Newmarket Town Clock Rings Time Out

Newmarket's Main St Clock debacle highlights the need to have our Planning Act revamped to close up all the loop holes that allow local councils and developers to evolve them through amendments to official plans, zoning applications and bylaws. Some have called for an overhaul of the OMB, however that buffer between developers and local governments is the last thing we need to eliminate or the road to easy changes would be much wider - not more narrow. You need an outside entity for checks and balances and the OMB is at least that if anything else. It will not stop towns from being Vanboozled.

It's not just the town clock we're talking about here, or even the four attached businesses and seniors that were displaced YEARS early to make room for....? We still don't know. But it's a plague across York Region and Toronto's too for that matter. Why is / was this allowed to even happen, buildings sitting empty and unkempt looking while its occupants are left to fend for themselves? And sure, they moved the seniors who were once occupants in the clock tower in question, but it wasn't a choice they wanted to make.

Main St. Newmarket, Ontario, Canada - Clock Tower base business boarded up

Certain conditions must be in place before proposals for change will be looked at seems the course, and so-minded landlords can set out to create that environment, ripe for their plan - even before approval or assurances they can even get the required zoning. Thus begins the long poker game wherein ultimately the developer holds the best cards, using our own laws within our planning act to manipulate their way through and force / create their vision of a plan. Why do you suppose many developers are real estate Lawyers? Why do you think so many real estate people hang around council seats? The control of our towns, cities, main streets and farms have been thrust into the hands of those who know how to work the system better and that is the problem.

Corporations are not people. They don't 'care' per say since its not a person. Should towns scale back reliance on them?

Sam Orrico, a Markham, York Region Farmer for the past 35 years has seen it all, and knows the loop holes well, recently removed from a property he's called home for the past 12 years to make way for an as yet to be determined decision on rezoning it - proposing a change from a farm w a residence / industrial zoning restriction, to become a full blown residential one - which is not part of the original official plan, with agriculture and / or industrial placements being based near highways to avoid gridlock. But our current system seemingly allows this to be changed without much fanfare despite the crown stamped official plan. Therein lies a key to amending the loop holes.

See and hear Sam in his own words prior to being removed here.

Richmond Hill near Main with Sam Orrico

Farms, same thing as with businesses w residents. 1st eliminate the farmer and or the house on the property or let it run into disrepair - similar to what happens with businesses often with residents living above and which then are boarded up until councils bend.

For farms, having no farmhouse or resident, makes it easier down the line to get re-zoning, whilst enjoying property tax perks and they can put these things on a timeline - known only to them - with the farmer (or tenant / business) often last to know relocating or moving at his or her expense, as Canada has no compensation set up for displaced farmers / workers like parts of Europe do.

How do we change this control back to the towns and cities' residents? Well we have to actually have an amendment made to the Planning Act so that local governments cannot supersede them anymore, nor developers bank on them being able to. Thus when you bought a property with a certain zoning and building type / height restrictions, that is what you get, with no more expectations of change.

West of Upper Canada Mall, Newmarket, Ontario, Canada

Should landlords allow properties to run into disrepair or disrepute for the purposes of forcing a vacating of them, then a provision needs made to confiscate it, at market value, to be resold to a suitable buyer who will be a responsible owner / operator. Just like they do to farmers and property owners when they want their land for crown projects or development. Reverse that power and watch how fast they fall into line.

Until then, they can pretend they want to include you / us in decisions but at the end of the day, it's all a smokescreen as  Corporate developers will apply for the most they can get, because they have to ( a corporation by law has to get the best possible return).  

Legal courts, with an adjudicator, will be the deciders on what and how big the proposed Clock Tower housing structure is regardless of my, your or your council's opinions, if its within " the law", without the right amendments made alright - to the Planning Act.

TP out

Planning Act not OMB Reform Needed

Farms dwindle as developers play the system

Our system of development across York Region is a ripe field primed and teed up for corruption's ugly makeover. I'm speaking of loopholes in our planning system, including amendments often made to official plans, overlooked by the Ontario Municipal Board, and how those in the know are able to take advantage of the corruptible system.

Sam Orrico stands symbolically in front of an emptied home

Did you know in Italy, when a Farmer has worked a property for a number of years they get compensated should they be moved off it so that it can be used for other purposes such as development? It translates to English as " Goodwill Out" and is considered fair to the Farmer. Not so here, as witnessed recently by one Farmer in Markham who has worked a property for 35 years, who with agreement still in hand, has been systematically removed prematurely. In fact he claims the bylaw officers have followed him to the new property he's had to plop his trailer home on even, the previous property's house having burnt down some 12 years ago, farmer Sam lucky to have been out at the time.

Who's really in charge of City planning?

They apparently plan to eventually develop Condos there at 14th west of Markham Road - in return for a community centre they built at the west end of the same property block. Problem is, Sam's block in question is not yet zoned for any development, and so as they move towards stripping the now fertile land, after years of care without even having posted signs to the affect they plan to apply for re-zoning, we now have a property at the cusp of ending years of his work - with no compensation to that displaced farmer, made to move his operation at an accelerated rate, at his cost. There are now loads of dirt piles, bulldozers, and other development type equipment set up ready to go. All with no permits or zoning to even develop it. That's how smug they are about it. Control.

It's not the first time it's happened to Sam Orrico, he was removed from the Pickering Airport land in the 80's, now a proposed dump, and certainly not he first time I've written about his incredible story. But make no mistake, he's here for the long haul, and not done his legal fight yet, especially now that the York Region Legal Clinic has a Lawyer on staff for issues involving possible homelessness, that Sam has now met with, although this may be out of their realm of mandated reach...But expect him to once again rise to run for public office in Markham to expose the "corrupt ways" and close the loop-holes through which unscrupulous developers - possibly aided by council unwittingly - can crawl through, to do what they like with a property, despite its official plan designation.

This sat on Sam's door step to spur him along, his remaining daffodils, nearby, went missing that day also.

That is if they don't manage to have him locked up on bogus " threats" charges again through the election ( he was also running as a candidate against Scarpetti) and then manage another unprecedented year long publication ban on quoting anything about him. I kid you not. Sam has always maintained it was false with the charge based on one witness only, also running for council, and he with a thick Italian accent.. He was let out after the election but with a publication ban.... And no one else finds that unusual I guess. It shook Sam up, but didn't end his resolve about exposing this "corrupting of the system" as he calls it.

One such planning loop-hole is that "there are no designated areas for community centres or libraries according to Sam, who has attended every planning meeting on the area properties since the 80's. And should be as they use these loop-holes to influence changing zoning - I'll build a community centre for you here and you in turn agree to look at changing zoning over there for me. This is literally what is happening in York Region and its allowed by our system.

In Sam's case, the same fellow who proposed the big Markham Arena deal, which was backed by Markham Mayor Frank Scarpitti at the time, and to which tax-payers were to be on the hook for the lions share - with promises of helping the poor attached to it even, owns the property located on 14th Avenue near Markham Rd. he owns much of Main St. Markham from my understanding.

After moving Sam to the property's edge in Sept 2015, he was ordered out in May 2016, illegally Sam believes.

Ironic that they've "evicted" Sam essentially from his trailer home location there though using a new yet incomplete bylaw and even using residential tenancy court to try and be rid of him, tricking / using police to remove him for trespassing before relenting - despite his legal agreement. Trying to hasten the way for?...There is no approved plan.

And who is the fellow that Sam says kept threatening him to go or they'll "find him" etc...He / they claim to work for the property owners. Sam reported it. Yet it has been only Sam who was removed with hand-cuffs this past Sept, with no legal reason I can see, for 'trespassing" he was then told - for which he was not ever charged. After an embarrassing, escorted trip to hospital for an "assessment', the area 35 year Farmer was let go and was back in his trailer home a few days later. But the bylaw police now had him / it in their sites too, using  a new, incomplete bylaw, designed for residential areas, not farms, to hound him with.

I guess they were not aware the property had an assessment and was taxed accordingly as a farm property with as a resident, and that the owners had enjoyed the perks of that arangement - having it kept with the lower tax rates in lieu of having the farmer who invests in machinery and works and maintains the the land. Farming is expensive and so is land maintenance - thus the mutual benefits. It is a mutual arrangement, but as new land owners, A.K.A. wannabe developers, bring in their own "farmers" we see this begin to erode. If they really wanted Sam out they could take him to civil court but, instead, using a bylaw prevents developers from looking the bad guy. Not us, it was a bylaw.

I take it the city chooses to believe the developers over a 35 year area farmer? It's not zoned for anything but a Farm w a residence or industrial at this time still. 

Like Sam has maintained all along, he'd of been more than willing to move should they have an approved plan to develop - but they don't - and as such they should not be given unchecked use of the land meantime, and be stripping what took years to build up before having any of that in place, and even if so, certainly not at Sam's expense for moving and re-cropping. His plan didn't include early leave of his home of 35 years - the last 12 in that trailer on that property and dragging thousands of pounds of machinery and belongings to another locale. That's why he'd secured an agreement. New land owners can't just do as they please in such cases. But it helps if the City's on board.

Land Sam made fertile and holding crops to be stripped for development - with no permits. Trees and bushes gone already

Municipalities need control of their plans and need to wrest that control back from unscrupulous players in this easily manipulated system - wide open to be corrupted - and have those loopholes closed up - not play along with them!

Eliminating the OMB, the one neutral body that is there to look at these issues, is most definitely not the way to go and anyone saying so doesn't understand how it all works - or does and wants to gain more control. We certainly can't trust councils themselves to decide, when they can be so easily swayed through a promise. We want to take away, not add, more control for them. It's the system of planning itself that needs the nose job.

Plans have things in a place. Schools go here, hospitals here, residential communities here, industrial and farms here. They are set up this way for good reason - such as eliminate gridlock, which is why you see industrial areas set near highways for truckers - so they don't have to travel into and create congestion. When we lose control of the plan's elements, it isn't just a matter of a favour for one property its the entire area or city and it has a dominoes effect, especially when you start to factor in the province's expectations for your growth plan. We cannot just do what we want with a property because we own it as one Markham Councilor tried to tell me. She doesn't even understand the planning process in my opinion and it is the process that needs changing so that the people that do cannot take advantage.

Who's next for targeting? whoever they wish until the loops holes are closed up.

Sam before they removed him to develop this.

It was the previous land owner who'd approached Sam to be the farmer there, gaining years of tax rebates and relaxed property maintenance governance because of it - not he who approached them. And in transferring or purchasing a property, you get all liens or attachments, including the Farmer, unless you make arrangements otherwise or forge your own agreement. That would have been the honourable thing for this property owner to do but they've been, or their agents have been nothing but hostile to the issue and this man

Sam plans to tighten up these loop holes up as part of his platform in the next municipal election as well as raise some rights issues at Queen's Park for those facing homelessness in the future having had little luck accessing emergency funds he says we have rights to as laid out in the Act, but is being controlled by York Region's social services administrators - which he says is against his and others' rights. Carry on Sam. We'll be watching.

" He's the land owner Sam, he can do what he wants" Markham Councilor Karen Rae 

" We own the land Sam get off. We own all of it. We own you" - Agent of the land owners allegedly to Sam

" What's the sense of having an official plan and taking in the puiblic's input into it if they can just do whatever they want?" Sam Orrico

TP out

Markham Farmer claims Legal Right to Land use

Hear from Sam himself - video

Markham Farmer, Sam Orrico, who has been farming in the area 35 years, had been given until Sat May 14th to move or face having his remaining belongings destroyed including his home, now a trailer, after the original house burned down some years ago during a dispute on repairs raised by Sam who has an agreement for the property. Yet both the town and the property's new (and "powerful") owner seem to have teamed up to oust him prematurely, using a newly created and incomplete bylaw, designed for residential properties as it's launch pad vehicle.


Before that, it was April 29 2016, and before that Sept 14 2015, and before that pressure and threats he says. Farmers like Sam forge these entrance agreements so just this very thing does not happen. It clearly states he'd move upon approval for development and to date there is no such thing.

If you'd like to know more background follow this link, but in a nutshell the town has asked the property owners to 'clean up' the property in question, suddenly calling Sam's farming equipment, parts, signs, storage areas, etc junk with Markham Councilor Karen Rae even calling him a hoarder.

"I'm no hoarder", Sam barked, "That's insulting. A hoarder hoards things they don't need. I need these things to farm and for equipment maintenance and many things. People who are not farmers do not know." He was offended. Even more so than back in Sept 2015 when the property owners reps first "ordered" him out, to have his stuff gone or they'd remove it, and then sent 7 cops to take him away in hand cuffs to prove they meant it - despite having his agreement. He came back that next day, after a humiliating stop for an "assessment". But belongings were now missing.


Sam issues his own letters!

Well Sam has sent a letter of notice of his own this week to the police, council, lawyers for the property, the property owners, you name it, letting everyone know he will no longer accept letters from anyone unless it's from a court of law. That he disputes their claims, and has an agreement as proof of his claims, and means to have his day in court.

He's been treated terribly for years with just enough interference by both the city and the land owner, he claims, to keep him from becoming a viable business. But it's more like disappearing lately, as equipment's has gone missing, farming tools, generators, even in the last few days the bolts to his trailer wheel chassis have gone and even his dug in flower perennials. They also expected him to move everything on their timetable at his own expense.

They lined his stuff up to scrap it

Yet, they, for some reason, have no problem moving in some other fellow in at the back of the property into another trailer over a year ago now, who Sam says he's just there to spy on him and cause grief, yet for some reason they need Sam out - before this property is even zoned for development - or rather re-zoned as the property owners and city are hoping for smooth sailing to condo development, superseding the official plan which called for industrial, being near the highway. Gridlock.

They ripped up all the trees and bushes too

I'm afraid they've all misjudged this old man of principle with a rock solid contract to be there.

On April 29, the day of the OMB hearing on the property (was put over), daffodils he had growing still on the property were removed while he was away.

Keep Markham Beautiful . Ha. Right.

Sept 2015 They moved Sams trailer right next to traffic

TP out

Sam's Daffodils seen here April 29 day...gone Ap 29 Eve

Developers, Cities & Farmers - not news to Yourk News

Looking out from Farmer Sam Orrico's Markham roost, Aug 2015

The recent article published by York Region Media group headline screams out - Ban Developers Contribution from Campaigns - then describes a newly released independent report about how most of our locally elected officials accept donations from developers for fundraising for their election campaigns in increasingly higher numbers and most often where development is being looked at or already being done.

Told be out April 29 2016 despite his contract

The alarm is being raised now as they are looking at changing the rules, since roads and development are primarily the main decisions these bodies get to make. That, and fitting them into official plans. Sort of. I think the reshaping  comes along with new fundraising rules to be announced by the provincial government, that which I believe, itself, stems from the federal govs plans at fundraising rule changes. So it's systematic, and again, we actually have no choice but to go along. Making us think we have a say is part of the fun.

Sept 2015 Councilor Karen Rae 'helps'

Yourk News first brought the issue of farmers being treated unfriendly via the story of Markham Farmer Sam Orrico, who claims he has been railroaded for years now. by a system that has included both the city and property owners making life hard to survive or earn a living - through permits hassles and systematic harassment  - to ever let him get established or re-established again, after a fire burned the property home down 12 years ago.

Intimidating machinery was brought in Sept 2015

And recently using a new, currently being re-worked bylaw, called "Keep Markham Beautiful", to appear to pressure land owners there to "clean it/him up", using the ruse to have the long time area farmer removed for good, like garbage off a property. Sam claims the bylaw is designed for residences, not farming properties anyway, and that he has an iron clad entrance rights agreement for as long as the zoning still allows for farming - which it still does. That and the fact that the bylaw as written is incomplete.

Funny thing is, they've long ( Sept 2015) begun removing trees and much of Sam's equipment or had tossed it in bins & carted off, with years of parts for machinery, fencing & tools along with it whilst still "allowing" him to remain in the trailer he's called home for the past 12 years. Albeit after they force-moved it to a more publicly accessible locale on the property while trying to legally have him declared a non-tenant.

The agents of the property owners also tried to have Sam declared a trespasser at one point, police handcuffing him and escorting him off Sept 12, 2015, like a criminal, to have him "assessed" at the hospital. No charges, nothing.

In reflection, perhaps his freedom rights were violated, and if so, only based on information provided on letterhead of the developers agents highlighting a ruling they managed to get from a landlord tenant adjudicator. One who'd refused Sam time to get smart council, and who would not dismiss as requested - as the directives say to do -  because it had 3 addresses on it, making it ambiguous stating, "Don't worry, I think this is an easy application to rule on." Easy for whom? She had no jurisdiction to rule on Sam's entrance agreement though. That much she also read into her judgement, only ruling that he had no residential tenancy agreement - a big difference.

Sam's home of 12 years, worked it for 35

I know about the escort, because the officer called asking if Sam could stay the night with me (Sam gave my # ) as they were removing him. And as I informed the officer he had every right to be there, he, like the rest of the world it seems, including Markham Councillor Karen Rae who Sam sought understanding from, but who seems to only recognize that the property is owned by a landowner and therefore can do what they want, all seemingly are unaware that a new property owner is also bound by old agreements on a property with farmers - only that he "needs to go sometime".

hot water heater

Well, yes he does, he doesn't dispute that, It takes years to move farm equipment or crops, not weeks, which is why he learned to protect himself through such agreements. Property owners also receive years of perks through favourable tax rebates and rates, so it's not just a one way street, but when they want to develop they want you gone. Their time. Sam being gone would make things very neat. He tried to again address Markham council Sept 21 2015 but  they ignored his actual address to them - that their bylaw is missing subsections.

Farmers recycle everything

Did I mention it was a property owner who originally approached Sam to work it so they'd get a more favourable tax rate and have noxious weeds controlled? This allows developers to hold onto a property while paying minimum tax and maintenance costs indefinitely.

What he disputes now is the fact that his agreement specifically mentions that he would be agreeable to move upon approval of the land being re-zoned for development (which at present it is not) within a reasonable time frame once approved. Instead, in Sam's view, they have been trying to get him off with various means for years prior, most vigorously since last September, to his detriment of doing business or farming as he'd like. So he also now additionally has an issue about the manner he has been treated throughout this process including threats and thefts.

This man says has been spoken to in threatening tones in the past for continuing on there, been told he's mental, stinks, no one cares...and he's lived through two house fires during disputes of house repair issues on farm properties moving towards development, with no one ever being charged or held accountable - Sam escaping with second degree burns in the first fire, the second occurring within 20 minutes of him leaving the property. Ironically that 1st property is now the hospital.

Unlike Sam, who himself when running for Mayor, was actually jailed during the 2010 Markham municipal election for supposedly threatening " he'd kill" Mayor Scarpitti, - of which Sam vehemently denies and "witnessed" through a third party, a rival also running for council, claiming he'd said it. Based on this, they held him throughout the election, effectively removing him from running as mayor and silencing him from perhaps revealing info that could have changed the election. Even made him Mayor. But we'll never know will we?

Farmers need to know official plans to plan themselves

Afterwards the presiding judge, who Sam claims also seemed to have political aspirations, ordered a rare, precedent setting publication ban on anything to do with Sam Orrico for a year. Sam, an expert on planning issues and the Official Planning Act, having attended every area meeting regarding the numerous properties he's work in the Markham area since the 1980's, had been set to reveal some embarrassing, developer-city related info. Old, broken English Sam. Yea. So, excuse me if something just doesn't seem just right here.

Click Here and Hear Sam Tell it!

Fast forward to today, expected to get out 35 years worth of his life, home, and equipment out at his own expense, while being unable, and now not even healthy enough, to earn a living. With no money for lawyers he's often had to be his own but knowing the Planning Act better than most councilors ever will, and mayors, has sometimes worked against him it would seem. Sometimes he tends to use a gotcha effect that politicians and others don't like and so perhaps start throwing barriers up to avoid it. Like publication bans, or suddenly enforcing by-laws designed for residences not farm properties for the 1st time in 12 years.

The other evening as Sam went to attend a meeting for local issues, he was hit by a hit and run car. The snow banks were such that they may have played a role, but Sam is not so sure and fears it may have been on purpose. Paranoid? Perhaps, but from where I see it, he has every right to be. Geez, even the local papers nor any other will write a right a thing about him, first removed from the Pickering AIRPORT LANDS so many years ago now, having come here lured from Argentina, as the best place to farm and live. They did cover that issue.

All I know is PACC spent this winter trying to acquire him heat because no one from any official capacity seems to want to do anything other than "push him into a shelter". Thank goodness for the Lions Club of Markham and some churches. Even with having a place to go from other farmers in the farming circles doesn't get him his trailer and belongings and remaining tools and equipment moved, or the new location prepared let alone, especially when you spend your days seeking sources for heat and food because of cruel circumstances and a system that punishes the shallow pocketed.

Markham is revamping its by-laws. Members support the OMB being reviewed to get councils 'more control"

Sam's tools missing after forced 'assessment"

Pay him some respect. In fact pay him some $ to end his contract early as you are essentially asking him to do at his expense, and to also recoup lost property and earnings, and to help him move his beat up trailer, as the developers and the city are poised to make future $ millions in the end. Geez at the very least he's made sure that land stayed clean of toxic dumping for 35 years. He's saved everyone a bundle there.

Isn't it Ironic!?

Sam's now been told he must vacate by April 29 - ironically the same day as the OMB hearing of the property. They've reportedly said they'll destroy his trailer if its not gone and If he doesn't attend the zoning will get a bye right through without public or interested party objections.

And being that the very property is being considered for re-zoning on that very date and is itself payback to the city from the land developers for having built them a "cultural centre" on an adjacent block of the same property for the city - yet across the street from an industrial complex of which Sam's area of the property is currently still zoned for - Industrial or farming, decided years ago when creating Markham's official plan, but now being sought to change which will cause grid-lock.

Currently zoned for industrial , farm

Speaking of farming, the Campaign Fairness report was contributed to by York University Political Science Professor, Robert Mcdermid, who stated, 

"Development campaign donations are an important role to play, when you think that one of the things that council does is create profit for developers. A developer purchases a piece of land, a farm maybe when it is zoned for agriculture(sounding familiar?) and as the boundary of the city creeps out they have it switched to residential. And in that switch, the developer multiplies the investment several times over. And when he further subdivides that land into further parcels, he multiplies that wealth again. It is acts of council that create profit for developers. So it's hugely important and developers understand that"

Political Science Professor, Robert Mcdermid

Yes indeed.


Tom Out