Dear Editor,
I would like to respond to the editorial of councilor Lynda Stephens dated Wednesday 30 June 2010 appearing in the Meaford Independent. In particular, I would like to indicate some facts perhaps unknown to the public at large.
The lawsuit in the beginning was an attempt by the Municipality of Meaford to join together 2 existing public rights of passage. These are the public road of North Georgian Beach and the public marine right of way of South Georgian Beach. Between these 2 roads exists a 500 foot strip of land comprised of 9 lots owned by the 9 families named in the Municipality’s lawsuit. What was at stake in the beginning was a walkway in front of these 9 property owners so that the public could pass back and forth between the 2 Beaches.
There are many ways the Municipality could have achieved its goal but it chose to do so by enacting an ancient 1854 bylaw which purports to create a road along the water’s edge. This road is 66 feet wide and a mile and a quarter long from the 21-22 side road to the 24-25 side road which most of us know as Duxbury.
The Municipality attempted to limit the use of this purported road to the 500 feet in front of the 9 property owners situated between the 2 Beaches. Unfortunately for the Municipality, Superior Court Justice Daly does not agree with this concept and has ordered the Municipality to join all of the property owners who may potentially be affected by this 1854 bylaw. Thus, all of the property owners between the 21-22 side road and Duxbury are now Defendants to this action. The Municipality, therefore, must personally serve Statements of Claim on an additional 80ish property owners, their mortgage companies, and the Ministry of the Attorney General (at an estimated cost of $22,000) and impose its will on all of these landowners and institutions.
To date more than $1,000,000 has been expended on this boondoggle. The Municipality has spent in excess of $500,000 as have 4 of the 9 original Defendants attempting to fend off the Municipality. This matter has just started to reach the courtroom stage and what could follow, if this matter does not end now, will make the current spending look like petty cash. With the addition of the 80 land owners who see the 1854 road passing through their living rooms, porches, septic beds, and wells, this matter could take years to come to a conclusion.
The worst part of this scenario is that if the Municipality wins, it loses. By winning, it effectively puts the majority of the landowners between the 2 side roads in a position of non conformity with regard to front yard set backs. The Municipality issued building permits to most of these people and if it wins, all of the building permits are in error and each of these errors creates another potential lawsuit. In all of these lawsuits, however, the Municipality will be the Defendant, not the Plaintiff. Given the complexity of these issues, the potential litigation will take decades to end and could possibly bankrupt the Municipality. At best, Meaford taxes will skyrocket.
This mess began with the last administration under the leadership of Wally Reif. Under the current administration, Mayor Richardson has chosen to stay out of the fray. Deputy Mayor Michael Traynor, councilor Jim McPherson, councilor Harley Greenfield, and councilor Gerald Shortt have voted in favour of a resolution to end the legalities and rescind the 2007 bylaw which created this affair. Only councilor Lynda Stephens and councilor Cynthia Lemon have voted to continue this insanity.
By simply discontinuing the current lawsuit, the Municipality will incur a portion, if not all of the Defendant’s legal costs. This will be a small fraction, however, of what the Municipality will pay if it continues on, because remember, if it wins, it loses. It’s like winning the battle but losing the war.
I have read the materials (10 lbs. and 4 ½ inches thick) which have been prepared by the Defendant’s lawyers for a court motion which is ongoing. I doubt councilors Lynda Stephens and Cynthia Lemon have or they would have seen that there are 6 potential defenses to this lawsuit, any one of which, if successful, will create a total loss for the Municipality. My view is that the Municipality has a very weak case and that the current resolution to end this litigation is wise and moral. Mistakes have been made but it is time to cut the losses and move forward. The damage to more than 80 properties is no price to pay for a foot path joining 2 roads. The end, simply, does not justify the means
The conclusion of this matter will be a vote on the actual bylaw needed to stop the legalities and rescind the 2007 bylaw. This vote will be pursuant to the resolution just passed as outlined above and will take place Monday July 12, 2010.
This matter is one of the most important issues ever to come before the Meaford council. You, being the public, need to give feedback to the members of council. The official web site of Meaford is www.meaford.ca. Then go to “our municipality” and click on “council”. All contact information, including telephone numbers and email addresses, for the council members is there.
Be heard!
Douglas Bovell, Meaford
+ 1 + 0 
