPD
Some of us choose to remain anonymous because in our professional lives we hold high profile positions. It is impossible for one to make public statements of a personal perspective without having regard for how those statements may be perceived as the beliefs of their employers.
ReplyDeleteI enjoy, on my personal time reading information that concerns the city and having the ability to post my beliefs without fear of professional repercussions.
Your land use planning perspectives are those of your own, I have yet to hear similar comments from the majority of citizens and believe that is why we have local councillors whom are elected by the general public ........ to represent their views.
You may not like Council's decisions but at the end of the day you should not undermine them. Let the electoriate decide. Also, on your Hamiltonians for Progressive Development website, perhaps you could provide a listing of the membership or even membership numbers.
Anonymus: My oh my, you sure are good at making blunt statements about what the people want.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do not know Mr Desnoyers or am affliated with his group, I do applaud their efforts to stop big box development, which leads to nothing but minimum wage jobs, where the workers have no access to benefits, pensions, forget that.
But then you are too busy in your "high" profile job, which I wonder, is it paid by the citizens, to make assumptions about what all the people in this city want, because the truth is, the people are never asked.
The problem with this site is that there are too many individuals logging in as Anonymous. To "Mr. Anonymous" from 8:41 p.m. let me provide rebuttal.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, your explanation for maintaining your anonymity is about as lame as it gets. You either believe in what spews from that orifice below your nose or you don't. If fear of repercussion is your biggest concern then restrict your comments to the facts and don't engage in personal attacks. I will answer just about any question as long as it is respectful and based upon fact.
Secondly, you are correct that I have my own views on what the Vision should be for the City of Hamilton as you do and everyone does. However, I am just the spokesperson for HPD and the position the group takes is reached by consensus and once that is reached, regardless of my own personal opinion I faithfully convey that message. If you honestly believe that our elected council represents the views of the individuals who elected them you must be living in a different city. The right to question the actions of our elected officials is fundamental to our form of democracy. It is a very narrow view that would consider this "undermining" them!
Thirdly, every individual who is a member or supporter of HPD submits a form (check our web-site)and that form clearly makes a Privacy Statement. HPD as a group is bound by that privacy statement but ANY individual who is a member/ supporter is free to state their affiliation with us. If we posted on our web-site that we had hundreds or thousands of members/ supporters how would that change your opinion?
Finally, in keeping with my first comment about sticking to the facts, you provided no feedback on your thoughts about council completely violating their own principles. In our recent appeal of the Centennial conversion we had 13 pages of examples of violating the Growth Plan, PPS, Vision 2020, GRIDS, existing OP and the just recently released new OP! It would appear from your comments that you favour the "Aerotropolis". Will your opinion change when it is finally relaeased to the public that taxpayers will probably fund the industrial park to the tune of $200 Million or more. At the present moment the operation of Hamilton Airport provides a DIRECT benefit to the City of Hamilton and taxpayers of less than $1.5 Million per year. If I told you that the land the airport sits on is probably worth something in the vicinity of $225,000 million and could produce 24,000 jobs instead of the 1600 at the airport - would you change your mind?
Ponder these points and let me know if you would like to engage in meaningful debate or just more of the same.
To the posting at 10:11 P.M. - in regards to your final comment, the City follows a fairly rigid method of obtaining public input. Unfortunately, in almost all cases it usually asks for input after the decision has been made. In many cases, if your input is contrary to the prevailing opinion you don't get taken seriously and the response by some but not all concillors can be very unprofessional.
M. Desnoyers
Co-Chair
HPD
M Desnoyers: Let the warrior spirit be with you in your battle.
ReplyDeleteTo Anonymous at 10:11 pm. I'm in the private sector. I respect your thoughts but see things a little differently. I believe retail commercial goes to where the people live. People choose where to live because of the services provided and jobs. Hamilton has many employment opportunities and more and more employment land coming on stream every year. I also believe in development around the airport.
ReplyDeleteWe need to separate industrial employment from urban areas. One just has to look at Ancaster's fire yesterday. Thankfully, it was in an industrial park somewhat removed from residential.
I also know a person who works full-time at Walmart, he's told me he makes around $15 an hour and has benefits. He has a house, car, and family. It's not great but they're getting by and his children are happy. That's what is most important.
Why is it that the only place in the world where Walmart workers can organize is in China? I guess they do not want another pro democracy uprising as the one in Tianamin Square. I mean here in Canada we have Walmart trying to limit free speech, by claiming ownership to the circle. Another tactic in trying to quash the rights of workers to organize.
ReplyDeleteMr.Desnoyers while I respect your right to be a professional whiner I disagree with your goals.
ReplyDeleteIt's because of groups like yours that this city has stagnated. Developers and other potential investors won't come near this city because they just don't need the hassle. There are greener pastures or should I say greener fields elsewhere.
You seem to be under the misguided impression that your group or the city can dictate what investors can or cannot do with their money. They will take it elsewhere as they have for the last 30 years. In the case of Hamilton that development has moved to Burlington, who's industrial parks are filled with refugees from Hamilton.
As for brownfield developement, it's a joke. There is just not enough land in suitable sized packages to build on. We need large tracts of serviced land to attract developement and jobs to this city. The airport lands will provide the inventory we desperately need. I'd also like to see the 403 corridor between Hamilton and Brantford developed. This nonsense about these lands being prime agricultural land are just that, nonsense. For the most part it's mostly scrub land with a few cornfields thrown in here and there.
The appeal your group has filed with the OMB regarding the Wal-Mart developement are just another example of your groups misguided anti development terrorism. What use of those lands could possbly be better than what is being proposed. I for one would much rather see a big box development at that location than an industrial park. I would also encourage the city and the developer to sue your group for any extra costs incurred because of your appeal once they win. It time to put groups like yours out of business so this city can once again progress.
Mike Russell: You are wrong in your opinion, sir. I suggest you watch the film, many communties have fought and won against Wal-Mart and the scrouge that it creates.
ReplyDeleteMr. Russell
ReplyDeleteDefinition,
professional whiner: passionate individual who chooses to be actively engaged in the community and is deeply concerned about the long term viability and sustainability of municipal planning decisions.
Guilty as charged!
If you are concerned about what the city can or cannot dictate to developers and investors than you must be deeply concerned for the proposed plans for the "Aerotropolis". Perhaps you should famialarize yourself with the Dillon Phase 1 report and the preferred options report submitted to the CLC earlier this month.
The city has had large tracts of land in the Glanbrook Industrial Park and the Airport Industrial Park for at least a decade and they still sit empty. In fact, the servicing of the Airport park was completed over a decade ago and now needs to be brought up to standard before anyone can move in. No one has opposed the development of those lands yet they still sit empty so your assertion that investors just don't want the hassle don't ring true.
The OMB appeal of the Centennial lands has nothing to do with Wal Mart. In fact, I don't think we even mention them in the OMB filing. This is a conversion of lands that goes against just about every planning principle that the city established - not us. See my previous message and comment on those facts.
I always find it interesting how the province who has voiced their objections (including the OMB appeal of the aerotropolis) are rarely painted as demons like HPD is. It is easy to see how difficult it would be negating the position of a highly experienced and qualified group such as the provincial planners.
Finally - 7000 acres of "mostly scrub land with a few cornfields thrown in here and there" - yea right!!! What a terrible insult to the many farmers who help put food on YOUR table.
M. Desnoyers
HPD
Mike Russell - you actually think having two more Wal-marts grace the outer edges of our city as progress? Please tell me you are joking. Groups like HPD and Environment Hamilton are not the ones keeping business from setting up shop here - in fact they are all doing us a favour by questioning why a city like Hamilton is falling all over itself to approve these huge mistakes. There is much to learn about fixing this place - a few more Walmarts are not going to get us any closer to finding those answers.
ReplyDeleteDave
ReplyDeleteI could care less about the Wal-Marts, it could be any retailer. The fact of the matter is that these developments will provide jobs and pay taxes. Thats what development is all about. Sure they are not high paying jobs but they are jobs all the same. Not everyone can make top dollar. The 2 or 3 million in taxes per year may not be alot either but it's better than what the city is getting right now. That extra 2 or 3 million in the city's coffers night allow them to spend more on the failing infrastructure or on public transit.
As for groups like HPD and Environment Hamilton they have there place. The problem is every time they object to something it ends up costing taxpayers money. The citizens of this city elect a council to make decisions, some we agree with others we don't. When election time comes around if we don't like what they are doing we vote for someone else. Who elected those 2 groups to oversee this city, no one. If these people want to effect change then run for office, if people agree with the message they will get elected.
This would not be the first time I have experienced a "blogger" who's last resort in a failing argument is to suggest that if you "want to effect change then run for office". I would suppose that all of the huge developers who exert their influence and apply untold pressure on staff and council to get what they want means they were elected!
ReplyDeleteIf we follow Mr. Russell's train of thought, one would have expected that the current council which we elected would follow the guidlines and principles that they embraced and were elected on. Case in point, the city and Council engaged the community via countless public meetings to create the new Urban Official Plan. They then proceed to adopt the Draft plan and right out of the gate allow conversion of the subject lands which so fundamentally violate the plan that you are left wondering who is at the helm. This is not a unique phenomenon to this particular issue. It seems to be the underlying problem because fundamentally we are desperate and Hamilton has never met a developer it didn't like. Let's face it - developers ALWAYS do what is in the best interest of the community - don't they?
Mr. Russell has stated that "As for groups like HPD and Environment Hamilton they have there place." I am curious as to exactly what that place is?
We (HPD) do not, nor should we, paint a broad brush regarding the conduct of city council. There are many on council who get the message but there are unfortunately an equally large number who don't need our help when it comes to wasting tax payer dollars.
M. Desnoyers
Co-Chair
HPD
Mr Russell: I suggest you watch this series of lectures, then come back and answer the question as Mr Desnoyers asks " Let's face it - developers ALWAYS do what is in the best interest of the community - don't they?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9ruW9FRbJ8&feature...
Oh for Pete's sake, talk about soft ball questions. Fail.
ReplyDelete