Pollard Drain cancellation, costing decision fails to please all as bills go out

BY SHAWN LOUGHLIN

The long and drawn-out saga of the Pollard Drain in Londesborough has come to an end, but not to the satisfaction of very many, as over $100,000 of already-spent funds still need to be paid for work completed on the drain, despite the fact that it will now go no further.

 

Central Huron Council has had many discussions on the issue, even hosting a public meeting in Londesborough on the issue. On Monday, Nov. 17, council put the issue to rest once and for all, opting to navigate the rock-and-a-hard-place situation by distributing the costs equally among landowners in the affected region.

 

Homes, farms or businesses located on Concessions 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14, over 180 in total, were each charged $583.96, while four properties owned by the Municipality of Central Huron were each charged $584.30 and two County of Huron properties were charged $583.96 for a total of $110,369.80.

 

A petition for the drain was initiated nearly eight years ago and then, in subsequent years, preliminary work has been done and extensive public input has been sought, only for the decision to back away from the drain to be made earlier this year.

 

Kyle Pollard was at the meeting to speak his piece, saying that the work would have to be done at some point, but that, the way it was proposed by the engineering firm, he wouldn’t have supported it either, so he understands why the decision has been made to walk away. And yet, he said, the time will come when the work will have to be formally initiated and completed.

 

Also at the meeting was Bill Dougherty, who expressed his displeasure with the decision to equally charge residents for the outstanding funds, saying that he, initially, was going to be charged around $5 for the work being done, in stark comparison to many of the other affected landowners. He’s now being charged more than 100 times that.

 

For the meeting, Clerk Alan Bushell prepared a report for council, breaking down the costs per property owner, outlining the communication process and presented some of the feedback received by members of the community after the Sept. 8 public meeting in Londesborough.

 

Bushell detailed the decision to not proceed, made at the Sept. 8 public meeting, and then council further reviewing the municipality’s options at the Oct. 20 meeting, resulting in the decision to request a bylaw to equally bill every property assessed on the drain. That requested bylaw was then included on the Monday, Nov. 17 meeting agenda for debate and eventual approval.

 

He also detailed that assessed property owners received mail-out notices explaining that the bylaw would be considered at the Nov. 17 meeting, welcoming residents to either attend or provide written feedback.

 

In addition to the aforementioned residents who spoke up at the meeting, a handful also provided written comments in opposition of the decision.

 

Auke Bylsma wrote that he first felt relief that he would only be assessed the aforementioned equal share, but, upon further reflection, felt the decision was unfair. He said that because council decided both to proceed with the drain and then ultimately pull the plug on it, the entire bill should be paid from Central Huron’s operating budget (full of money from all of the municipality’s ratepayers).

 

Dougherty also penned a letter to council, expressing his disappointment in the decision. He felt the costs being charged to the municipality were exorbitant and that he didn’t deserve to be charged for the work that had already been done. He also complained about mixed messaging regarding his involvement in the situation being minimal, only to face these charges once the new decision had been made.

 

Andrew and Christina Thomson agreed, suggesting that funds be collected either from the general municipal levy or from the original drain petitioners. Tim Lowey and Paul J. Wong also expressed their frustrations.

 

At the meeting, council went ahead with the passage of the bylaw, reading it a first and second time. Bushell said that bills would be sent out in the new year to avoid billing residents just before the holidays, which is why the third and final reading of the bylaw will take place at a meeting in the new year.