OrilliaMatters welcomes letters to the editor ([email protected]) Please include your full name, daytime phone number and address (for verification of authorship, not publication). The following letter is an open letter to Oro-Medonte Mayor Harry Hughes from Les Kirsh.
*************************
Dear Mayor Hughes,
Thank you for coming to our home last week. As you know, my family and I are most grateful for the assistance that you have provided to us in the past.
In the course of our conversation and as of today, I have not yet made up my mind as to which candidates I am going to support in the upcoming election. I asked you about several ongoing issues in the township that have caused me great concern.
In the interests of transparency, perhaps you could answer some further questions that continue to trouble me and also provide further clarifications on the questions that we addressed in the course of our conversation in order to help me in my voting decision.
I mentioned that short-term rentals (STRs) operating in our area were of great concern to me. With regard to these STRs, you told me that the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) chair did not agree with the homeowner’s planning witness, Mr. Knox. Upon my further reflection, in July 2020, you told us that we needed to make our zoning bylaw ‘iron-clad’ and further that the township’s very experienced legal counsel agreed with Mr. Knox’s opinion. At the OLT hearing, my understanding is that both the township’s planner and legal counsel agreed with Mr. Knox.
I further understand that the township is appealing the OLT decision. In the course of our conversation, you informed me that the OLT chair did not agree with Mr. Knox? If I’ve misunderstood you, please advise me and accept my apologies in advance. If indeed I heard you correctly, if other homeowners have been similarly advised, I think you would agree that this would be misleading and would cast aspersions as to Mr. Knox’s qualifications as a qualified expert witness. I am confused as to why you advised this and require clarification.
I’ve been reading the materials on STR’s and Good Neighbours. It is my understanding that the township has not shut down one disruptive short-term rental operator or even taken one of them to court for violating the zoning bylaw that prohibits STRs. I also understand that more than 35 disruptive short-term rentals have been reported to the township in the past six years.
People have been pleading for help from the township at least since 2017. Can you please tell me why no disruptive short-term rental operator has ever been taken to court and shut down? We did discuss that a multi-jurisdictional government cooperative approach would be helpful in dealing with what has become a complex problem; however, my understanding is that the township did have jurisdiction under existing bylaws to take legal action against operators.
I am at a loss to understand why it did not. Even accepting that the pandemic caused court delays etc., would you agree that it would’ve sent the message to existing and potential STR operators that these establishments were/are offside and that there will be costly legal consequences if the operators continue to breach existing bylaws?
I was also very concerned about the ethical issues relating to Coun. Keane’s alleged eavesdropping on the Horseshoe Valley Ratepayer’s meeting and further why the taxpayers ended up paying Coun. Keane’s legal bills when the Integrity Commissioner found that she had obstructed the Integrity Commissioner’s investigation and had breached the Code of Conduct.
I read about this with shock and surprise in OrilliaMatters. You told me the Integrity Commissioner was dismissed and less than competent and further that several other municipalities had fired him. You also advised me that OrilliaMatters didn’t report the entire story.
I also wanted to know why taxpayers ended up paying the councillor’s legal fees, not why you fired the integrity commissioner. Perhaps you can help me understand. Can you please tell me why the majority of the council used our tax dollars to pay Coun. Keane’s legal bill? This situation doesn’t add up and causes me to question the ethical boundaries that may have been breached by both Coun. Keane and others. The payment of her legal fees does not reflect well on the reputation of the council.
Something I did not raise with you but should have, as it troubles me still, is the question of appointments to the council. In December 2019, I, along with at least 50 other ratepayers, implored the council to hold by-elections to fill the two vacancies left by the sudden and very sad loss of Deputy Mayor Scott Jermey and Councillor Scott MacPherson.
At the time, you and the majority of the council voted to appoint to fill the vacancies. One councillor boasted that over 90 per cent of the constituents were in favour of appointments versus holding by-elections. Another councillor claimed that the letters received in favour of by-elections were ‘form’ letters.
A review of the written letters reveals that more than 75 per cent of the people wanted by-elections, and they were not from letters. They were genuine expressions of personal views, mostly rooted in respecting the integrity of the ratepayers’ rights to a democratically elected council. So could you please explain to me why you felt it necessary to appoint two members to the council?
This would at least on the surface appear to be a very undemocratic approach, and it would seem to me, perhaps naively so, that the constituents in the relevant jurisdictions ought to have had a say in the matter.
My final question is about voting in the upcoming election. Given that COVID is still upon us and given our vulnerable population, I was very disappointed to learn that the majority of members of the council voted to curtail e-voting and telephone voting. I understand that more than 72 per cent of the people voting in 2018 used e-voting. I also understand that in 2018 the voter turnout was the best ever.
The Clerk recommended that e-voting be continued, and yet you voted to eliminate e-voting, citing security concerns. Could you please refer me to the written report from an internet security company that supports this view?
As you are aware, I am a practising Chartered Public Accountant. My training and experience cause me to make decisions daily that are carefully reasoned and based on the best factual evidence available. I expect this same duty of care from our elected officials for whom I have the utmost respect, and I hope you will clarify the above-noted questions for me so that I can make an informed decision on Election Day.
Thank you in advance for your time and consideration. I look forward to your reply.
Les Kirsh
Oro-Medonte
*************************
