DBIA extorted money from city: Parnell
City council adopted new rules to prevent business improvement areas from opposing any decision of council, this week - rules that one councillor said come after the Downtown Business Improvement Area association extorted the city for money.
Coun. Lesley Parnell said at the council meeting on Monday that the DBIA shook the city down after it dropped its Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) appeal of council’s decision to allow a casino on Crawford Dr. (and not downtown).
The two sides reached a settlement that saw $150,000 go to the DBIA from the city every year for the next 20 years in exchange for dropping the appeal. But Parnell didn’t see it as a settlement.
“Basically, we were extorted out of some money. That crosses the line,” she said. “That’s the bottom line, for me.”
Dave Madill, the chairman of the DBIA board, was at the meeting on Monday – he was there to tell councillors the board was “dis- turbed” by the new, restrictive rules and wanted a deferral so the board could offer more feedback.
But Madill was gone from City Hall by the time Parnell made her comments (the meeting went from 6:30 p.m. until after midnight).
In an interview on Tuesday, Madill said he was disappointed in the remark.
“It’s unfortunate and careless what Lesley Parnell said,” Madill said. “Truth and facts do not support that claim.”
Madill pointed out that in late 2015, councillors held a closeddoor meeting where they directed staff to start planning for a casino on Crawford Dr.
After a citizen complained, an investigator found the discussion shouldn’t have been held in private; there should have been an opportunity for residents to hear council’s debate.
The investigator noted that the public was only told six months later – in May 2016 - that city staff had already begun to rezone the land on Crawford Dr. for a casino.
The DBIA thought it was so unfair that it appealed to the OMB – only to settle the matter with the city before a hearing ever took place.
“We in good faith bargained a settlement after the city held an illegal meeting – we filed a legitimate complaint,” Madill said Tuesday.
He said the settlement money – which the DBIA is using for items such as downtown security cameras – is meant to “counteract” the damage done when the future casino and its crowds went to the outskirts.
Both sides – the city and the DBIA – felt the settlement was fair, Madill said. Yet now the DBIA is going to have to live with new restrictions.
At City Hall on Monday, the vote to adopt the new rules was 9-2: the two votes against were from Coun. Diane Therrien and Coun. Gary Baldwin.
Under the new rules, local BIAs can appear before council as a delegation but can’t pass a resolution or take a decision contrary to a councilapproved policy or decision.
Nor can a BIA become a party or participant in a hearing before the OMB unless they meet specific requirements; for example, they have to show in advance that they have the money to fight the city at an OMB hearing.
At the meeting on Monday, Therrien, who is the council’s appointed member of the DBIA board, wanted council to wait and allow the board to offer more feedback.
Coun. Gary Baldwin agreed to it, saying he didn’t like the idea of adopting new rules so hastily when the DBIA wants to have some input. Why not wait, he asked.
“By doing that, you can’t be accused of being heavy-handed,” he said. “You give them an opportunity to have their say.”
But Coun. Dean Pappas said it’s time to modernize the rules for BIAs. There’s no reason they cannot “tweak” those rules later, he said.
Coun. Keith Riel also said the new rules should be adopted with no delay.
The city is paying a lot of money to the DBIA over the casino, he reminded councillors – all because the DBIA was upset the casino wasn’t going downtown.
“Where does this stop?”