Chudleigh talks to Acton's -
The New Tanner about council's recent "embarrassment" - flip-flopping over
issues previously settled
Halton Hills, Acton - An article was published
in Acton's 'The New Tanner', dated January 20, 2005,
"Chudleigh says Town
made right decision".
Quote from the New Tanner:
Halton MPP Ted Chudleigh said Halton Hills council is wise to rescind a previous motion to include an additional 4,000 acres of Scotch Block into the Greenbelt Plan proposed by the Provincial Government.
“This reversal certainly proves that Halton Hills council realize they
rushed to judgement on the acreage in Scotch Block,” said Mr. Chudleigh. “It also suggests that the council understands that the Greenbelt idea itself is not fully fleshed out.”
Chudleigh said it was nice to see Halton Hills council
respond to those citizens who were negatively affected by council’s
determination to include the Scotch Block acreage. However, he said,
council could have saved much heartache and embarrassment by
consulting with those affected landowners prior to their original motion.
“I hope more municipalities begin to recognize the
serious flaws in the proposed Greenbelt Plan and make their views known to
the Provincial Government. Borders of this proposed Greenbelt are not
specific enough to enact in legislation. Removing land rights without
providing some form of compensation, is not just, nor is it in the public
interest to ignore minority rights.”
Commentaries
posted in our forums;
Quote:
The decision to recommend the additional 4000 acres to the Provincial Mandate was a good one, but given the response from
what now seems like - the Chudleigh organized farmers loby group against the Greenbelt, it’s painfully obvious to council now that their original decision to safeguard the environment was a bad one.
Over the period of the past few weeks, council heard from many farmers and developers who operated or bought farms hoping to develop them in the not so distant future, and the one thing that made council concerned,
or so it seems - was the negative real estate effect - protecting farmers property has on real estate values.
It's possible many of these farmers
may have mortgaged the farm to the tilt, believing one day it would be worth millions to them. The Chudleigh
farm on Hwy 25 is a perfect hypothetical example - There's a place nestled
in the rolling hills of Halton, a birds-eye view from the picturesque
escapement, surrounded by homes of distinction, minutes from the 401. The apple
farmer goes to the bank with a real estate assessment worth millions and millions of dollars. The bank says; how much you want? The apple
farmer says; how much will you give? The bank says; how about 60%. The apple
farmer says; how fast can I get it?
Now along comes the greenbelt McGuinty who tells the financial community; it’s not going to happen. The bank says; hello, Mr. Apple
farmer, my boss said we need the balance of that 60% we gave you earlier. Apple
farmer might then call their MPP neighbours or brothers at Queens Park, who organizes the farmers
intimidating town council into rescinding what they (council) thought was the right choice, attempting to safe guard the environment for future generations.
Other interpretations
posted in our forums;
Quote:
Chudleigh said - "removing land rights without providing some form of COMPENSATION is not just, nor is it in the publics best interest to ignore minority rights."
"What he really meant to say was .... removing land
rights without COMPENSATING farmers, is not in the farmers best interest.
Safe guarding the environment for generations to come is in the public's
best interest, but not if it means 'us' apple farming Chudleigh types have to
re-mortgage the farm."
Post your Interactive/comments here ...
click here for more
Chudleigh News Releases ...
.
.gif){kind=spacer}
All external sites will open in a new browser