It is done.
Councillors here have joined the rest of Wellington County in adopting an anti-fortification bylaw and protocol.
Although the bylaw has been in the works for years, Erin’s decision came only after a recent presentation by Wellington OPP Inspector Scott Smith and a report from the town’s chief building official (CBO).
In his report to council on Jan. 24 Andrew Harholt recommended Erin adopt the bylaw and an attached investigation and enforcement protocol.
Harholt said the bylaw is in response to provincial legislation and the Wellington County Police Services Board, through the County of Wellington, had requested lower tier municipalities enact a common bylaw.
Harholt said it is meant to regulate the fortification of lands and protective elements applied to lands as well as to prohibit excess fortification or protective elements. The bylaw was proposed as a means of discouraging outlaw motorcycle groups from considering a base in Wellington County.
In the event of non-compliance, the bylaw would be enforced under the provisions of the Building Code Act by the chief building official.
“The chief building officials within the county have always supported the intent of the initial proposed bylaw,” Harholt said. “We have, however, identified a number of concerns with the previous drafts.”
Those resulted in numerous amendments, leading to the current draft bylaw that addressed those issues.
Based on that, Harholt was ready to support the enactment of the bylaw on the basis of the following policy assumptions:
– the bylaw would be used to deal with situations of excessive fortification as identified by the Ontario Provincial Police, or others;
– the OPP would assist the CBO and his designates, as requested in the administration and interpretation of the bylaw, and the OPP would take an active role in all enforcement associated with the bylaw; and
– it acknowledged the CBO and designates are not experts in the field of “excessive fortification” and they would rely on the expertise of the OPP in those matters.
The bylaw would be enforced upon requests from the OPP only, and as such, the lower tier municipalities within Wellington County will not:
– establish a registry of all existing and future permitted fortified properties;
– amend building bylaws to require submission of drawings or specifications of security measures (fortification) prior to issuance of building permits;
– enact a permit or licence system for authorization of the installation of measures and protective elements.
Harholt stated, “Properties that have been excessively fortified contrary to the bylaw, not unlike marijuana grow houses and other clandestine drug laboratories, are potentiality dangerous by their very nature.”
He said those properties may pose unseen dangers installed by their owners and operators to thwart law enforcement officials or other unwanted entrants. The bylaw assumes that in order to determine if a building has been excessively fortified, the building official must enter the premises.
So, the potential also exists for inspectors to be physically or verbally threatened – and that would be defined as workplace violence. Consequently, the Occupational Health and Safety Act would allow a worker to refuse to work in a particular situation where that person has reason to believe the physical condition of the workplace is likely to be a danger, or that there is the potential of workplace violence.
Councillor John Brennan wanted it to be clear that the designation of excessive fortification would be an OPP decision – not town staff.
Councillor Barb Tocher asked if Harholt or council had the opportunity to read an email sent that day from an Erin resident concerned with the bylaw as it affected private property.
She understood the bylaw is not meant for commercial places that are fortifying their properties for protection purposes. “But what about private residents who are fortifying their properties for security reasons – not for fortification as we are understanding it.”
Harholt said it comes down to if “we consider it excessive or not. That is the OPP’s decision.”
However, he said Smith’s presentation to council a few weeks earlier stated there would be considerations for residences.
Tocher said the letter writer had also questioned the definition of “excessive.”
Harholt said that is one reason that decision was being left in the hands of the police.
Brennan cited a section of the bylaw that states it does not prevent the use or application of commonly available commercial security devices.
Mayor Lou Maieron said it comes down to, if “you can drive an OPP Yukon through the fortifying gates it is okay, but it takes three Sherman tanks – you have a problem.”
Brennan said the bylaw also includes “the reasonable use of protective elements. If you are putting in things commonly available, you don’t have a problem. It is when you go overboard.”
Maieron said, “The intent is that if you want to protect your private property – that’s fair. But if you want to exclude the police from entering because you are doing something illegal, it can become excessive.”
Brennan felt comfortable the police would not be going after individuals doing what they normally might to protect their homes. Maieron added he had doubts any law-abiding person would mind police coming in, even if they had protective measures.
Harholt said anyone concerned they would be contravening the bylaw is welcome to contact the OPP.
Tocher remained concerned the bylaw still appears open to interpretation.
“What the police consider excessive today may not be what police consider excessive tomorrow,” she said. “This bylaw doesn’t have any constraints as to that interpretation and I think it’s a dangerous slope.”
Councillor Deb Callaghan knew there were other municipalities dealing with grow houses and crystal meth labs. She said they have protocols regarding bringing in building officials and the fire department.
“Does this mean fire and property standards do not get involved?”
Harholt said, “As far as this is written – not right now.”
Maieron suggested that could be an item to consider after the bylaw passage. He also cited the time spent so far to reach this point.
“Sometimes you have to reach for the low-hanging fruit before you reach for the higher branches,” he said.
Harholt said he believes the bylaw is just another tool for the OPP to gain entrance to a property when there are no other options.
“I’m not sure whether I’m just reading that into it or not.”
Council subsequently passed the bylaw.
Mayor Maieron anticipated Wellington County and the Wellington County OPP would be pleased the bylaw is finally in place.
