No referendum, no vote

(6) Comments | Print | Report a typo | Contact the Editor
Michael Prue, the MPP for Beaches-East York, wore a sweater with the words, "East York says no to megacity," knitted on the front at a de-amalgamation meeting in Azilda May 18.

Michael Prue, the MPP for Beaches-East York, wore a sweater with the words, "East York says no to megacity," knitted on the front at a de-amalgamation meeting in Azilda May 18.

May 19, 2006- 5:37 PM

By:

BY HEIDI ULRICHSEN
heidi@northernlife.ca

If Greater Sudbury's mayor and council refuse to hold a referendum on de-amalgamation, citizens should vote them out of office during municipal elections in November, says NDP municipal affairs critic Michael Prue.

"In the end, you have the absolute right to have the government and municipality you want," he told an audience of about 60 attending a de-amalgamation meeting at the Lionel E. Lalonde Centre in Azilda Thursday night.

"Go out and elect a councillor that supports your right to de-amalgamate. Get someone in this room to run in this ward."

Prue, the MPP for Beaches-East York, was joined by Nickel Belt MPP Shelley Martel, Ward 2 Councillor Claude Berthiaume and Ward 3 Councillor Andre Rivest.

A petition signed by 8,300 Greater Sudbury residents in favour of holding a referendum on de-amalgamation was given to Martel last week, who presented it to the legislature Monday.

Another 1,000 signatures have been collected since then, said Berthiaume.

Before getting into provincial politics during a byelection in 2001, Prue was the mayor of East York and a councillor on the Toronto City Council once his community was brought into the new megacity.

He successfully lobbied the provincial government to allot a third council seat for East York to improve its representation on Toronto City Council.

Sporting a yellow sweater decorated with the words, "East York says no to megacity," Prue told the Azilda residents about the first time he learned his community would become part of Toronto.

A consultant in charge of the process called Prue and the other mayors of Toronto suburbs into his office. He asked why amalgamation was necessary, and the man couldn't come up with a good answer.

"He looked at me, and gave me what can only be described as a Trudeau-esque shrug, and he said 'Damned if I know, but I have to do something'," he says.

"That's how Toronto got amalgamated - 'Damned if I know, but I have to do something.' And after Toronto, a whole bunch of other cities (also got amalgamated). Ottawa, Sudbury, Hamilton, Kawartha Lakes and Hamilton."

The Harris Conservative government, who spurred amalgamations in Ontario, said municipal service costs would go down, but that wasn't true, says Prue.

"They said we'd go from six fire chiefs to one, and so on, but really, we had one fire chief and six deputy fire chiefs because we needed people to look after the fire stations."

In Kawartha Lakes, people were so unhappy with amalgamation that they held a referendum on breaking up the city again right after the fall 2003 provincial election, and 52 percent of the population supported the idea.

While in opposition Premier Dalton McGuinty wrote an email saying his party would support de-amalgamation, but once elected to office, he broke his promise, says Prue.

Quebec Premier Jean Charest was elected around the same time as McGuinty, but he kept his promise to allow de-amalgamations. Since then, many former municipalities in Quebec have split with super-cities.

The MPP promised to make sure NDP policy clearly allows for de-amalgamation at the next convention.

Read More: Home > Sudbury News
(6) Comments | Print | Report a typo | Contact the Editor

Reader's Feedback

Editor’s Note:

NorthernLife.ca may contain content submitted by readers, usually in the form of article comments. All reader comments and any opinions, advice, statements or other information contained in any messages posted or transmitted by any third party are the responsibility of the author of that message and not of NorthernLife.ca. The fact that a particular message is posted on or transmitted using this web site does not mean that NorthernLife.ca has endorsed that message in any way or verified the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message. We encourage visitors to NorthernLife.ca to report any objectionable content by using the "report abuse" link found in the comments section of this web site.

6 Comments

  • John Q Public_5 5/24/2006 2:53:49 PM - Report Abuse

    Shane and Zeke are prime examples of how rhetoric has blinded the masses. Complaining yet ignorant of how costs have skyrocketed. How the Valley matured from money taken from the City in the past to construct their infrastructure. Now wanting to cut and run with their goodies. Yet not fully aware that the entire region has seen cuts. Everybody is experiencing the same pinch. To think other wise and to dream of the "good old days of the '70's" is being foolish and myopic. The elected democratic government lawfully amalgamated cities. For the good of everybody. That is how society works. To cloud the issue by saying "I should have the right to vote" is grandstanding. Valley residents should take a hard look at their area. No large industry or manufacturing to bolster the economy. Years of cheap taxes in a Regional Government with payments from the larger city to bolster their services. Now it's time to pay as you go and catch up for what was sent your way. Want to separate? Let's see your numbers in a test budget. You won't do it because you'll see exactly how good you have it right now. Valley East, the cheap ride is over.

  • Shane Taylor_1 5/22/2006 3:38:41 PM - Report Abuse

    Since amalgamation Valley East has lost more then it has gained in my opinion. Services have remained the same or worsened (tipping fees, snow removal, street conditions etc.), and property taxes and service costs are growing constantly. Valley East had the future of the area in it's own hands, and now is only one of many voices. I personally don't get the impression that city official's from anywhere outside of Valley East really cares about the issues going on in Valley East. As for mantras like "for the greater good of everybody", well that really translates to the greater good for the people that own property and live in Sudbury. Not a cent of money taxed in Valley East or other large municipality should be spent in Sudbury, but that does not seem to be the fact. As for democracy, I don't remember voting in any referendum to amalgamate Valley East or any other outlining area. In fact there wasn't even any PC candidates voted in the Sudbury District at the time. When amalgamation was happening the people in Valley East seemed to feel they where losing everything they had accomplished in the past 100 years, and only gained problems from Sudbury. So much for democracy.

  • Zeke Kanhai 5/20/2006 11:21:39 PM - Report Abuse

    If we are truly a democracy, the citizens should have a choice as to whether they want almagamation or de-amalgamation. Of course, the process of arriving at a final decision should involve thorough studies of the pros and cons, especially the financial feasibilities. The public should participate in a review of such studies before a referendum is held. In a true democracy, the smaller communities should not be bullied by the larger neighbouring cities or the provincial government.

  • Will Stos 5/20/2006 7:22:50 PM - Report Abuse

    I agree with Bernie. The areas surrounding the old city of Sudbury want the best of both worlds: low taxes and urban luxuries. If the Sudbury area is ever going to start playing with the big boys development-wise, it's going to have to start working for a common good. I propose going a step further from amalgamation. Half the council should be elected as councillors-at-large so they would have to represent the whole city and not pander to their own personal ward fiefdom. Prue asks what reason there was for amalgamation. What reason was there not to amalgamate? There no is sense in having multiple municipal or town councils in an area where so many are closely grouped together. Let's stop trying to move backwards and come together to promote the entire area and look for ways to improve services while sharing the fiscal responsibility.

  • Bernie Lomax_29 5/19/2006 4:39:07 PM - Report Abuse

    This is a complete waste of time. Now we have somebody coming form the GTA to tell us how he FAILED to de-amalgamate his city. He has no idea about the complex and unique geography, population, and financial costs of the Greater City of Sudbury. LETS BE CLEAR HERE to what this entire endeavour REALLY is: This is ELECTION GRANDSTANDING by Councillor Claude Berthiaume and Councillor Andre Rivest. They full well know that the decision to change the city is a Provincial responsibility and it has to be though opening Laws and drafting a new Municipal Act. The all to be voted on in legislature. Something Ontario will not do. Secondly, they spout how things were much better the way they were pre-1999. ***************SO PROOVE IT! ****************** Draft a parallel budget with the additional costs of Mayors, Town Councils with secretiaries, vehicles, maitenance of roads and infrastructure. Also add the costs of additional municipal buildings, their staff and the funding to operate the structures. Don't forget the cost from downloading of Ambulance, and Social Housing are now the responsibility of Towns and Cities. Furthermore MNR no longer responds to bush fires and the local Fire Departments now must deal with that huge cost. Add the re-opening of your own garbage and recycling depots. (Assuming the Federal and Provincial governments will issue a permit for the dumps.) Add the cost of Police to that as each de-amalgamated town will have to pay the City or the OPP to fight crime. Each Town will be responsible for their own insurance policy. More money will be needed to purchase or and upgrade Town garages and yards and the staff to work there. Water? There's another huge cost. Valley East brags it's population is over 25,000 and therefore can qualify to be designated a "City". Good luck. The extra standards that come with City status will crush the residents with huge tax levies. As that there is little (if any) industry to cushon the tax bills. I CHALLENGE those that want to go backwards to come up with this PARALLEL BUDGET. You'll see that things aren't as bad as you think they are. If you want City type services, then move to the core of a city. If you want rural living, then put up with the rural lifestyle. A final example is how a snowplow or garbage truck can service an entire city neighbourhood in 1/2 an hour. The same trucks cost abundantly more to drive all the way out to Onaping to clear the same size areas in 4x the time. Think about that and how it applies to most services from water to Emergency Services.

  • gordon smith_1 5/19/2006 3:34:59 PM - Report Abuse

    The Amalgamation Will not work the cost have gone wild .Lets get out before we all sink. Have a vote on it.
FacebookTwitterRSSVideophotoNewsletterMobile