The Lack of Fence Legislation in Kitchener Amanda Reed arparalegal@hotmail.com 226-203-0065 August 28, 2017
What You Want What I Want * Cost savings * Effective use of City resources (staff time) What I Want * A by-law clearly setting out a fence dispute process * Recourse if by-law contravened
“The original intent of the Act was to adjudicate disputes between farmers…for a fence that would span a great distance; and, would subsequently pose a large financial burden if borne by one owner.”
“Currently, owners of urban sized lots are using the Act as a means of furthering personal disputes; which is not pertinent to the Act’s original intent.”
“The following municipalities have chosen to apply section 98: Kingston, London, Markham, Mississauga, Richmond Hill, and Vaughn.”
Other Municipalities and s.98 Kingston Line Fences Act applies London Fence By-Law PS-6-13002 Markham Fence By-Law 277-97 Mississauga Division Fence By-Law 0075-2004 Mississauga Division Fence By- Law Dispute Procedure Richmond Hill Line Fences Act applies
“Staff is of the opinion that by discontinuing the application of the Line Fences Act the people of Kitchener will not be adversely affected, for they will still possess alternative means of dispute resolution; such as the courts.”
= We Both Get What We Want Proposal: Adopt the Mississauga By-Law and dispute procedure. * cost to the City is nil; * people have recourse to sue civilly under contravention of a by-law; and * resolution process is set out in step by step form so both parties are clearly aware of the process and consequences. = We Both Get What We Want
Mississauga Fence Dispute Process Step 1: No agreement reached – Proceed as per By-Law Step 2: Recovering the Costs of Building the Fence Step 3: Initiating a Prosecution to Recover Proportionate Share of Cost of Fence The extent of the City’s involvement and expense in fence disputes is: City Council enacted the by-law. That’s it.
Questions?