Betty Bardswich
The Recorder
MINDEMOYA––A meeting of the Court of Revision for the Mindemoya South Drain was held in council chambers on March 19, as the process for landowners to appeal their assessments.
This panel is one of three bodies to which a landowner may appeal when drainage works are being proposed or improved. Court members are appointed by council when only one municipality is affected, and a decision of the court of revision can be appealed to the Ontario Drainage Tribunal.
Perry Anglin was the sole appellant to appear before the court comprised of Derek Stephens, Larry Noland and Steve Orford. Professional engineer John Kuntze of K. Smart Associates Limited spoke in opposition to Mr. Anglin’s appeal.
Mr. Kuntze pointed out to the court that they were only to deal with the assessment, not the design of the drain and remarked that the issue of whether the Anglin subdivision should be included in the south drain had been presented many times. Although Mr. Kuntze had the south drain report on hand, he told the audience and court members that he went into the field again to make sure he understood exactly how the land drained. He did not include the Anglin subdivision into the drainage works as the water does not flow in that direction.
“The Anglin subdivision is outside the watershed for the South Drain,” said Mr. Kuntze. He also added that it is possible to make a connection between Bay Street and the Mindemoya South Drain, but since the drain inlets are at the same level, nothing would be gained. Mr. Kuntze does not recommend having the Anglin drainage going into the Mindemoya South Drain outlet.
“I cannot support the proposal that Perry Anglin is putting forth,” he said. “Based on the review of the Bay-Anglin streets drainage it is my recommendation that the Court of Revision dismiss Perry Anglin’s appeal to add the Anglin subdivision to the Mindemoya South Drain watershed.”
Mr. Anglin began his remarks by asking if there are properties that haven’t been assessed yet and stated that there are more properties than the Anglin subdivision that should be added to the South Drain. In doing so, Mr. Anglin cited the Chad Pearson property and stated that his position was that council should consider the Anglin and Pearson properties together and that both subdivisions should be included in the South Drain. He also wanted to know why the process was taking so long when the original petition was filed in July of 2009.
In speaking against the go-ahead for the Mindemoya Drain, Mr. Anglin reminded the court and Mindemoya residents present that this project was the subject of a petition signed by 500 adults and that the new reeve and council won election by not supporting the development. He also questioned why the design for the Mindemoya Drain would accommodate the flow of water from the Pearson property and not from the Anglin land.
Mr. Anglin asked the court to defer a decision until the order of the Drainage Tribunal has been complied with, that a cost update on the Mindemoya drain should be done and that the Pearson land and Anglin subdivision should be reassessed.
Mr. Stephens closed the meeting by stating that the court’s decision will come out in a couple of days. “The minutes will be approved and posted on the website,” he said. “No decision will be made until the minutes are done.”
