HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Citizen, 2012-10-25, Page 6PAGE 6. THE CITIZEN, THURSDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2012.Writer clarifies statements from previous letterTHE EDITOR,
Recently I wrote a comment with
regard to Mr. Brock Vodden and his
attempt to drag North Huron
taxpayers into a grossly expensive
but inevitably futile lawsuit against
an internet blog site using municipal
taxpayer funds. In that letter I made
the comment that Vodden would not
directly be affected since he was not
a property owner and therefore not a
municipal taxpayer. My comment
was prompted by the fact that it is
very easy to use someone else’s
cheque book to resolve your own
personal issues, especially when you
have no obligation to repay any part
of the debt that you may incur.
This has brought forth several
questions to me regarding that
statement which I feel obliged to
answer. Please remember that these
answers are with regard to municipal
elections only.
Do I feel that because someone is
a resident but not a property owner
and therefore not responsible for
property taxes that they should not
be allowed to vote? No! I believe
that everyone who resides in the
municipality should have the right to
vote in municipal elections. What
happens here affects us all on a daily
basis and so if you live here you
should have a say in who represents
you.
Do I feel that if you are not a
property owner you should not have
the right to hold municipal office.
Absolutely! In the real world you
would not elect a member to the
board of any corporation who did
not have an invested stake in it. Can
you imagine having the board of
directors for CIBC making decisions
that affect the profitability of the
bank without them owning shares or
having to consider their own
pocketbook. Why they might do
away with service fees, much to the
delight of the customers, however
the result would be that the bank
would go broke very quickly.
In much the same way it is
ridiculous to have someone sitting
on council and proposing to spend
money that we do not have on a
totally ridiculous venture that will
accomplish nothing while not
having to consider the consequence
to their own wallet. What we have
here is the Corporation of the
Municipality of North Huron and
every property owner in it has a
vested interest and share in it. Any
debt incurred by the municipality
becomes the responsibility of the
shareholders (property owners). It
should only be those with a vested
interest that have the right to
determine how the assets and money
of the corporation and its
shareholders are cared for and used
to sustain the municipality.
Before anyone jumps on me with
the argument that the renter is
paying taxes through the property
owner, please consider that if the
building is vacant the property
owner is still responsible for the
taxes. The tenant can pack up and
leave and he has no responsibility to
pay anything other than the rent he
owes. If because of the
mismanagement of municipal affairs
by council the taxes should double
next year the tenant has no worries.
He is generally protected by rent
control laws and so the property
owner gets stuck with the increase in
cost. If the tenant does not like the
way the neighbourhood is
deteriorating, or the way the
building is managed he can find
another one, pack up and leave with
no worries. He does not have to
consider the sale of the building or
consider the possible loss of
property value, transfer taxes, real
estate fees, mortgage penalties and
deficiencies and on and on. He
simply gives his notice packs up and
leaves.
I also believe that in a perfect
world all property owners in the
municipality should have the right to
a vote and that includes commercial
and non-resident property owners
who currently are excluded and yet
in many municipalities represent a
very substantial piece of the revenue
generated by property taxes. Of
course these entities or persons
would not have a right to hold office,
only to vote. In the case of a resident
who owned a home and also owned
one or more commercial properties
in the municipality yes he would be
entitled to one vote for each property
for which he received a tax bill. This
is only fair since he is contributing
on two fronts as a resident and as a
contributor to the economic viability
of the municipality. That being said I
also believe that if your taxes are in
arrears you should not be eligible to
vote and in today’s age of computers
that would be pretty easy to manage
right at the polling station where you
could also be given the opportunity
to pay those arrears and exercise
your right to vote.
Consider also the farmers in our
area who own farm properties in
more than one municipality. I know
several who own farms in both North
Huron and Morris-Turnberry
contributing to the tax base as well
as the employment in both
municipalities. Do they not have a
vested interest in the fiscal well-
being of both places and should we
not respect their contribution as
well? Why should they have to
choose only one municipality in
which to vote when they pay taxes in
both? I think the statement “One
man one vote” with regard to
Municipal voting should be altered
to read “One property tax bill one
vote”.
When I was a young lad living in
Toronto, only a couple of years ago,
I had friends who lived in
apartments but owned seasonal
property in small cottage country
municipalities where they and other
non-resident landowners represented
the bulk of taxes collected. They
were not allowed to vote and
subsequently the local residents took
advantage and spent money on
projects that benefitted the local
residents and left the cottage owners
underserviced and overtaxed.
Personally I think that is a
perversion of democracy
and an example of what
happens when you cede
control to a small group with
their own personal agenda.
Can anyone possibly be so
naive to think that using the
taxpayer’s money to fund
frivolous lawsuits is going to
attract new industry or
residents to North Huron?
As a businessman doing due
diligence before locating
here I will be more
concerned with that and the
crumbling roads and
infrastructure than I am
about some bunch of raving
loonies on a blog site.
Just a side note that here
in Blyth we have now spent
money to delineate parking
spaces and where you
cannot park in addition to
the new North Huron
Parking laws. It was
however rather indicative of
the attitude of our elected
representatives that the first
person I saw parking in a
restricted area dangerously
blocking a corner both for
pedestrians and motorists was none
other than one of our councillors. I
will let you guess who.
Bill Knott,
Blyth, ON
The War Amps
continues to serve
war amputees,
and all Canadian
amputees,
including children.
The Child Amputee
(CHAMP) Program
provides financial
assistance for
artificial limbs,
regional seminars,
and much more.
The War Amps
The War Amps
1 800 250-3030
customerservice@waramps.ca
waramps.ca
Charitable Registration No. 13196 9628 RR0001
The War Amps does not receive government grants.
Order key tags and address labels at:
TheLegacyContinues
Zackery
When you use War Amps key tags and address
labels, you support programs like CHAMP.
DRIV
E
S
A
F
E
1234
5
6
7
8
9
Letters to the Editor
Honoured
At the first Brussels Guiding Unit year-end camp earlier this year,
Morgan Sheppard, second from right, and Kelsey Rathwell, second
from left, both received their Canada Cord, the highest
achievement that can be achieved by a Pathfinder. Both have been
involved in guiding for several years and they continue to support
local guiders as junior leaders. The awards were presented by
Guider Wendy Marks, left, and Guider Janet Mitchell, right. (Photo
submitted)