Aurora – Lake Simcoe Watch

Mayor

Tom Mrakas (candidate for Mayor)

1. Should municipalities in the Lake Simcoe watershed work with the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority and the Government of Ontario to develop and implement a plan to reduce Lake Simcoe’s phosphorus loadings to 44 tonnes per year by 2026?

Yes.

2. Should municipalities in the Lake Simcoe watershed work with the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority and the Government of Ontario to develop and implement a plan to ensure that by 2026, at least 40% of Lake Simcoe’s watershed consists of high quality connected forests, wetlands and meadows?

Yes.

3. Should the LSRCA establish a process for receiving and reviewing submissions from the public with respect to all Section 28 permit applications pertaining to Lake Simcoe’s wetlands, floodplains and shorelines?

Yes.

4. Should the Development Charges Act amended to allow municipalities to recover 100% of their additional infrastructure costs to service new residential and commercial projects from their developers?

Yes.

Chris Ballard (candidate for Mayor)

Yes.

A great deal of work has been done and progress has been made but more is needed. We all benefit from a healthy lake -- those who use the lake for recreation, those who live there and those who make a living from lake resources. We need to work together to continue improving the health of Lake Simcoe

Yes.

Maybe.

Pending a review of the Development Charges Act and how revenue is currently used.. While I am seriously concerned about the already high cost of housing in the area it is not fair that through their property taxes current residents end up having to pay infrastructure costs that are a direct result of new development. I want to explore all avenues for a resolution to this issue.

Councillor and Regional Councillor

Wendy Gaertner (candidate for Councillor)

Yes.

This is crucial! Absolutely Municipalities must work with The Authority and the Government to reduce phosphorous.
I have been on Aurora Council since 2003 and know the importance of reducing phosphorus loading. Each year we receive an update on progress. I am very interested and ask a lot of questions; but everyone on every Council needs to take this issue seriously!

Yes.

Oh yes! The connectedness and quality of these environmental soldiers so important.

Yes.

Yes! All permit applications must be reviewed to at least establish that the proposal will at least not cause harm to our wetlands, flood plains and shorelines. I would prefer that submissions be accepted only if they protect or improve what exists!

4. Should the Development Charges Act be amended to allow municipalities to recover 100% of their additional infrastructure costs to service new residential and commercial projects from their developers?

Yes.

Yes, of course this would be financially helpful to municipalities as we know that “growth does not cover growth.”
However, My concern is that developers will just pass on the extra costs to the buyer, residents especially.
Developers generally have large profit margins. I would like to have a discussion on how we could proceed to a solution that does not overload homeowners.

Vicky McGrath (candidate for Councillor)

Yes.

Sandra Humfryes (candidate for Councillor)

Yes.

Rachel Gilliland (candidate for Councillor)

Yes.

Absolutely. We are risking the health of our lake and rivers. The main areas of improvement by working with the Province and Municipalities should be:

Stormwater management caused by new development
Climate Change
Agricultural runoff

Also, it's important to continue to maintain the productivity of our Water Pollution Control Plants by investing in better treatment technologies and upgrades.

Yes.

Protecting the watershed, wetlands and forest is two-fold. 1. A rich high-quality forest will help filter out phosphorous and contaminants from entering our lakes and rivers, and 2, has the ability to help improve the habitat and migration corridors for animals, birds and plants.
If our forests are too fragmented and piecemeal...we risk losing the health of the forest, loss of animals and reduce the ability to filter out contaminants. It's our responsibility, as a human race, to implement a plan for the future before it's too late. In my opinion, these impacts have become a serious environmental concern that would require the support from local municipalities, the LSRCA and the Ontario Government.

Yes.

Too much power in the hands of one body. If the public is refused the right to be heard, who is going to protect our wetlands, floodplains and shorelines when questionable decisions are made by the LSRCA? A good starting point is defining a process.

Yes.

Yes. Service discounts should be eliminated and subsection 7(1) of the Act removed. I recommend removing the 10% discount from the calculation of the growth-related capital costs and to be borne by developers through development charges. These DC charges will help offset the cost of additional infrastructure required to support the growth/development.

Matthew Abas (candidate for Councillor)

Yes.

What is cost involve to tax payers, and how will the reduction be measured? Are there other ways to reduce algae such harvesting for biofuel?

p.s. There are no wards in Aurora.

Yes.

One easy way to improve water quality is to enforce the $50,000 York Region fine to pool companies that continue to dump pool water down storm sewers. Who determines what "high quality" means and what will be the cost to tax payers? Manitoba maples should not be planted. Other fast growing trees can also interfere with the reasonable enjoyment of residents,if planted too close to properties. Why are permits for pools being granted that violate Aurora Bylaws and LSCRA title conditions? Why are front lawns being paved for extra parking that increase run-off?

Yes.

There are many gaps.
Section 28 includes;
prevent loss of life;
minimize property damage and social disruptions;
reduce public and private expenditures related to emergency operations, evacuations and restoration;
minimize the hazards associated with development in floodplains and areas which are susceptible to erosion, which in future years may require expensive protective measures.

This is not currently happening.

Currently there is an errorsion issue at Lundy park that I reported 1 year ago that is still unresolved. The anti-errosion measures are in bad need of repair.

The introduction of a beaver ( Ballymore Beaver) has created serveral issues including possible loss of life via falling trees where children play. The deadfall has become a huge fire risk to neighboring properties. Weekly inspection needed for safety are not being done.

The reduced capacity of the storm water pond puts an historic home at risk of flooding as it is below the 100 year flood line. This will result in an eventual lawsuit and tax payer waste. Hand drawn boundaries for maps are in accurate and should be done by survery as required by Ontario law. Waves on storm water ponds are minimal and the same boundaries used for lakes does not make sense.

Yes the pubic should consulted.

Maybe.

The first 100 houses developed should not have to pay for then next 1000 units being built. Service costs for basic services should be the same for all residents. Internet services in old area need to be improved and should be included when newer areas are done. When sewage capacity is exceeded, should the cost be distributed, or just applied to the last house that exceeded the capacity?

It does not make sense to me that residents zoned residential pay rural rates for hydro delivery.

John Gallo (candidate for Councillor)

Yes.

I would prefer a lot more than 40%.

Yes.

Derrick Hammett (candidate for Councillor)

Yes.

Maybe.

I believe in the reviewing of submissions and offering input/advice to municipalities. I am hesitant on the LSRCA having any final decision on applications.

No.

Some responsibility must be accepted by the municipality and benefits they will receive from future long term residents. Proper budgeting and managing will be required and if done improperly, that should not be a developers issue.

Denis Van Decker (candidate for Councillor)

Yes.

Protector of the Environment is one of the main things I see of a councillor. This is from my Blog about the environment and water quality. It is focused on our local watercourses but of course we are part of the watershed so it is relevant. Please go to my blog on the environment here including my YouTibe Video on the same topic linked there:

https://vandecker.com/our-environment/

Or my website www.vandecker.com to see all 26 of my platform videos and all of my election material.

I have been an environmentalist for all of my adult life and even as a child I was brought up in a house with the 3 R’s. As time has gone on, the 3 R’s have expanded to the 5 R’s: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, Repair and Re-purpose.

I have Perennial gardens and Fruit Bushes growing throughout my front yard gardens. We eat local as much as we can. I have 9 composters on the property feeding the gardens – and all of them were reclaimed from the curb. We have solar on our roof, a very efficient home and we repair, re-purpose and reuse as much as possible. A decade ago I was active in the Green Party writing policy in Green energy and Justice issues.

I also have been working as an entrepreneur in the Renewable Energy field for 18 years – putting my money where my heart is. I have spent the last 6 years installing Solar. I have a number of ideas about Renewable Energy and Solar that I have in 3 separate videos.

This video specifically focuses on Water quality issues and how lax enforcement is allowing developers to pollute our waterways.

Environmental issues are important to me. I will be your protector of the environment on Aurora Council.

Yes.

I agree the forests are important and I love using them and believe they are a great natural resource. I am not sure about the number of 40% coverage

Maybe.

I am not familiar with Section 28.

Yes.

David Heard (candidate for Councillor)

Yes.

No.

There needs to be balance as I feel this is why developers have become so bullish.

Daniel Lajeunesse (candidate for Councillor)

Yes.

Absolutely, education, regulation and enforcement should be supported at the municipal level.

Yes.

A number of assumption have to be made (such as what is the current levels), however I strongly believe in the overall benefit of mature and healthy green spaces.

Yes.

As the Lake Simcoe area population continues to grow, the number of permit requests and process complaints will continue to grow. The main benefits of a submission process can be; the reduction of complaints due to misinformation, perceived favouritism, built in scrutiny and more.

Yes.

Development has accelerated throughout the northern Toronto communities. Developers see huge opportunities and as they probably should, seize them. However this growth needs to be better managed to ensure the continued health of our environment, its citizens, the town's infrastructure and the town overall growth plans. Basic infrastructure costs (water, sewers, water control, roads, etc...) should definitely be covered by the developers as these costs can be distributed over numerous builders and over all new homes. Services and maintenance fall under the community.

Anna Kroeplin (candidate for Councillor)

Yes.

Even though phosphorus is a nutrient, high levels found in Lake Simcoe are producing excessive growth of underwater plants and algae that die, sink and then decompose, which inevitably consumes oxygen. As Lake Simcoe not only sustains 75 different species of animals, it provides drinking water to our town (along with 7 other municipalities), therefore we absolutely need to do our part to support the efforts to reduce phosphorus loadings.

Yes.

As a healthy watershed is dependent on high quality forests and wetlands that are home to many species, Aurora needs to be part of the solution to protect it. A healthy watershed sustains communities.

Yes.

LSRCA has a process when dealing with development proposals to protect wetlands, shorelines and watercourses, so it makes sense that if a private resident or member of the public want to undertake work that could potentially compromise or alter wetlands, shorelines and watercourses, there should be some controls in place to reduce hazards. Public submissions would also be valuable to allow reporting of naturally occurring flooding, erosion and slope failures.

Maybe.

I understand that development charges provide for the recovery of growth-related capital expenditures from new development but am unsure of the current percentage that the Town recovers for additional infrastructure costs. As related to the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority and development on watershed lands, I agree that municipalities should be able to recover additional costs as the funds could then be allocated them back to protect natural resources that ultimately sustains the community.

Adam Mobbs (candidate for Councillor)

Yes.

I personally admire the research and position put together by Lake Simcoe Watch. I understand the concerns, science and objectives of reducing phosphorus by 2026. We can work together, where I will happily support the municipality, regional government and province to help achieve the plan to reduce phosphorus.

Yes.

Maybe.

I believe in responsible vision for growth in Aurora, one which includes a responsible vision for protecting the environment, tree canopy and wetlands. We can work together to ensure progress on the plan and support the LSRCA.

Maybe.

I will happily work with the province to review and update the Development Charges Act to ensure it is aligned with a responsible vision for growth.