Mayor Ray Tout holds out little hope a resident disputing a $5,000 municipal drain bill will manage to get a rebate without having to spend more money.
Gord Trask met with council Aug. 12 to complain about his assessed costs relating to what is known as West Luther Municipal Drain 63A, which has been part of a long-standing dispute, and costs related to the drain upgrade for a nearby proposed gravel pit owned by Alfred Wilson at Monck.
The dispute has been ongoing for several years, involving the pit owner, Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) and Trask. It has also been the focus of considerable opposition from neighbours of the proposed pit.
The matter has been in the courts and before a court-appointed “referee” in a bid to iron out issues. The dispute dates back to 2008 with the referee upholding that Trask is responsible for 10 per cent of the assessment on the drain and Wilson responsible for the remaining 90%.
Trask maintains he was never aware of the hearings held by the referee or that when a ruling was handed down he had 30 days to appeal it. He said costs, some estimated at about $100,000, attributed to drain upgrades were too high.
“The benefits … include benefits for an environmental assessment and administration cost due mostly to township costs at the referee hearing,” Trask said in a letter to council. “These costs are of benefit to one person and that person is not me.”
Interim CAO Mike Givens requested Garth Noecker, the township’s drainage superintendent, explain some of the historic details of the dispute.
Noecker, who was involved in the original plan for the drain, said the drain was originally “pitched as an agricultural drain (that) was built to higher standards.”
Noecker also noted that following the referee decision about three years ago, the GRCA also missed the 30-day appeal deadline, but took its concerns to a judge. Eventually both the GRCA and Wilson paid the costs. Trask has also contended he had to hook up to the new drain after a portion of his drainage was damaged by the work.
“The only reason my drain is going into it is because they cut off nine of my four inch tiles,” he said.
Noecker said, “He (Trask) didn’t feel he should be assessed the legal costs. Gord feels he’s been hard done by.”
Tout and the majority of councillors were not on council when the dispute and legal proceedings took place. Tout said there was little the municipality could do based on previous legal judgments.
“There has already been a decision of the cost,” he said. “We can’t overrule a judge.
“From the referee hearing the judge has made a decision on costs, 90% going to Wilson and 10% to you, Trask. Your recourse is through the courts. As far as we’re concerned the judge has made the decision on who has to pay what.”
Noecker said, “Gord was never aware of the decision of the referee.”
“All I’m asking for is to reassess my property,” Trask said. “I would like it to be reassessed because there’s no way the $5,000 should be part of my property.”
Givens told council a reassessment would require new engineering work and could end up costing upward of $20,000 with Trask having to pay a portion of it.
Councillor Dan Yake asked if details of how the dispute and referee hearing proceeded were in writing and if Trask was kept up to date.
“If the correspondence wasn’t sent to Mr. Trask that’s pretty unfair,” Yake said. “He should be given the opportunity to plead his case and we, as a municipality, should help.”
Tout rejected direct municipal involvement, saying, “We can’t help out financially. My suggestion is if you want a reduction you have to go back to the judge.”
Givens said, “He has to go through the provincial courts and that’s going to cost.”
Trask said he will consider his options.
