Council defers odour bylaw around cannabis
Pelham Town Council deferred passage of an odorous industries nuisance bylaw at its February 18 meeting in the wake of presumed legal warnings from pot producers CannTrust and RedeCan. The bylaw is central to the Town’s Cannabis Control Committee’s efforts to create enforceable regulations before the expiry of the interim control bylaw in mid July.
The matter was deferred to council’s March 23 meeting upon CCC chair Tim Nohara’s request, but not before Mayor Marvin Junkin questioned the ability of the committee to handle the queries from CannTrust and RedeCan on their own.
“What we’re looking at are procedural, legal steps,” the Mayor said. “I think we should be referring this back to [the Town’s] lawyers in Toronto rather than the CCC … I think this is beyond the scope of the CCC, but that’s my opinion.”
Nohara said they have received letters from the cannabis producers’ lawyers, but didn’t divulge the contents.
“We have engaged our counsel to advise on any improvements we can make,” he said. “There have been identified some improvements.”
In September, Nohara told the Voice that getting the Town’s cannabis bylaws right is paramount, given almost-guaranteed litigation from producers.
“[We] have to implement them in a way that first of all works, and second of all with withstand legal challenges,” he said at the time. “We will get sued, but we think we’ll win.”
Ultimately, council disagreed with Junkin’s position that Town lawyers exclusively deal with the issue. Ward 1 Councillor Mike Ciolfi asked for a recorded vote, and councillors unanimously voted to authorize the CCC to handle the matter. According to a Town statement, however, the committee will work alongside Pelham’s legal counsel.
Nohara had originally asked for a deferment to March 2, but Town CAO David Cribbs said that didn’t provide enough time given council’s logistics.
Sitting later as Committee of the Whole, councillors appeared to pick apart Town staff’s Cannabis Land Use Report. Objecting to assertions made in the report about minimal property value impact from proximity to cannabis growers, Ward 2 Councillor Ron Kore asked staff why no such examples were cited in the report from the Niagara peninsula. Director of Community Planning and Development Barb Wiens replied that staff had no such local examples to use, and only had supporting data from Eastern Canada.
Ciolfi questioned Wiens on the report’s conclusion that municipalities cannot prohibit legal uses within their boundaries. Wiens provided the example of strip bar establishments in other jurisdictions.
“I’m aware of similar case law with respect to adult entertainment parlors, with respect to those land uses, that’s often been quoted,” Wiens said. “In the City of Thorold, there was quote some time ago, in the ‘80s, a case involving adult entertainment parlors there.”
Given the pushback to the report, Ciolfi led the charge in amending that Council receive it, but stop short of allowing staff to work from it until the CCC could provide feedback. “To say staff will implement this, I’m not prepared to go ahead with that tonight,” Ciolfi said. The amendment passed.
Following this discussion, Kore switched topics, requesting to speak about short-term rentals. Town Clerk Nancy Bozzato replied that since the topic was not on the agenda that this wasn't possible under council rules.
A moment later, Kore took issue with staff department reports now being made quarterly, rather than monthly, unaware that the change in reporting frequency had been made.
Bozzato and the Mayor deferred to the CAO for a reply. Cribbs addressed his response to council, as well as to the gallery, packed to overflowing with residents stretching out into the hallway leading to council chambers.
“I think the main complaint at the moment is the inability to address an item that’s not on the agenda,” Cribbs said, alluding to Kore’s earlier mention of short-term rentals.
“I can only say that the reason the Municipal Act functions as it does is that members of the public have a lot of interest in the items on the agenda. They knew, for instance, that cannabis was going to be discussed tonight and a lot of people came out to hear about that. Gypsy moths are coming up—there are identifiable humans sitting in the audience because they want to hear about that. The reason we don’t bring up short-term accommodation this evening is because there are dozens and dozens, if not hundreds and hundreds of people in this community interested in that, and we don’t have any materials prepared.”
Cribbs added that quarterly reports are more sensible given staff’s heavy workload and the frequent, two-week lag time that can make monthly reports redundant.
“This council...has an extremely long, very ambitious, admirable, frankly, list of items you want to get to. This community has a number of significant issues. We go to the max, and we extend beyond the maximum meeting time multiple times a month. There isn’t room for more reports. Those reports take hours and hours and hours of senior staff time, and to go from a monthly report that has only very minor statistics [to] quarterly is actually a very good management tool.”
Kore, then speaking of himself in the third person, asked, “If Ron Kore wanted a question about short-term rentals, how would he go about it.”
After an extended pause, the CAO replied with what was essentially an explanation of municipal procedures 101.
“Well, there are multiple ways to accomplish that. If it's simply a relatively innocuous or quick question, of course merely contacting either the relevant director or myself can get that answered. If we're looking for a more substantive report, i.e., using a lot of staff time— staff time being a resource for which the community pays us in salary —then the notice of motion process is...one mechanism you have to force anything on the agenda, if that's your preference.... [Councillors], in fact, get the minutes of [staff] meetings. You understand that we’re working on things. You refer items back to staff, and you typically give us deadlines, and we actually are in the habit of meeting those deadlines. So, typically, you know when you're going to hear more on any given topic.”
After another pause, Cribbs concluded, “That is our system.”
Gypsy moths are on the way, and so is paying for them
Council received a report on the anticipated 2020 gypsy moth scourge. Like last year, it is expected the foliage-consuming critters will again be a major pest. The Town currently has $150,000 budgeted to combat them, but is still considering options that would require considerably more funding. One—aerially spraying the entire municipality where egg sacs have been detected—is pegged at a cost of more than $1 million, which would require an average charge of about $118 per household. The report also recommends the Town institute a “forestry health reserve fund,” which would deal with the future cyclical nature of gypsy moths.
BioForest, the outside consultant hired by the Town to conduct infestation surveys for this year, will present to council on March 2. A decision on the 2020 approach could be made then.
Odds and ends
Public Works Director Jason Marr said staff is still waiting on a design package from engineers for the new Fonthill arches to be reconstructed about Pelham Town Square. The arches are fully paid for through private and charitable donations.
Councillor Lisa Haun questioned Treasurer Teresa Quinlin on the community centre’s $15,000 telephone budget— three times more than originally forecasted. Quinlin said that the elevators are the culprit for the added cost, given that they require a dedicated landline for emergencies. Haun suggested that staff shop for better rates from other telco providers.
Finally, as if 2020 had not already provided enough health concerns to fret about, council was treated to a 15-minute presentation from Pelham resident Roman Shapoval on his worries about fifth-generation (5G) wireless technology, the potential implementation of which is now under federal review.
Unlike previous generations of cellular service, 5G operates a wavelengths limited in range, meaning that transmitters are required every few hundred metres—roughly every city block. Older technology is capable of transmitting for miles between antennas. Activists worry that increased exposure to close-up radiation may be harmful to health, and are advocating further study before 5G is approved.
However, in May 2019, the New York Times cited the Russian propaganda TV network RT America as a main source of 5G disinformation. US intelligence agencies previously cited the network as a “principal meddler” in the 2016 presidential election.
“It’s economic warfare,” the article quotes Ryan Fox, chief operating officer of New Knowledge, a technology firm that tracks disinformation, saying in an interview. “Russia doesn’t have a good 5G play, so it tries to undermine and discredit ours.” (In February 2019, Russia launched its own 5G networks.)
Shapoval, a transplant from New Jersey, said he worked in “big tech” for 12 years before moving north upon marrying a Fenwick native.
