The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

PAGE 4, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 24,1982, WHITBY FREE PRESS lihe IIy edesa whitby Voice of the County Town Pub Michael ian Burgess, Publisher - Managing Editor àlished every Wednesday by M.B.M. Publishing and Photography Inc. Phone 668-111 The Free Press Building, 131 Brock Street North, P.O. Box 206, Whitby, Ont. MICHAEL J. KNELL Community Editor MARJORIE A. BURGESS Advertising Manager Second Class Mail Registration No. 5351 The only Whltby newspaper Independently owned and operated by Whitby residents for Whitby residents. Itseems that some councillors don't want to defend the town's position at the Jovial OMB hearmg After Monday nighVs pitiful display, it seems to this publication that some members of Whitby Town Council are not interested in safeguarding the concerns of the citizens whom it represents. We are making specific reference to the.stage show which followed a motion by Regional Coun- cilior Gerry Emm that would have permitted the town to hire special legal counsel with knowledge of land use and other planning matters to defend its position before the Ontario Municipal Board with respect to the application of Jovial invest- ments Limited and its partners to build a Canadian Tire store on'undas Street East. it had been Joviai's intention to build the retail outlet on the northern portion of its lands im- mediately behind Bowman Ave. This proposai was fought vigorously. by area residents on the grounds that the development would cause many unsurmountable problems most notably with traffic. Whitby Town Council subsequently accepted the residents' position and voted by a seven to nil margin to reject Jovial's application. m i got a telephone call from a viewer the other night, objecting strenuously to the fact that Global's hour long interview of Prime Minister Trudeau by David Frost was interrupted by so many commerciais. She felt that the commercials were a sign of disrespect to the Prime Min- ister. I am inclined to believe that commerciais were more a sign of disrespect to the viewer than to the Prime Minister (who didn't have to sit through them as we did), but l'il concede her point. Fortunately, there is some re- lief in sight. Two developments, it seems to me, threaten the future of commercials on television. One of them is the home recorder, the so-called VCR, and the other is Pay TV. Some of you must have guessed that we're in a ratings period at the moment. That is why the quality of the movies and other major productions on ail channels last week, this week and next are of such an attractive quality. And all of these blockbuster productions are loaded with commericals. You could call it making hay while the sun shines. Because I think the day is not very far off when movies and other longer TV productions, like interviews with the Prime Minister, which do not have natural breaks in them, wili be seen uninterrupted, even on conventional commercial television. Once Pay TV is in place, and people can watch first run movies in the privacy of their own homes for a nominal monthly fee, they're going to think twice about suffering through 45 minutes of movie and 12 minutes of commercials in every hour on the so-called "free" channels. And when most homes have video cas- sette recorders, for which you can rent first run movies for five dollars or less, and people can play them, and stop them when nature calls -- not when the commercial breaks dictate -- the revolution will be in full swing. It isn't just the technology of television that's changing, it's the whole economic base. So i suppose i really should have told that lady last night: Hang in there. it's just a matter of time. That's not news,;but that too is reality. The developer then announced that he would appeal this decision to the Ontario Municipal Board and hired a weil known expert in the field of planning law to make his case. What the members of our council have literally done, is allowed the developer the edge at the board's hearing to be held later next month. Why did our beloved and respected councillors and mayor take this action? That is a question that all of them will have to answer fully and truthfully - especially at election time. At the council meeting, Mayor Bob Attersiey and West Ward Councillor Joe Bugelli fought Emm's motion on the grounds that there is no money in the budget to hire this special legal counsel, (despite the offer of area residents to subsidize or even split the costs). It seemed to us, that they were more concerned with money than they were about defending council's position. Bugelli claimed that during his tenure on coun- cil, the town had five of six cases it has fought successfully before the OMB., He believes that this track record is good enough not to hire such specialized knowledge and ability. Weil, frankly, it isn't good enough. it seems to this publication that some members of council, for whatever reason, are not willing to stand behind a decision that they made. Do they think it was the wrong one? If they lose this case before the OMB, because of an apparent Intentional lack of effort, it is this newspapers' opinion that council will have lost its credibility and may never.have the opportunity to regain it. Do these gentlemen honestly belleve that their own planning director wili be able to defend their postion? Judging by the reeort he submitted to council, he surely will not be able to. In that report, Planning director Bob Short stated clearly that the construction of a Canadian Tire store on this property was consistant with the definition of the special purpose commercial zoning. Short gave council his professional opinion opinion (which he is paid to do) so how can coun- cil expect him to defend their position? In actual fact, the Town's own planning direction is expec- ted to be calied as a witness AGAINST the Town. Those in opposition to the motion seemed to believe that its proponents did not think much of town solicitor Hugh Nichol's ability. This is not true. Nichol (ironically an area resident) is an able and truly competent attorney. Ali the motion would have done is given him some expert assistance. But those in dissention did not see it that way. This publication also has to wonder if those men who voted against the motion are truly in- terested in seeing the matter dealt with in accor- dance with the wishes of council, or whether they're just doing "window dressing" knowing full well they're going to lost at OMB. Whitby Town Council is a form of government. Its actions do not make it worthy of that noun. It is time that some members of Whitby Town Council behaved like members of a government on this issue and defended its position (and that of the people it represents) with every tool and piece of law at its disposal. /1 M~ ~ ~f ~ M a