LARRY'S CORNER- Hamilton's Former Mayor Speaks

King of NIMBY Fights City Hall

By Larry Di Ianni
(posted February 23, 2009)

It wasn’t a question of ‘if’, it was only a question of ‘when’! Now we know the answer. Herman Turkstra, north-end dweller and brilliant Hamilton lawyer does not want the west harbour lands at the former Rheem’s site developed for a Pan-am stadium. Period. He has spoken!

And why has Mr. Turkstra taken this position? In a story in the Hamilton Spectator it says this, “What has Turkstra steaming is his assertion that city council voted to keep the proposed 12 hectare project site residential in 2005 after a three-year public planning process in which he was involved.” Turkstra goes on to use words such as ‘treacherous breach of faith’ and ‘betrayal’ to describe this reversal in land use being considered by Council.

Mr. Turkstra then plays Hamilton’s equivalent to the ‘race card’- in our case, the ‘economic card’. He reportedly states, “The people who live adjacent to the Rheem lands are not experienced or have faith in being able to convince government to do anything. It’s a part of the city that has been beaten down.” He adds, “Could you imagine trying to put something like this in Westdale? You would have 5,000 McMaster professors, doctors and lawyers on your doorstep. It would never happen in a million years.” The message is clear. The poor and ‘beaten down’ can’t muster up the will or expertise to fight. The better off and better connected would do just that. Never mind that Westdale isn’t a neglected area as the west harbour is. Never mind that many people around this area are tired of looking at an abandoned shell of a once productive manufacturing site. Never mind that some have expressed an interest in selling their properties to the city. Never mind that these same professors did not march down to city hall when the equally intrusive McMaster Innovation Park replaced another ‘beaten down’ facility in close proximity to Westdale. Father knows best!

Then Mr. Turkstra ends with a threat, which gets to the heart of his real concern. “Everyone who worries about traffic coming through the North End will be coming out of the woodwork.” This will motivate north-end residents to oppose Hamilton’s participation in the Pan-Am bid.

If I were Council I would take Mr. Turkstra’s message of opposition and obstructionism very seriously, but as Councillor Bob Bratina bravely did in the same interview in the paper, he expressed confidence that the bid must go forward and shouldn’t be daunted by the worst case of NIMBYism that has ever been published in a newspaper story since another prominent Hamiltonian stepped forward to dismantle the Airport employment land’s process because planes fly near his house.

Herman Turkstra’s arguments, although well-made, are poppycock! Here is why.

Firstly, Mr. Turkstra was involved in the Setting Sail planning process as he said, but he did so as an opponent of what staff was proposing. Mr. Turkstra wanted to see less rather than more activity in the west harbour, near his residence. He also spoke for other residents in the area to whom he offered leadership and expertise. Others who disagreed with Mr. Turkstra saw in his opposition the protection of home turf rather than any high-minded civic goal for the best use of land around Pier 8 and its environs.

Secondly, Mr. Turkstra is using the argument of prior Council decisions to his opportunistic advantage. This is the same man who ignored countless Council resolutions and planning documents supporting the Red Hill Valley Parkway and fought it tooth and nail right til the end. He even fought against his own advocacy of the road when Mr. Turkstra would appear before Stoney Creek Council on behalf of development interests, citing the need to for the road to facilitate this or that development on or near Mud Street in Stoney Creek.

Thirdly and fourthly, when I was Mayor Mr. Turkstra appealed to me to NOT repair the shut down Mary Street Bridge in spite of it being planned and budgeted for. His concern was that the bridge repair would increase traffic coming to the north end area. For the record, the city adhered to this and in 2007 repaired the bridge but for pedestrian traffic only. Mr. Turkstra must have been happy. He also asked me NOT to repair Guise Street in front of a number of homes overlooking the harbour. I checked this street out and the road which Mr. Turkstra did not want repaired was an embarrassment. It was more rubble than asphalt. It had to get done and it was completed. I was puzzled by Mr. Turkstra’s position, but later understood that his request revealed more about his interest in preserving the slower pace of the harbour than it did about doing what was best for the city.

Herman Turkstra has a long history of political activity, legal representation and entrepreneurship in the city. He has a legacy of getting his way with all levels of government. I always gave him time and find him to this day a fascinating and bright advocate. However, in my view, his interference in the Pan-Am Games bid drips of self-serving NIMBYism of the worst kind. Council should take Mr. Turkstra’s opposition seriously, but it should also ignore his requests. They are not the vision of a thriving community that all of us aspire to.

BACK TO LARRY'S CORNER

HOME