Who's to Blame?

Another concerned citizen is looking for answers:

So how does someone get a final inspection? Isn't Scheaffer responsible? Isn't the town responsible? I spoke to Hess earlier and he said there was a $150.00 charge for an inspection. I (in good faith) paid my required fees to abide by the law and conditions of the town. I am now being told that the towns employee at the time (Scheaffer) did not do his job by signing my final inspection. Hess is now challenging some of Scheaffer's previous inspections in town. Seems to me a few people have dropped the ball at my expense. 

Are we really on a self destruct course? It seems that way, Contractors don't want to work here and people don't want to buy and/or build.

Feel free to respond.

Dan Thomson

porewitetrash@yahoo.ca

We wonder if Paul Schaeffer knows that Henry Hess has been saying these things about him.But isn't the Town liable for the actions of its employees? If Hess's accusations are true, then it sounds like the Town failed to perform the service you paid for and you should get a refund.

Petition for Mayor Tomlinson's Resignation

A new petition has gone out demanding the resignation of Kearney Mayor Paul Tomlinson unless he can clean up the financial mess he and Deputy Mayor Louise Wadsworth have created. The main catalyst for the petition is CBO Henry Hess's use of very questionable by-laws to generate income, on the backs of Kearney's citizens, to cover his ridiculous salary. 

There is much more than just those two issues but petitioners didn't want to get bogged down at people's doorsteps reading a grocery list of concerns. So instead, we've been asked to post the complete list of issues here.

We believe Mayor Tomlinson must be held accountable for, but not limited to, the following:

• Failing to demonstrate leadership and responsibility, and publicly declaring he is no leader but rather, “only one voice at the council table”.

• Besmirching the reputation of the Town of Kearney by publicly demonstrating a gross lack of respect to our neighbour Perry Township; our Member of Parliament Tony Clement; our Member of Provincial Parliament Norm Miller; and others.

• Demonstrating a callous disregard for the less fortunate of the Town of Kearney, specifically, but not limited to:

• Cancelling the Town’s donations to the Food Bank.
• In bad faith, putting liens on homes if payment of property tax is delayed.
• Cancelling the Town’s gift of Christmas turkey to staff.
• Publicly referring to the Town’s less fortunate as “trash”. [Actually, Tomlinson refers to all of Kearney's "Townies" as "trash". - CCoK]

• Failing to declare, and aiding and abetting councillors who fail to declare, a pecuniary interest in matters before Council.

• In bad faith, endorsing a budget that requires the depletion of the Town’s reserve funds.

• Demonstrating a callous disrespect for Kearney’s volunteers.

• Demonstrating a callous disrespect for Kearney’s senior citizens.

• Demonstrating a callous disrespect for Kearney’s town staff.

• Failing to hold councillors accountable for their lack of interest or involvement  in town affairs.

• Advocating and supporting two pay increases in two years for himself and council.

• Arbitrarily replacing the town’s Chief Building Official and the town’s By Law Enforcement Officer with Henry Hess at triple the cost.

• Creating, in bad faith, an arbitrary and illegal septic-system inspection program as a means to generate revenue.

• Failing to pursue funding or grants through the provincial and federal governments, which would ease the tax burden on the people of Kearney.

• Representing the Town of Kearney in business associations with the Town of Huntsville without the consent or endorsement of council.

• Failing to promote tourism in Kearney.

• Failing to promote business in Kearney.

• Failing to promote residency in Kearney.

• Repeatedly, and in bad faith, voting to abolish the Kearney Regatta.

• Arbitrarily and in bad faith eliminating volunteer committees that have driven Kearney’s prosperity.

• Harassing and bullying councillors who oppose him.

• Harassing and bullying citizens who oppose him.

• Secretly, and in bad faith, taking and publicly distributing photos and video of citizens and visitors of Kearney.

• Violating, aiding and abetting, and/or counselling others to violate the:

• Conflict of Interest Act.
• Municipal Affairs Act.
• Trespass to Property Act.
• Criminal Code of Canada.
• Election Act.
• Ontarians with Disabilities Act.
• Building Code Act.
• Etc.

• In bad faith, appointing his friends to the Fire Safety Board, instead of applicants with fire-fighting experience.

• Arbitrarily, and in bad faith removing the Fire Chief’s right to vote at the Fire Safety Board.

• Pitting the seasonal residents against the permanent residents.

• Frequently and regularly lying to the people of Kearney and the media.

• Jeopardizing the health and safety of Kearney’s citizens and visitors particularly children, the disabled, and the elderly.

• Breaking campaign promises including, but not limited to:

• “Prudently manage and maximize the use of taxpayer’s money.”
• “Development of a strategic plan for long term economic growth.”

 Are you surprised?

Another Citizen Comments on Building Code Violations

I have heard through the grapevine this week that Kearney is in violation of the Building Code Act, so I did a little research and here is what I learned.

Taken from the Building Code Act:

Code of conduct

7.1  (1)  A principal authority shall establish and enforce a code of conduct for the chief building official and inspectors. 2002, c. 9, s. 12.

Purposes

(2)  The following are the purposes of a code of conduct:

     1. To promote appropriate standards of behaviorand enforcement actions by the chief building official and inspectors in the exercise of a power or the performance of a duty under this Act or the building code.

     2. To prevent practices which may constitute an abuse of power, including unethical or illegal practices, by the chief building official and inspectors in the exercise of a power or the performance of a duty under this Act or the building code.

     3. To promote appropriate standards of honesty and integrity in the exercise of a power or the performance of a duty under this Act or the building code by the chief building official and inspectors. 2002, c. 9, s. 12.

Contents

(3)  A code of conduct must provide for its enforcement and include policies or guidelines to be used when responding to allegations that the code has been breached and disciplinary actions that may be taken if the code is breached. 2002, c. 9, s. 12.

Public notice

(4)  The principal authority shall ensure that the code of conduct is brought to the attention of the public. 2002, c. 9,

“principal authority” means,

(a) the Crown,

(b) the council of a municipality,

(c) an upper-tier municipality that has entered into an agreement under subsection 3 (5), 6.1 (1) or 6.2 (1),

(d) a board of health that has been prescribed for the purposes of subsection 3.1 (1) or has entered into an agreement under subsection 6.1 (2) or (3) or 6.2 (2),

(e) a planning board that has been prescribed for the purposes of subsection 3.1 (1), or

(f) a conservation authority that has been prescribed for the purposes of subsection 3.1 (1) or has entered into an agreement under subsection 6.2 (2); (“autorité principale”)

“registered code agency” means a person that has the qualifications and meets the requirements described in subsection 15.11 (4); (“organisme inscrit d’exécution du code”)

“regulations” means regulations made under this Act. (“règlements”) 1992, c. 23, s. 1 (1); 1997, c. 24, s. 224 (1, 2); 1997, c. 30, Sched. B, s. 1; 1999, c. 12, Sched. M, s. 1; 2002, c. 9, s. 2 (1-3); 2002, c. 17, Sched. C, s. 1 (1); 2002, c. 17, Sched. F, Table; 2006, c. 19, Sched. O, s. 1 (1); 2006, c. 21, Sched. F, s. 104 (1-3); 2006, c. 22, s. 112 (1).

When I learned this I phoned the Building Code Commission myself. They advised me that every Municipality is required to create a "Code of Conduct" for their CBO and inspectors, and then enforce it. If they do not have one then the Municipality (Council) is in violation of the legislation.

Guess what.....Kearney does not have a "Code of Conduct" for the CBO, and is in fact in violation of the legislation! So when the Mayor says "sorry, we have no jurisdiction over the CBO" He is WRONG! They (Council) are suppose to have jurisdiction over the CBO and how he implements the Building Code and to make sure there is no abuse of power. The problem is without having the "Code of Conduct" Mr. Hess can do whatever he wants!

Council needs to be held responsible for this, and for their CBO!

Anonymous

Note: Mayor Paul Tomlinson is quoted by the Almaguin News (April 19, 2012 - Page 5) as saying "Council has no jurisdiction over the Building Code. We can't tell Mr. Hess what he can do and what he can't do." So as usual, Tomlinson has either lied, or he just doesn't have a clue. Tough call.

Are you Surprised?

Is Tomlinson Planning an Exit Strategy?

In the last week or so Mayor Paul Tomlinson has been complaining about his health and hinting that he might have to resign "for health reasons".

But is he really planning to resign for health reasons, or is he just planning his save-face exit strategy for when the townspeople come calling with their petition for his resignation? Or maybe the stress of being Kearney's Crappiest Mayor Ever has been getting to him.

Are You Surprised?

Tomlinson's Abysmal Financial Management

We received this letter from a concerned citizen:

Dear "Concerned Citizens of Kearney";

I know you’ve covered most of this already, but I think that a clearer and more concise picture of Kearney’s downward financial spiral is needed here so readers can really get a sense of the damage that’s being done.  From the talk around town, it sounds like people are starting to see what’s going on, but there are still many who don’t seem to know the whole story.  There are many who are only now just learning of your website and there is a lot of information to read through.  I’m hoping that my letter will help bring the current financial crisis to the forefront.  I would rather that you don’t publish my name or email.  Thanks!

---------------------------------

Paul Tomlinson, as a councilor (2006 to 2010) and now as mayor, has an abysmal history of financial mismanagement.

2008:  The town had to return a $10,000 government grant that was supposed to fund recreational activities for the children of Kearney because Councilor Tomlinson, chairman of the Recreation Committee, violated the terms of that grant.

2009:  Councilor Tomlinson, publicly predicting Kearney’s financial collapse, voted against Mayor Johnston’s budget, demanding an 8.3% increase in municipal taxes.  The rest of council voted against Tomlinson and at the end of the year the town still made a surplus.  If I’m not mistaken, that surplus was deposited into the “Reserves”.

2008 to 2009:  Councilor Tomlinson, as chairman of the Budget Committee blew more than $50,000 of the town's money (our taxes) paying a financial consultant to do simple data entry at 14 budget meetings.

2011:  Mayor Tomlinson cancelled the shared Chief Building Official (CBO) agreement with the Perry Township (which was costing Kearney only $35,000 a year) in favor of hiring his own exclusive CBO at a cost of about $110,000 a year!

Because of reduced town revenues (unlike previous councils Mayor Tomlinson hasn’t been getting any provincial and federal grants or funding) Tomlinson's 2012 budget requires a withdrawal from “Reserves” of $2.3 million, which is almost as much as the total 2012 property tax revenue of $2.9 million.  This will almost completely deplete the town’s “Reserves”.  Where will we get the money for 2013 and 2014?

Tomlinson knows that he and Deputy Mayor Louise Wadsworth have put Kearney into serious financial trouble so he’s empowered his CBO/By-Law Enforcement Officer with new by-laws to use to raise $10,500 in “septic-tax” ($70 per inspection x 150 inspections).  But, the septic hit the fan and Tomlinson wasn’t able to charge the $70 to the property owners.  But Tomlinson has already spent the $10,500 in his 2012 budget, so where will that money now come from?

April 13th council meeting:  Because Mayor Tomlinson created a huge deficit in 2011, council had to pass a resolution to redirect $150,000 in surplus money generated in 2010 (Mayor Johnston’s council) into “Working Capital”, instead of being saved in the “Reserves”.

Flash back to an earlier council meeting:  Tomlinson got a resolution passed to take money out of the Dog Sled Races fund and Kearney Regatta fund.  But this money doesn’t belong to him or the town and Tomlinson had to give it back after he was busted by the auditors.

Kearney Regatta 2012:  Tomlinson has killed the Street Dance which generates the funds to finance Regatta.  Who's going to pay for that now?!?

To summarize:  As a councilor, Paul Tomlinson wasted $60,000 of our money.  Now that Tomlinson is mayor, during his term his CBO will cost us about $440,000, Kearney’s “Reserves” will have been wiped out, more businesses will have closed, fewer building projects will have been started (only 2 so far), residents will have lived in fear of CBO Henry Hess’s knock at their door, and more of our poor will see liens put on their properties.  

LIENS ON OUR PROPERTIES?!?

Yes!  Mayor Tomlinson’s latest initiative is to generate revenue on the town’s downtrodden and unemployed by seizing their homes and property the moment they fall behind on their tax payments.  Just so he can give his Proudfoot friends a 9% municipal tax decrease to offset the 9% provincial property tax increase they have to pay after their waterfront cottage property were reassessed.  Previous councils ruled more with compassion instead of greed and worked with the less fortunate to assist them, not punish them.  But then previous councils weren't clawing for every cent to stave off bankruptcy while serving another master.

And where do you think that is headed?  The poor of Kearney rely on food banks and charitable service clubs to put food on the table but Mayor Paul Tomlinson will solve that problem by taking away the table.  He's already cancelled town funding to charities.

But who cares, right?  We’re only “Townie Trash”.  Right, Mayor Tomlinson?!?

Tomlinson’s 2009 prediction about Kearney’s financial ruin was incredibly accurate, but he just wasn’t looking far enough into the future at the time.  If you still think we can afford Mayor Paul Tomlinson, his CBO/BEO, and his Proudfoot henchmen at the council table for another 3 years, there is no hope.

But if you do want to do something about it, spread the word and sign the petition that's been circulating.  The petition demands Tomlinson’s immediate resignation along with Barry Dingwall and Louise Wadsworth. The new mayor can give CBO Hess his pink slip and make amends with our good friends in Perry Township.  Yes, those friends who roll up their sleeves and pitch-in here in Kearney when the "Proudfoot Four" don’t bother show up.  (On a personal note: I think it has become more the "Proudfoot Three".  Councilor Steve Sainsbury seems genuinely interested in serving the people of Kearney, even if his earliest efforts were misguided because of the influence of others.)

A final note:  The information I’ve provided is as accurate as possible and is based on the 2012 town budget, council meeting agendas & minutes, town records, and correspondence.

Thank you Concerned Citizens of Kearney.  Keep up the good work!!

(Name Withheld by Request)



Thank YOU!

Tomlinson Continues to Secretly Photograph Citizens

As you know, Kearney Mayor Paul Tomlinson, when he's not taking cellphone pictures of kids at McManus beach, likes to photograph and video members of the public at town events. Particularly, former mayor Jeff Johnston and his family. And last night's Town Hall meeting was no exception.

Mayor Tomlinson, who decided for some reason that he should participate in the meeting by hiding in the audience, secretly videoed the former mayor as he raised the question on the legalities of the new septic inspection by-law. Tomlinson might argue that he simply wanted to allow those who could not attend the meeting a chance hear the question (as opposed to being a weirdo stalker), but you'll see in the video Tomlinson posted on YouTube that he doesn't video the whole meeting. In fact, he doesn't even video the final response to Johnston's question. Instead, as the question is being answered by an off-screen town representative, Tomlinson follows Johnston as he returns to his chair, then cuts the YouTube video before we get to hear the Town's answer.

Leaving us with 2 questions: What was the point of that? And who else has he videoed that we don't know about?

Are you surprised?

Mayor Paul Tomlinson's video

Is Tomlinson's CBO Killing Kearney's Real Estate Market?

According to one local real estate agent (who asked to remain anonymous) potential buyers are being steered away from Kearney and encouraged to buy elsewhere. One reason is Kearney's sudden glut of "missing" property inspection paperwork. This has lead to Tomlinson's CBO and By-law Enforcement Officer Henry Hess ordering new inspections, costing sellers and buyers thousands. Even if the paperwork is located, Hess is voiding the inspections saying the inspectors weren't qualified.

Who gets paid to perform the new inspections? Henry Hess.

Are you surprised?

The Septic Inspection Debate Continues

Maybe Mayor Paul Tomlinson can't be bothered to educate himself, but more and more concerned citizens of Kearney are sharing their knowledge and research:

From: Bill Tonge
To: "//concernedcitizens@hotmail.com"
Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2012 3:45:40 PM
Subject: sewage system inspection

I have contacted someone from the North Bay-Mattawa Conservation Authority and he has told me that they sent a proposal to the town of Kearney to do the septic inspections and council voted not to. They can create their own septic inspector, as long as he has the credentials, which I was told he does. He does not have the authority to order any repairs or upgrades etc. without notifying the NBMCA.

It also states in the Building Code that you do not have to allow him into your home: 16(1).

Lets be sure to push this one as well : 

15.23  The chief building official, inspectors and persons authorized by a registered code agency to exercise powers and perform functions on its behalf shall carry their certificate of appointment or authorization, as the case may be, when performing their duties and shall produce them for inspection upon request. 2002, c. 9, s. 29.

I have also read about trespassing law in Ontario, and what I get from it is that because he is a by-law / building officer he is not considered a trespasser.

As I was disappointed with my findings on everything I do know that video taping laws allow me to record everything he does on my property and that will be done.

I am also a little concerned about the conflict of interest that Kearney has created by having Mr. Hess as both Chief Building Official and By-law Officer. I think he should have to put in writing in advance to each individual property owner, why he going to be on your land, so he doesn't come saying he is inspecting the sewage system and then tries to site building code violations.

Thanks, Bill! We had a look at the Trespass to Property Act and it says:

2.  (1)  Every person who is not acting under a right or authority conferred by law and who,

     (a) without the express permission of the occupier, the proof of which rests on the defendant,

          (i) enters on premises when entry is prohibited under this Act, or

          (ii) engages in an activity on premises when the activity is prohibited under this Act; or

     (b) does not leave the premises immediately after he or she is directed to do so by the occupier of the premises or a person authorized by the occupier,

is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $2,000. R.S.O. 1990, c. T.21, s. 2 (1).

Now, we're not lawyers, but at the end of the day, it looks like this:

Henry Hess, if he has reasonable cause to believe your septic system is unsafe (there's a strong odour or visible ponding detectible from the road, or he has other prior evidence) he might then access your property to inspect the unsafe system. He can't check your septic system and then declare it as being unsafe. He has to prove he has reasonable grounds to believe your system is unsafe first. That's the condition that gives him the right or authority. The by-law might say different, but provincial law beats municipal law every time. And if Henry tries the old "We got an anonymous tip" routine, get all the particulars such as the time, date, and the name of the town employee who took the complaint so they can be subpoenaed to testify if the matter goes to court. Henry will have to produce that information when he comes calling to show that he has the right and authority.

Also, when you request to see Henry's credentials (identification, certificate of appointment, inspection certification) he must produce them for your inspection. Which means you get to read through them carefully; He doesn't get to flash them at you and stuff them back in his pocket. He wants to inspect your septic system? You get to inspect his credentials.

A final thought: Bill Tonge makes an excellent point about the potential conflict of Henry being both the CBO and the By-law Enforcement Officer. We already know that Henry has to justify his tripled salary, so is highly motivated to write tickets and reissue building permits (That's a conflict right there if you ask us!), and Tomlinson has now empowered him to stroll around your property with the hope that most people won't know that Henry's probably doing so illegally. Or that he can't access your property as one official, then switch to his role as the other official. But Tomlinson plays by his own rules and figures Kearney's "trash" (as he calls the Townies) will fall into line when Hess comes pounding on their door.

Are you surprised?

Tomlinson Denies Making Deal

Mayor Paul Tomlinson has been getting into hot water with council after it surfaced that he's been making deals with Huntsville without council approval, something that could get him kicked out of his seat at council. So it's no surprise that at the March 23, 2012 council meeting Mayor Paul Tomlinson denied making any deals with the Town of Huntsville and their Economic Development Officer to pursue funding for the graphite mine. But he hasn't been making deals, he has been... what? Hanging out with Huntsville's mayor and his Economic Development Officer and working with them to secure funding, grants, employment opportunities, etc.? But no deals!

At the council meeting Tomlinson stated:

"No agreement has been entered into because I would have had to come to council for their permission."

"[Huntsville Economic Development officer John Finley] is the grant officer in Huntsville and he knows the ministries and how to turn their crank with respect to motivating grant considerations. That doesn’t require an agreement. He volunteered his time – graciously. He’s also been offering his time to the graphite mine."

"No deals have been struck with Huntsville. No deals were asked for. No deals will be given. John Finley is contributing his time, expertise and knowledge gratis to the town."

Which begs the question: WHY?


Why would the mayor of Huntsville and his Economic Development Officer provide these services for free? Well, Mayor Tomlinson answered that question as well:

"We know there is going to be some spin-offs to Huntsville. That’s only natural. We can’t prevent that."

Or with Huntsville mayor Claude Doughty and his EDO running the show ("...he knows the ministries and how to turn their crank...") will it be Kearney that will have to hope for some "spin-offs"? Or are we expected to believe, as apparently Tomlinson does, that Huntsville will make sure that Kearney's citizens will come first, and Huntsville's second?

Sounds to us like Tomlinson's dancing his usual Proudfoot Sidestep now that he's been caught breaking the rules. Again.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!

 

Councillor Wills Fights Mayor Tomlinson to Save Regatta

In the face of the Proudfoot Four's continued resistance Councillor Yvonne Wills continues to struggle to save Regatta. Despite a very successful Regatta last year the Regatta Committee collapsed under the weight of Mayor Paul Tomlinson's micromanagement and the negativity of Councillor's Steve Sainsbury, Barry Dingwall, and Louise Wadsworth. Councillor Wills, because of the stress-related health problems from battling the Proudfoot Four (they voted twice against the Regatta), had not planned to work on Regatta again. But in the absence of any volunteers, and the Proudfoot Four's commitment to have nothing to do with Regatta, Councillor Wills is once again stepping up to bat.

But it will be another battle this year as the Proudfoot Four are determined to carve away the beer garden, the street dance, various activities and competitions, and reduce Regatta from two days down to one. Vendors who have participated in previous years have stated they will not attend for a one-day-only event.

You can read the Almaguin News article here.

Are you surprised?

More Concerned Citizens

The following is an email exchange between former Kearney mayor Jeff Johnston and Hartley Casselman, a board member of the Clam Lake Property Owner's Association. The emails are so the most recent is first and the original email is at the end.

The main point to take away from the discussion seems to be that Section 15 of the Building Code allows for CBO Henry Hess to carry out inspections of unsafe sewage systems, NOT any and all sewage systems. Kearney's new by-law might try to tell us different, but it really looks like if you don't want Hess sniffing around (pun intended) your property you can tell him to get lost (if a municipal by-law conflicts with provincial law, the provincial law - in this case the Building Code - wins). Unless Hess can prove beforehand that your sewage/septic system is already known to be unsafe. And we've made the point before; Do you really want Paul Tomlinson's new Sheriff Cash-Cow snooping around looking for "violations" to pay his salary?

In addition to our view that the By-Law has not been well thought through, my interpretation of the legal opinion that the Town of Kearney received in preparation of the Septic Inspection By-Law has not been followed. The “legal opinion” (copy attached) states:

a) the North Bay Mattawa Conservation Authority (NBMCA) is responsible for enforcing the Building Code and Act as it relates to sewage systems within the District of Parry Sound. The Town of Kearney does not have that authority.

b) the Municipality has the authority to create standards of property maintenance including maintenance of a sewage system. The Town of Kearney has not created a standard/consistent process for capturing pertinent information regarding septic systems in Kearney, nor a means to determine/identify problem systems. The CBO’s assessment with this program is subjective at best.

c) the Municipality relies upon Section 15 of the Building Code to carry our inspections of unsafe sewage systems....  The realm of municipal authority addresses “unsafe sewage systems” and not all sewage systems as this program intends. The Town of Kearney doesn’t have a data base of septic systems and as a first step, it is not trying to establish one.

d) “It is, however, important to stress that the use of the property standards by-law DOES NOT EXCEED THE AUTHORITY PROVIDED TO THE BUILDING OFFICIAL pursuant to the Building Code Act WHEN THE CONSERVATION AUTHORITY IS THE BODY CHARGED WITH THE ABILITY TO INSPECT SEPTIC SYSTEMS. “   It appears the Municipality IS EXCEEDING the authority provided in the Building Code Act

In discussions with experienced septic system installers and repair persons, observing a septic system will not divulge any issues unless there is visible ponding. A completely failed system may have no visible indications. But if the Municipality declares a septic system to be safe, this exposes the Municipality to liability issues, especially if the property is sold and the new owner discovers a serious septic problem. Recourse could be litigation against the Municipality.

As leaders in our community, I ask you to take a very careful look at the Town of Kearney’s actions regarding this Program. Also, please try to attend the public meeting scheduled for April 17, 2012 @ 7:00 PM, Kearney Community Centre, or ensure there is representation from your associations, property owners, and businesses.

Thank-you,

Jeff Johnston

From: Hartley Casselman

Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2012 11:35 AM

To: Jeff Johnston

Cc: Kenneth Ball

Subject: Re: Septic Inspection Program

Hi Jeff

No problem in forwarding my comments along, hopefully they will not fall on deaf ears. However, please represent these as my personal comments and not from the CLPOA.

One other point that can be made is that there is no official record in the town showing just where the septic system is located on a property, so this will lead to further guess work on the person doing the inspections.

Thanks Hartley

----- Original Message -----

From: Jeff Johnston

To: Hartley Casselman

Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2012 8:15 AM

Subject: Re: Septic Inspection Program

Hi Hartley,

Excellent points and I agree wholeheartedly.

Your point #7 – potential Town liability.  Excellent , excellent.

Your point #8 – I believe the CBO is certified to inspect septic systems, however in talking to Gary Groome, who as you know is very experienced, he says the type of inspection the CBO plans will not detect many problems, so to your points, unless there is a visible problem, it’s a waste of time and taxpayers’ dollars.

Would you mind if I sent this along to the Presidents of the other property owner associations and some other members of the public and council? I think your email states things very well.

Regards, Jeff

From: Hartley Casselman

Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 10:53 AM

To: Jeff Johnston

Cc: Kenneth Ball

Subject: Re: Septic Inspection Program

Hi Jeff

It is good to hear from you!

The following are my PERSONAL concerns [not CLPOA].

A while back I sent a communication form to the town supporting the basis for the septic inspection program but disagreeing with the methodology of how this was being put into place.

1. Responsible homeowners, like myself and others around the lake, who have their septic tanks pumped every 3-4 years and inspected by a licensed contractor to do so, and maintain backup documentation to prove this should be exempt from these unscientific intrusive town inspections and the new tax.

2. It is a total waste of time for Henry Hess to inspect these systems.

3. If anything, he should only look at those properties who do not maintain their septic systems until a catastrophe occurs. AND!!! Those property owners should pay the full expense for the town to do a proper flow and dye test... not this walk and sniff test which is a load of crap... no pun intended...

4. Even if done this way, the system will not be perfect. Case in point Jim and Jean Wright who recently sold their property had never had any service done on their septic system in all of the years that they were residents. Their property had no smell and there was no visible ponding around the septic bed. However, their septic system now needs to be replaced as it is totally plugged up. The home inspector could not flush a toilet without it backing up. Luckily for the new homeowner, it was caught on inspection and several thousand dollars was held back from the sale price to pay for this. If the Wrights had been a little smarter, they could have had their septic pumped just prior to closing and the problem would have never come to light and they would have had several thousand more dollars in their pockets now.

5. I, personally, do not want a town inspector snooping around unescorted on my property. As far as I am concerned this is "Illegal Trespass" and it is my intent to properly notify the town that their inspector must make an appointment with me should he wish to pay me a visit.

6. The town's new bylaw has no teeth, in that, if they do find a violation in the bylaw, there is nothing that they can do to force a property owner to repair their septic system.

7. Then there is the flip side of this. A town inspector looks at a property finds everything OK and shortly thereafter a problem occurs.... What is the responsibility of the town and can they be held responsible.

8. Henry Hess is a building inspector and not a septic system inspector. Will he now be trained in this field and who will pay for this [need I guess] additional training and certification?

Needless to say, I believe that this has not been well thought through, I may be mistaken, but I doubt it. With all of this in mind it is understandable why MNR Mattawa North Bay never set up an inspection program and was only interested in NEW septic system installations and not what happens afterward.

Just to clarify, this email reflects my personal concerns and not the CLPOA. While we have had a brief discussion in a board meeting about this program, this email does not reflect the discussion by the board. I am sure that this will be discussed in a future board meeting and an official response will be forthcoming from the board.

Hartley

----- Original Message -----

From: Jeff Johnston

To: Hartley Casselman

Cc: Councillor Yvonne Wills ; Councillor Ken Ball ; Councillor Arthur Murdy ; Councillor Steve Sainsbury ; Councillor Louise Wadsworth ; Levy Lorne ; Ron Duff ; Dave Matson ; Bob Tilley

Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 7:32 AM

Subject: Re: Septic Inspection Program

Hi Hartley & Rhonda,

Thanks for the notification. This is the first I had heard about it.

I fully support a septic re-inspection program and I applaud the town for putting one in place. However, I do have some serious concerns regarding the Town’s approach and process, it has notbeen well thought through and does not seem to draw upon the abundance of experience and information available.  I am basing my opinion solely on the By-law and feedback from those who have been selected in this year’s inspection program. 

Some examples;

1) other municipalities begin by building a comprehensive data base of all septic systems in the Town, containing pertinent data on septic system specs, date installed and subsequent maintenance activity including last time pumped out.

2) have a standard data sheet and send a copy to the respective property owner to verify town data and fill in the blanks.

3) once the data base is created, start field visits with known problem systems, oldest systems, and systems with greatest exposure to environmental risk, e.g. shoreline. Currently the selection of systems seems random and includes systems that are back lot or less than 5 years old.

4) establish a maintenance program for all septic systems that include specific cycles depending on type of system, usage level (e.g. full time residents, seasonal, rental, etc.)

Field visits need only be done on an exception basis.  Currently  the CBO’s visit to private property is seen as an invasion of privacy by many, and a possible ruse to do other inspections or observe other violations of the building code. 

Regards, Jeff

From: Hartley Casselman

Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2012 10:34 PM

To: Hartley_Rhonda Casselman

Subject: Septic Inspection Program

NOTICE TO ALL CLPOA MEMBERS

We have received the following notice of a public meeting, from our local representative on town council, regarding the new septic system inspection program in Kearney. If you have any questions or concerns about this new mandatory program, you should attend this "Open House".

Subject: Septic Inspection Program

"Property Standards Sewage Inspection Program Open House" in the Seniors Room at the KCC, Tuesday the17th April 2012 7-830pm.

Thank you

Your CLPOA Board of Directors