Lessons From the Past

Jeff Green | Jan 22, 2025

Covering the Central Frontenac Township this week, I got a sense of Deja Vu, and with the benefit of the google search bar on our own website, I now see why.

In 2012 and into 2013, there was a debate in the township about whether to bring in a property standards bylaw.

At that time, based in part on an initiative by the Friends of Arden group, there was a push for the township to regulate not only the safety but the appearance of properties, with the intention being to make the township more attractive for both tourists and potential new residents as well.

The township already had a Safe Properties Bylaw in place, ever since 2000.

The township held two public meetings at the time, to talk about three options; bring in a property standards bylaw, change the safe properties bylaw, or leave the 2000 bylaw as it was.

As is the case now, most residents did not know that the 2000 bylaw existed, and that the township could order old vehicles and brush to be removed from a residential or commercial property, and could act to remove them at the cost of the resident or business owner, along with a fine, if the property owner did not comply within a set timeframe.

The main differences between a property standards and a safe property bylaw is that a property standards bylaw allows for aesthetic concerns to be considered and can extend to the state of repair of the dwelling itself, whereas a safe property bylaw is limited to concerns over safety on the property outside of the home.

In the end, the Friends of Arden's intention to make the township more attractive and inviting, were effectively countered by other township residents who were more concerned about property owner's rights to manage their property as they wished.

Council decided to forego a property standards bylaw, and instead made changes to the safe properties bylaw, and the new bylaw was similar, if not a bit less onerous on property owners.

Then, as now, the bylaw is enforced on the basis of complaints.

There are a couple of interesting similarities to what went on back then, as compared to what is gong on now.

France Smith, who was then a member of council, suggested in 2012 that there be two sets of standards established, one within the hamlets, and on on rural properties outside of the hamlets. At that time, this was seen as unworkable. Smith made a similar suggestion at council last week, interestingly enough, but it does not appear that it will be taken up this time either,

In 2012, bylaws in Central Frontenac were enforced by Frontenac Bylaw Services, which was owned and operated by Ken Gilpin.

The staff member who oversaw the development of the 2013 sake properties bylaw was then Chief Building Official Jeremy Neven.

As of last summer, the township has its own bylaw officer, Nicole Shorts, and this time it is the bylaw officer who is charged with developing a bylaw that she will then be responsible for enforcing.

There is also glaring difference between the way the two processed have been conducted.

In 2012/13 there were public meetings before the bylaw was drafted, and in 2024/25 there have been no public meetings at any stage of the process, no organised public consultation at all.

This, in spite of the fact that there is now a vehicle in place, Engagefrontenac.ca, which is a county run web service that is designed to foster public debate on issues before council.

No property owner wants any government, local or otherwise, to be able to tell them how to run their lives and their property. But there are also legitimate public concerns over safety and liability and environmental impacts that are a reasonable limit to a property owners rights.

It is always going to be a touchy subject, with strong emotions.

Public engagement could make the process of developing a necessary bylaw slower and more complicated, and could result in a watered down, less effective outcome.

But it is still the better way to go, especially when we are dealing with municipal governments who levy taxes to the same property owners that must follow the regulations in any bylaw that is ultimately approved.