ABERFOYLE – Puslinch resident Bruce Taylor is feeling deflated, but not defeated, after complaints he lodged with the township integrity commissioner and the Ontario Ombudsman were deemed not to require further investigation.
He said he continues to believe he is right, that the township is wasting money on needless studies, and that he’s been poorly treated by township staff, councillors and the mayor.
And more than anything he’s worried that his gravest concern – the safety of children at Boreham Park – is being ignored.
Taylor has a long history of complaints about Boreham Park in Arkell, which was recently upgraded to include new equipment that is compliant with the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA).
But Taylor contends the park is still dangerous because a drainage culvert is within a few feet of the playground. On one occasion Taylor tested the water in the culvert and he said it contained E.coli.
The culvert is about 10 feet across and eight feet deep in places. Taylor believes it’s a simple matter of burying the culverts and filling in the ditches.
That would remove the danger of the elevation change, which is decidedly not AODA compliant, he says, and the threat of children drowning in the ditches or becoming ill when they come in contact with contaminated water.
He noted a 13-year-old in Wolfville, Nova Scotia drowned in a municipal drainage ditch. The boy was overpowered by strong waters in a ditch as the remnants of post-tropical storm Beryl swept through Nova Scotia last summer.
Taylor also said he has a quote from a local supplier for $17,000 to fill in the ditch.
Delegated three times
Tayor has delegated to council three times on the matter. The first time was before the new equipment was installed, when he drew attention to the culvert and the dangerous grade change.
Council was assured the culvert could be addressed after the new equipment was installed and the project went ahead. The park officially opened in fall of 2023.
For his second delegation, Taylor brought Canadian National Institute for the Blind ambassador Bernard Akuoko with him, along with letters and emails from some 15 safety organizations explaining the drowning danger to children and pets of even a minimal amount of water.
Council decided to have its engineering consultant do a high-level look at the park and determine if filling in the ditches is feasible.
The GM BluePlan report pegged the project between $1 million and $3 million, so council rejected that plan.
None of that sat well with Taylor, who continued to send emails to staff and council hoping to convince them the park is dangerous. Many of these emails were also sent to the Advertiser.
His third delegation was after he had taken water samples from the culvert in the park and learned they contained E.coli.
He relayed this information, plus his understanding that the township and council would all be liable in the event of illness or death, to township officials as well.
At that meeting council voted in favour of hiring a safety consultant to examine the safety of the park as a whole and make any recommendations.
They also hired an engineer to provide a description of the function of the stormwater management system as context for the park. That report is still pending.
When the tenders were announced, Taylor gathered his safety material and delivered it to the consultants.
Cease and desist letter
Shortly afterwards, on Oct. 31 last year, he received a “cease and desist” letter from SV Law on behalf of the township stating his communication with the safety consultants was interfering with their objective review.
“Your efforts to actively communicate with these third-party professionals during the safety study process, and to predetermine their objective recommendations, must not continue …” the letter states.
“As such, you are hereby put on written notice that all such behaviour, communication and conduct is to cease and desist immediately.”
Taylor was affronted by the letter.
“They could have sent an email saying I’m not allowed to contact the engineer. I would have stopped,” he said in an interview.
During Taylor’s last delegation, on Sept. 25, Mayor James Seeley invited other members seated in the gallery to come up to the table if they also wished to address council. Only Taylor came to the table.
So when resident Helmuth Slisarenko stood up during the delegation, Seeley shut him down and asked him to leave or he’d call the police.
It was later learned Slisarenko only wanted to let council know that he couldn’t hear what they were saying.
Both Slisarenko and Taylor turned to the integrity commissioner to investigate, believing their rights to speak freely were refused and Seeley had bullied them.
That, too, had an unsatisfying outcome for Taylor.
The integrity commissioner did not find cause to launch a full investigation, noting the mayor has “qualified privilege” to maintain order and decorum in council meetings.
“Pursuant to Section 15(5) of the code’s complaint protocol, we will not be preparing a report to council on the result of the investigation,” states the integrity commissioner’s notice of termination.
Taylor is adamant that Seeley overstepped his powers with Slisarenko and himself.
He accused Seeley of having a “vendetta” against him and said the mayor routinely dismisses and disregards his comments.
Taylor added there is no public engagement policy on the township website; and the township should have spoken to him directly before sending the cease and desist letter.
He said no other municipality he’s contacted has ever sent such a letter to a resident for matters like these.
He added he believes the safety consultants should want to receive the information he has gathered over two or three years.
“Why would you not want the consultant to see that?” he asked.
“Why would the township go straight to the lawyer’s letter. It’s just more cost to the taxpayer.”
Taylor wanted to know the cost of the cease and desist letter and the integrity commissoner’s reviews.
The township told him they were subject to solicitor-client privilege.
He filed a Freedom of Information request and received heavily redacted invoices with only the final amounts the township paid and no indication of which invoice was for which integrity commissioner complaint.
Taylor then wrote to the Ombudsman of Ontario to learn if these actions were allowed.
The ombudsman’s letter explained the role of the office “is to carry out evidence-based reviews and investigations about the municipal administration, including assessing whether policies and procedures were followed,” reads the letter from early resolutions officer Daniel Bastien.
Bastien advised Taylor to follow up with the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario, the Law Society of Ontario, the Complaints Resolution Commissioner and the township itself if he was not satisfied with the information he had received.
“For the reasons noted above, our office will not be taking any further steps with respect to your complaints,” Bastien concluded.
Complaint costs
On costs, Taylor is adamant it is not him ratcheting up the cost of the park, but council and its poor decisions.
By his calculation, the township has paid in excess of $27,000 on top of the actual cost of installing the playground:
- $4,000 for the GM Blue Plan study;
- $7,700 and $8,800 for the two integrity commissioner investigations launched by himself and Slisarenko;
- $5,000 for the pending safety studies; and
- $1,700 for the cease and desist letter.
The original cost of the park was $208,882, reduced by $150,000 with a Trillium Foundation grant bringing the township’s cost to $58,882.
The township is being tight-lipped on the matter.
“Township council has received a number of delegations over the past few years regarding Boreham Park safety concerns, and the condition of the ditches,” stated interim CAO Courtenay Hoytfox in an email.
“In response, council initiated a report on the storm water management pond in 2023 and directed staff to engage consultants to conduct a safety study in 2024.
“These initiatives, which involve technical reviews, come at a cost to the municipality,” she continued.
“Council reviews each request carefully to ensure decisions are made in the best interest of the community.”
She said the integrity commissioner is an independent officer who operates at arms length from council “and is not directed by the township in how it conducts or reports upon any matters that it reviews.”
She added the township does not comment on private or confidential matters, including cease and desist letters.
Taylor said despite the ombudsman’s letter and the integrity commissioner’s decision, he will not rest until the park is safe. He intends to delegate again when the safety report comes to council.
