View Single Post
  #2  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2016, 8:54 PM
thistleclub thistleclub is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,728
Suburban urban split
(CATCH, Aug 16 2016)

Decisions on many key issues that have divided urban and suburban councillors could change significantly if new wards based on the principle of representation by population are approved this fall. Voting records indicate such issues include downtown renewal, heritage protection, bus lanes, most other transit issues, area rating, and development charges. And ward boundary reform might either finally achieve the projected goals of amalgamation or further intensify the bitterness it generated.

After sixteen years of wards that follow pre-amalgamation boundaries and give the much smaller suburban population nearly as many council seats as the residents of the former city of Hamilton, a long-demanded redistribution will be decided this fall. The choices outlined in an independent consultant report range from major revamp to a continuation of the status quo. The latter is likely favoured by at least the seven councillors who represent Ancaster, Dundas, Flamborough, Glanbrook and Stoney Creek who repeatedly have blocked changes to ward boundaries.

Suburban representatives have voted as a solid or near solid block on other issues – especially against elimination of the lower tax rates embedded in the area rating system adopted at the time of amalgamation. Part of that system was dismantled over the last few years, but households in the former suburbs continue to pay only about a third of the transit taxes that face residents of the old city.

Transit operations have also seen urban-suburban divides, and to some extent that’s also the case for the on-going debate about LRT. Five suburban councillors voted in May to defer a decision on whether Hamilton wants the billion dollar provincial investment. A sixth was absent for the 9-6 decision and only one opposed the deferral.

Two-thirds of those who squashed the King Street bus-only lane were suburban – joined in the 9-6 decision by the three Hamilton mountain councillors. The defeat of improvements to the HSR’s Rymal 44 route two years ago was an even starker example of the urban-suburban division. That 8-5 decision taken in the absence of three urban councillors saw all seven suburban votes on the winning side.

And there was a strict urban-suburban divide last year over a motion to ask the citizen’s panel on transit to also review the HSR area rating tax system. Mayor Eisenberger joined all eight councillors from the old city to out-vote all seven suburban representatives.

Last year the two geographic factions split on a motion asking staff to look at the possibility of tolls for “out-of-town” truck traffic on the Red Hill and Linc expressways. The move was supported by Mayor Eisenberger and five urban councillors, but overwhelmed by six suburban representatives joined by Terry Whitehead.



Read it in full here.
__________________
"Where architectural imagination is absent, the case is hopeless." - Louis Sullivan
Reply With Quote