Council wants to take a closer look at some of the recommendations in a staff report around property standards policy instead of rushing along with previous suggestions.
"In my mind, some of the recommendations in there are a bit premature," said Coun. Paul Raymond. "There are some recommendations for policy changes that are not vetted by the committee. They should be vetted by the committee."
Deputy Mayor Gerard LaChapelle, who had brought the matter forward at an Oct. 14 committee meeting, agreed.
"I find it rushed," he said. "I can't accept this. There are lots of questions I have in the report. I find with things like this, we need time, a week or two to digest it. I believe this can be resolved by our staff members going down to talk to the residents."
The matter he had brought forward related to letter sent to a Maskinonge Road resident, who had received an "Order to remedy, Violation of Standard Property Maintenance and Occupancy," with very little time remaining to take steps to make the required changes to the property.
The letter, which was stamped Aug. 28, reached the resident on Sept. 24, way past their Sept. 16 date of appeal, and only gave them until Sept. 30 to make repairs to their soffit, fascia and siding.
"The owner did reach out the township staff to discuss the matter before him as the property owner," said LaChapelle. "The individual discussed items within the letter with a concern of the timing to address the items within the letter. When the owner talked about the appeal, it was conveyed he had to file a letter of objection to the township with a $250 cheque attached."
He said listening to the resident's story frustrated him about how process is carried out at the township.
"Once again, we get involved as council, because of how we do business," said LaChapelle. "It breaks down to communication. When I see the information provided of our procedures, what I'm questioning to is how we proceeded with the notification.
"We're here to solve problems, not create problems," he added. "I believe how this was handled, created problems. In my conversation with the home owners, they were quite willing to do what we wanted them to do. To me, all the players that are important in decision making were not part of this report."
The municipality's first approach should always be to talk to the residents, not to send a letter that's threatening, said LaChapelle.
"When you have this conversation with these people, they were threatened, they felt uncomfortable," he said. "You have no idea how hard it was for them to talk to me because they have this fear about the municipality and that bothers me also."
LaChapelle said this entire experience makes him feel that residents are afraid of talking to their elected officials.
"They don't know how to communicate with us --- that's wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong," he said. "We're here to help people so let's find ways to bring this to conclusion."
During Wednesday's council meeting, Steve Farquharson, general manager, protective and development services manager of planning and development services, said staff will be going down and speaking with the individual, whose case LaChapelle brought forward, to put together a game plan to gain compliance.
"I try to work with everybody as much as possible," said Rob Kennedy, municipal law enforcement officer. "The discussions I've had previously with the resident have gone pretty well. I could go speak with him personally to set up some timeframes for when everything will be done."
LaChapelle seemed satisfied with that approach.
"I do support that option, to speak, and engage," he said. "I think that's the best form of attack at this point. When Mr. Kennedy does attend, the chief building official attends and then we get a written commitment from the resident about what they're going to do. I think this will be the best approach."
