Details

Written by Gordon Prentice

Published: 25 January 2022

Why is it that 16 acres of undevelopable land donated by the Glenway developer to the Town of Newmarket is worth over $14M when a 16 acre farm 300 metres away is on the market for $5.5M?  

I'd like to know.

On 14 December 2021 the Town of Newmarket issued an official donation receipt of $14,290,000 to the Glenway developer, Marianneville, for its donation of 16 acres of land in Glenway West, abutting Bathurst Street. (see map below)

Eleven years earlier, on 21 January 2010, Marianneville bought the former 140 acre Glenway Golf Course for the knockdown price of $9,900,000 gambling on getting planning permission to redevelop – which it got. 

Astonishingly, the donation receipt for 16 acres is worth more than Marianneville paid for the whole 140 acres in 2010.

Money in the bank

Marianneville can use the donation receipt to offset tax owing to the Canada Revenue Agency. It’s as good as money in the bank.  

The Town doesn’t pay anything. For accounting purposes, the donation receipt will appear as revenue in the Town’s financial statements, matched by the acquisition of the land for the same amount.

But who decided the land was worth over $14M? And why isn’t the valuation report available for the public to read? 

The Town has a Donation Policy but valuations are kept confidential. 

So I have no way of knowing if the $14M is a wildly inflated valuation or if it is the going rate, in line with similar gifts of comparable undevelopable land elsewhere.

Fair Market Value

The donation has to be valued at Fair Market Value which is defined as the price the property would bring 

“in an open and unrestricted market and between a willing buyer and a willing seller who are knowledgeable, informed, and acting independently of each other.”

Last month’s sale of the Clock Tower in the heart of the historic downtown for $4,250,000 shows the market at work.  For gifted land, professional valuers must be brought in to assess its value. The donor pays for the valuation.

Oak Ridges Moraine and Greenbelt

The land contains two large stormwater ponds and lies within the Greenbelt and the Oak Ridges Moraine where development is strictly controlled. In fact, no development is possible on the donated land. 

On 30 December 2021 Newmarket Today reported

The donated lands are around the former 16th hole of the golf course. (Marianneville’s Joanne) Barnett said that portion of the property was less suitable for development for houses, but worked for a trail system. 

“They supported two stormwater ponds and segued nicely into the woodlot there. It was a nice fit.”

Three hundred metres away, the 16 acre Chesters Chicken Farm, at the corner of Bathurst and Davis Drive West, is up for sale with an asking price of $5,499,000. The land also lies within the Oak Ridges Moraine.

So why the huge difference in value?

Planning considerations

The donated Block 120 is zoned as Open Space. It is located in the settlement area of the Town of Newmarket but it also lies within the Oak Ridges Moraine. The policies of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) override the Town’s official plan. 

Municipal planning decisions have to conform with the ORMCP which takes precedence over municipal official plans.

There are other land classifications listed in the Plan such as “Countryside”. And where the land is up for sale the market decides its value.

What $14M could buy

If you Google “land sales on Bathurst Street” you will find other parcels of land for sale. And all these are within the Oak Ridges Moraine on the rural King side of Bathurst.

I see 16230 Bathurst where you can get 23 acres for $5.25M.

Now I see 100 acres in King – within the Oak Ridges Moraine – offered for sale at $12,800,000. For this you get:

“a beautiful mix of open rolling paddocks, hayfields, a lovely woodlot with trails and even a horseshoe-shaped pond.

And what about 16365 Bathurst (this one on the Newmarket side) ) where you can pick up a rather grand house and 37.6 acres for $7,500,000?

The detailed maps of the Greenbelt are here. They show the boundaries of the Oak Ridges Moraine. The Glenway lands (and the donated Block 120) are shown in sheet 31 which covers Newmarket. Aurora and the Oak Ridges Moraine in King are shown in sheet 45.

Personal and sensitive 

The Town keeps the record of donations secret for this reason:

“Charitable giving is normally a personal and sensitive issue. To ensure the privacy of donor information it is necessary to control access to donor and donation information. The Financial Services Department maintains records on all donors and donations received by the Town. A donor may request that his/her gift and/or all information pertaining to that gift remain anonymous.” 

But, surely, that cannot possibly apply to the donated land when the Town itself publicised the gift in 2017 and Marianneville has chosen to speak openly about it.

How can they then shelter behind the veil of confidentiality?

In other cases where donors insist on confidentiality, it should be possible to list the number of donation receipts issued every year with their value together with the number of donors who didn’t want a receipt for tax purposes.

The Marianneville valuation shouldn't be secret. 

We need to have sight of the valuation report and the name of the valuer who prepared it. Why ever not?

The Town's donation policy also takes into account any possible advantage the donation may bring to the donor. (For example, properties overlooking permanent open space may sell for a premium.). 

“Only the Eligible Amount of a donation may be recorded on a donation receipt. If the donor receives any property, services, or other Advantage in consideration of his or her donation, the Fair Market Value (FMV) of the Advantage is deducted from the FMV of the gift to determine the Eligible Amount for the purposes of the donation receipt.” 

Donations and Planning Approval

The policy makes it clear that:

“Donations will not be accepted from persons who have a concurrent application of a permit or license from the Town or an application for planning approval from the Town, or from persons who are bidding for a contract from the Town through a procurement process.”

Marianneville is still waiting for certain approvals for what remains of its Glenway West development but this was anticipated in 2017 by the Town’s then Chief Administrative Officer, Bob Shelton, who wrote:

“Marianneville continues to own the balance of the west lands that are not included in this land donation. These lands include a woodlot, stormwater management ponds and former golf course fairways. Should Marianneville file a development application for some or all of these remaining lands, the application will stand on its own and be reviewed in accordance with the prescribed Planning Act process.” 

We would expect no less.

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Update on 1 February 2022 to change "tax receipt" in headline to "charitable donation receipt" for greater accuracy.

Update on 27 January 2022: I have updated my blog to include the new paragraph above headed "Planning considerations"

Note: In his Information Report in 2017, Bob Shelton, told us that, in addition to the land donation, Marianneville had agreed to 

"design and construct trails and related works at its cost on, and adjacent to, the donated lands at a time agreed to with the Town. The trail will connect to the Bathurst Street sidewalk, the existing trail in the Kirby Crescent Park, and Alex Doner Drive. For the portion of the trail proposed on lands retained by Marianneville an easement will be required and provided to permit public access over private land." 

There are 42 km of paved recreational trails in Newmarket and more are planned including multi-use paths. I don’t know the length of the one at Glenway West nor do I know how much it would cost to build. The Town, though, will be responsible for maintaining it. 

Details

Written by Gordon Prentice

Published: 22 January 2022

Next Wednesday, 26 January 2022, the Town’s Committee of Adjustment is expected to approve plans to transform the empty Clock Tower building on Main Street into a boutique hotel with 55 guest rooms, a restaurant and a rooftop event space. 

The Town is backing the plan.

It will mark the end of a decade long debate on the future of one of Newmarket’s most iconic buildings.

The Committee of Adjustment considers planned changes to a property which are

“not in conformity with the zoning by-law, but follows its general intent”

and can approve so-called minor variances.

Support

The plans have been widely welcomed. Trinity United Church, directly opposite on Park Avenue, and the Newmarket Co-operative Nursery School both support the development.

The building height is increased but the rooftop structure is stepped back, lessening the visual impact. And all the parking will be at grade. 

It has been eleven years almost to the day when the previous owner, Bob Forrest, had a discussion with the then Ward 5 councillor, Joe Sponga, about his plans for the building that he had just purchased. A boutique hotel was mentioned as a possibility but then it all went pear-shaped as Forrest, greedy for profit, pursued a development that would have wrecked the Town’s historic Main Street. (Click "Read More" below)

The old Clock Tower building has been crying out for a new use for far too long and this imaginative proposal deserves a round of applause.

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Comments from the Town's Engineering Department are here. Planning considerations are here. The Planning Rationale is here. The Architectural Drawings are here. The Parking justification letter is here. The Heritage Impact Brief is here

And other material is here.

Update on 28 January 2022: The Committee of Adjustment approved the application subject to further consideration being given to parking issues at Site Plan stage.

Read more: Newmarket's iconic Clock Tower gets a new lease on life

Details

Written by Gordon Prentice

Published: 17 January 2022

Tomorrow, voting begins in Richmond Hill for a new Mayor to replace Dave Barrow who resigned on 15 September last year after a six month absence on medical leave.  

A week earlier, on 8 September 2021, Barrow persuaded his colleagues at a special council meeting to eliminate one of the two deputy mayors. Carmine Perrelli lost out to his arch-rival, Joe Di Paola, who has now been Acting Mayor for almost 11 months.

At the last election in 2018 for the two Richmond Hill Regional Councillor positions, Joe DiPaola was elected with 11,758 votes (22.35%) just pipping Perrelli who trailed with 11,418 votes (21.7%).

The two are now locked in a fierce battle for the Mayoralty with seven other candidates also on the ballot paper.

Carmine Perrelli is an unsympathetic character who deserves to lose. 

Strong Leadership

His campaign literature parades his “strong leadership”. 

Archie Brown, in his 2016 book “The Myth of the Strong Leader”, writes:

No-one ever says, “What we need is a weak leader”. Strength is to be admired, weakness to be deplored or pitied. Yet the facile weak-strong dichotomy is a very limited and unhelpful way of assessing individual leaders. 

There are many qualities desirable in a political leader… These include integrity, intelligence, articulateness, collegiality, shrewd judgement, a questioning mind, willingness to seek disparate views, ability to absorb information, flexibility, good memory, courage, vision, empathy and boundless energy. Although incomplete, that is already a formidable list… 

Carmine Perrelli just doesn’t cut the mustard. He is loud, belligerent, argumentative, boorish and self-important.  

Intimidation and fear

He is also thin-skinned. And to cap it all, he blocks people he doesn’t like from his Twitter feed. 

Last April, Perrelli was the subject of a Code of Conduct complaint brought to York Regional Council by a Richmond Hill lawyer, Jason Cherniak, who objected to being blocked.

Joe DiPaola waded into the debate. He told members of York Regional Council that Perrelli was not afraid: 

“To use his position to intimidate and cause fear”

He went on to brand Perrelli as

“an extremely problematic elected official”

Who needs a Code of Conduct?

York Regional Council only recently adopted a Code of Conduct. It had been delayed for years by endless foot-dragging with some members, including Perrelli, questioning whether a Code of Conduct was needed at all.

He told the Regional Council that Canada’s Criminal Code, an observant press and media and elections every four years was enough to keep councillors honest and diligent.  He says the Code of Conduct is:

“a weapon for political adversaries to use against you.”

Clearly, he believes people are out to get him.

Garbage

Perrelli boasts in his campaign literature that he “Eliminated the Bin Exchange Fee” where residents could trade in their old, damaged garbage bin and get a new one for free.

Except that Perrelli did not have the authority to do that. And Richmond Hill Council, on the advice of its Director of Financial Services and Treasurer, is seeking to recover $139,623 from him.

How this will play out if Perrelli becomes Mayor is uncertain.

The Council website reminds us that the Mayor’s role is defined by the Municipal Act 2001 s225 which says the Mayor, besides being the Chief Executive Officer of the Municipality, must also ensure that Council decisions are implemented.

So, if he is elected Mayor, what happens to the $139,623 he owes the Town of Richmond Hill? 

A Strong Leader wouldn't be afraid to tell us.

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Update on 25 January 2022: From the Toronto Star: David West - backed by former Mayor Dave Barrow - wins by-election and is Richmond Hill's new Mayor.

Details

Written by Gordon Prentice

Published: 16 January 2022

Doug Ford and Caroline Mulroney are determined to press ahead with the Bradford Bypass – a controversial scheme which opponents say will cause environmental damage to Lake Simcoe’s delicate eco-system and to prime Grade 1 agricultural lands in Holland Marsh.  

Last September, the Ford Government exempted the Bradford Bypass from key requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act 1990. They said that:

“By eliminating duplication and streamlining processes, we are shortening timelines, reducing delays, and focusing the province's resources on projects that matter most to Ontario communities.”

Special Treatment

Regulation 697/21 applies only to the Bradford Bypass.

“We have exempted the Bradford Bypass project from duplicative requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act by way of regulation. The regulation sets conditions for the assessment process going forward and for continued environmental protection and consultations. No other Ministry of Transportation projects have been exempted from the Environmental Assessment Act as part of this regulation.”

Since then, the Ford Government has made a commitment to fully fund the Bypass which they say will “relieve gridlock”.

They are also carrying out early construction works in advance of all the necessary environmental studies being completed. On 26 November the Province issued a “Request for Proposals” to build a bridge crossing for the Bradford Bypass.

In its comments on the (then) draft regulation, the Ontario Public Health Association “strongly urged” the Government to reconsider exempting the Bradford Bypass from the requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act.

“The Bradford Bypass project which received individual EA approval in 2002 with conditions, but has not yet been implemented, would no longer have to meet some of those conditions. The conditions included a requirement to prepare a Transportation Environmental Study Report (TESR) and a Design and Construction Report (DCR). The TESR would have outlined: potential environmental impacts, measures to mitigate impacts, and consultation.

It is still not immediately obvious (at least to me) what environmental reports and studies are mandated and the extent to which the public will be consulted – and who decides whether or not to consult. And if that decision can be challenged. 

Last week officials from the Ministry of Transportation did their best to square the circle in a presentation to members of York Regional Council. But they fell short, obfuscating as much as they clarified.

How much will the Bypass cost? 

Markham Regional Councillor Jack Heath innocently asks how much the project would cost – give or take half a billion dollars. But the officials refuse to give a figure on the grounds that it’s early days and much could change. An exasperated Heath fumes:

“It astonishes me that somebody at the Ministry can't do that (give a rough estimate)… We should have invited someone who could at least give us a general idea what this is going to cost. If the staff can’t do it then the politicians can do it and maybe we should have invited one of them.” 

Georgina Mayor, Margaret Quirk, tells us that her Council is “supportive of the project” but they worry about the impact on Lake Simcoe as

“the health of the lake is of great importance to us.”

Her Council wants to involve the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority but doesn't see any need to press the Federal Government to get involved. 

“The Federal Government has made it clear in responses last year that they were not going to be doing that.  So instead of knocking on that door again…”

Since then, of course, we have had a Federal Election and we have a new Minister of the Environment and Climate Change – but that is all lost on Georgina’s Mayor.

Hard to believe

She tells us about a letter from the Ministry sent to her Council which says

“the Bradford bypass will be located South of Lake Simcoe and will not directly impact Lake Simcoe…” 

She says that's really hard to believe. 

“It will (impact). We know that. It's not rocket science. But how the Province will mitigate that is what we want to know.” 

Now we hear from East Gwillimbury Mayor, Virginia Hackson, who also supports the proposed bypass believing it will

“move traffic off our local roads and on to one provincial road”

But, like Margaret Quirk, she wants to see the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority have a role.

Quirk and Hackson give every impression of being supplicants, begging the Ministry to listen to the conservation authority and others while restating their own support for the bypass.

Taylor demands clarity

Now Newmarket Mayor, John Taylor, steps forward, seeking clarity in all the obfuscations and circumlocutions from the Ministry. Newmarket has already called for a Provincial Environmental Assessment and, if that’s not forthcoming, a Federal Impact Assessment. 

But the Province is now moving ahead under a regulation – specific to the Bradford Bypass – which exempts it (the Province) from key requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act 1990.

Taylor wants to know what they don’t have to do now (under regulation 697/21) that they would have had to do before.  He wants the Ministry to give him a table showing the differences. And what if changes are made to the project? Will there be consultations on these? 

He also wants to know why the Ford Government insisted on a review of the North York Wastewater Treatment plant in East Gwillimbury after an environmental assessment process that lasted six years. And why is the very same Government taking the Bradford Bypass project out of the established EA process and fast-tracking it?

We get a torrent of explanations from the Man from the Ministry leaving us none the wiser.

Like everyone else, I wait to see the table promised by the Ministry. All will then be revealed.

Or not.

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

See also report in Newmarket Today on 13 January 2022.

Update on 22 January 2022: From Newmarket Today: Letter to the Editor: Time to put the brakes on Ford Government's dismantling of environmental protections

Click the link below to see transcript of Thursday's presentation and debate.

Update on 10 February 2022: Federal Government will not intervene

Read more: The Bradford Bypass and its impact on the environment