Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutClinton News Record, 2016-02-17, Page 5Wednesday, February 17, 2016 • News Record 5 letters to the editor And how are you sleeping these days? Dear Editor: True Story between two cit- izens living in two different Industrial Wmd Turbine Projects: Me: Do the turbines affect you? Her: I hadn't noticed any- thing, how about you? Me: Yes, about five days after the first Project near us started, I had my first bout of tinnitus. Her: Tmnitus, what's that? Me: Ringing in my ears. Her: Oh, I have that Me: When did that start? Her: hmmm, let's see....after the turbines started.... Health Issues began for some residents immediately after the initial Projects come online, others takes weeks or months to be noticed and there are various degrees of severity with those symptoms. Given that and that most of the symp- toms are common to other ill- nesses health practitioners are more familiar with, many citi- zens don't connect the dots between what they are experi- encing and Industrial Wind Turbine operations. Complaints commonly identified by affected citizens are: • Heart palpitations • Vertigo • Nausea • Dizziness • Visual blurring • Concentration and Mem- ory problems • Panic episodes • Chronic fatigue and loss of energy • Irritability • Head and Ear Pressure • Headaches and Migraine • Pulsating vibrations in your body • Sleep Deprivation (my per- sonal nemesis) .waking up at 2 and 3 and 4 in the morning, and I mean wide awake, for no apparent reason. Once symptoms begin, it is reported globally they do not go away, people do not 'get used to it' (a common phrase used by people who don't experience symptoms) - it gets worse. Just to be clear and to avoid being accused of fear mon- gering, this letter's intent is to help educate the wider public and increase awareness and support for health affected residents. Whether or not you personally experience symp- toms does not mean others don't. I liken it to any other environmental hazard, peo- ple can be affected to varying degrees, depending upon pre-existing health condi- tions, current health status, and a host of other Snowmobilers need to review Bill 100 Dear Avid Snowmobilers, I am attaching informa- tion of concern regarding Bill 100. Please review the attached information. It is extremely important that people know that if they have allowed a snowmobile trail across their property with all good intent, when this bill passes the trail could be registered against the title of the property and become a permanent right of way that goes with the land. There is a law called ease- ment law that only allows the private property owner - the owner holding the fee simple in the land (Fee Simple Owner) the right to grant any use of his or her land. Our government has taken it upon itself to register statutory easements on private prop- erty. Statutory easements are not easement law but govern- ment taking your land. Please be aware of what is happening to your prop- erty. Leam more about Bill BILL 100 Supporting Ontario's Trails Act, 2015 Submitted by Karen Mahon Bill 100,which has been voted 011 once and is moving forward through government procedure, leads the private property owner into thinking they can allow things like snow- mobile trails, atv trails, hildng trails, heritage trails, etc., across their property and yet retain the right to shut those trails down, if they want or need to. They will not be able to, if Bill 100 is passed. What are the main points of Bill 100? Bill 100 short titled Supporting Ontario's Trails Act, 2015, includes 3 sections and 6 Schedules. Schedule 1 is the Ontario Trails Act, 2015, and has 16 sections. This Act is by the Minister of Tourism and the Bill states the purposes of this Act are: to encourage the use of trails, to enhance trail experience, to pro- tecttrails, and to recognize trails. Under section 7 of this Act it is stated that the government will use "Best Practices" to exe- cute this Act. "Best practices" is too arbitrary a term, has no sub- stantivel meaning in law, and is completely ambiguous2. Gov- ernment can do what theywant to get the easement. Nothing in this Act is for the protection of the private prop- erty owner, and would seem to mislead the private property owner into entering into agree- ments where an easement would be registered against the title of the private property. This easement cannot be removed by the private property owner (section 12 (11)3; it can only be removed by an "eligible body; which under this Act is a "nominee' A "nominee"4 seems a very unusual term (see footnote below for legal definition), and the reasoning for this term could seem quite the trick. When an "eligible body" approaches a private property owner about allowing a trail to cross their land, if the owner of the land agrees, then the owner is the one actually asking this "eligible body" to put an ease- ment against the owner's title. Unknowingly the private prop- erty owner has just turned over his rights to the eligible body, and because of this Act that eli- gible body can now go and reg- ister an easement against the title of the property. You may ask how can they just do this. The "nominee" has been granted, by the private property owner, the authorityto do it and there does not need to be signatures because of sec- tion 12 (10)5 and the Land Reg- istration Reform Act. This is the other trick part of this Act "Eligible bodies" include, excerpts right from the Act: The Crown in right of Canada or Ontario, including an agency, board or commission of the Crown that can hold an interest in land: an aboriginal band (within the meaning of the IndianAct of Canada), commu- nity or organization prescribed under this Act: amunicipality: a conservation authority: a board under the Education Act: an incorporated registered charity under the Canada Corpora- tions Act: a trustee of a charitable foundation, etc., registered under the Income Tax Act: a qualified organiza- tion, under section 170 (h) Internal Revenue Code (United States) [(3)FUTURE INTER- ESTS IN TANGIBLE PER- SONAL PROPERTY... For pur- poses of the preceding sentence, a fixture which is intended to be severed from the real property shall be treated as tangible personal property.], etc.,: any other person or body prescribed under this Act. Also, if a private property owner did allow an easement, under section 12 (8) that ease- ment can be transferred from the eligible body, you have entered into an agreement with, to any of the other "eligible bodies" on that list, and you wouldn't even know. So, in good faith, you enter into an agreement with the local club and the next thing you know a municipality or conservation authority has an easement against your property. Is that what a private property owner wanted? No, but that's what this factors. Like it or not, there are health affected citizens that are experiencing negative health impacts since turbine operations began and have and/or are in the process of considering leaving their homes because of those neg- ative health impacts. I per- sonally have no doubt that once the Grand Bend Wmd Project's 3.2 MW turbines begin full operation expected in March 2016, the numbers of health affected citizens will grow. It is safe to say that this issue has created more ani- mosity among and between members of the rural 100. It is not in your better interest. Landowners will have to decide what to do. Your knowledge of this Bill should encourage you to help stop it. Brock Napier in the Muskoka area has shut down Bill can do. Section 12 (3) (a) is for the the preservation, enhancement or management of the use of the land, as well as access to all, or a portion of the land, for some- thing which relates to the trails or activities on the trails. In other words, if one's property is needed for people to access the trail across his property, than his entire property is included in the easement. This includes groomers or graders to smooth out the trail, etc. Section 12 (3) (b) is to create trails for public use. Itis also for the maintenance and manage- ment of said trails. And Section 12 (3) (c) is ambiguous because it states that regulations maybe created under this Act and yet it leaves open all kinds of mis- chief. An example would be that a regulation may include that the owner may have to pay for the maintenance of the trail even when he doesn't use it, instead of the eligible nominee or the public. Section 12 (9)6 speaks to time limits which may be communities than any other issue. The opportunity for developing avenues with which to work towards solu- tions that work for all has never been more necessary. In an effort to secure sup- port for health affected resi- dents, there will be a presen- tation made to the Huron County Board of Health on March 3, 2016 at 9 a.m. at 77722B London Road, Clin- ton, Ontario. Interested per- sons are welcome to attend this public meeting. Patti Kellar Bluewater six trails. Ryan Sutcliffe in the Kawartha area has also shut down trails. The govemment needs to withdraw the bill if clubs want access to the land for trails. Sincerely, Karen Mahon added to the easements. These may include months, years, or forever, but as it is the eligible body determining the rules, it would seem, that the easement would be made for as long as possible in the favour of the eli- gible body. Section 12 (16)7 says that "rights are reserved" but only if your rights don't interfere with this Bill. This Bill could also be a detri- ment to those who have had a really good working relationship with private property owners, because if a private property owner feels they are going to have an easement registered against their property that they haven't any control over, or can't remove, why would anyone allow any association, federation, ororgani- zation the privilege of putting a trail across their property. I know I wouldn't, so this Bill does just the complete opposite ofwhat its purpose is, to promote trails. Bill 100 needs to die on the floor of Queen's Park for the protection of everyone's private property rights.