Roger Varley has been in the news business almost 40 years with The Canadian Press/Broadcast News, Uxbnridge Times-Journal, Richmond Hill Liberal and Uxbridge Cosmos. Co-winner with two others of CCNA national feature writing award. In Scout movement over 30 years, almost 25 as a leader. Took Uxbridge youths to World Jamboree in Holland. Involved in community theatre for 20 years as actor, director, playwright, stage manager etc. Born in England, came to Canada at 16, lived most of life north and east of Toronto with a five-year period in B.C.
Another bylaw! Really?
When she was campaigning for a return to the mayor's chair during the last municipal election, Gerri Lynn O'Connor promised to visit Uxbridge Township's bylaws with a view to revoking unnecessary and unenforceable bylaws.
This was, perhaps, a reaction to the ridiculous graffiti bylaw that the previous council had passed which, in effect, made it illegal for anyone under the age of 18 to purchase a wide-tipped felt marker in the township. The bylaw also required stores to prominently display a sign saying they were required to seek proof of age for anyone desiring to purchase such an implement. Have you ever seen one?
But it appears the mayor has not revisited any of the bylaws we have that require eradication - is it still illegal in Uxbridge to have an internet connection faster than 56k?
And now, council is considering a new special events bylaw that could possibly result in the demise of a number of events we all look forward to every year. It is still in draft form and can be changed considerably, presumably depending on the comments and reactions of township residents. Council was to take its first official look at the proposed bylaw yesterday morning in a special session.
Given my reading of the draft, Council needs to give this particular bylaw a good, hard look and not rush into passing it. Indeed, council might want to consider whether the bylaw is needed in the first place.
To start with, the preamble to the bylaw states that "the Council of the Corporation of the Township of Uxbridge deems it necessary to regulate special events". Is someone trying to tell me that council has not felt it necessary in the past? Is someone trying to tell me the township doesn't already have regulations in place to cover special events? How have we survived this long?
The major problem I have with this bylaw is the utterly confusing wording. For example, it refers to a "major event" as any event which is held "for profit or otherwise" at which more than 1,000 people are expected to attend. It is the only time in the bylaw that the phrase "major event" is used. All other references are to "special events". Is there a difference? If so, what? And events held "for profit or otherwise" would, in my opinion, cover all such occasions, so why include the confusing terminology?
That reference to 1,000 people in attendance also raises questions. For example, I'm sure the Optimists draw at least that number of people to their annual Fantasy of Lights in Elgin Park. But that would be over the course of a couple of weeks. Does that constitute a special or major event?
Oddly, not all special events will require a special events permit. For example, such a permit will not be required for an event held on a municipal highway - (the Terry Fox Run, Run for the Diamond, the Santa Claus Parade etc?) - or by any registered charitable organization using any property owned by the municipality.
The proposed bylaw would require everyone applying for a special events permit to undergo a police check. And for any corporation running an event, all the corporation's "operators and employees" who work the event will also have to have police checks. For Art in the Park, for Pete's sake? The Duck Derby? Many of these events are run by our service clubs and it is my understanding they are all incorporated. That means all their volunteers would be required to undergo police scrutiny. All these police checks, by the way, would be paid for out of the applicants' and volunteers' pockets. As for Huck Finn Day, would Pat Higgins have to pay for police checks for all of his Canadian Tire employees who show up to help run that marvellous annual event?
The bylaw does not spell out whether police checks would be required for vendors and their employees who turn up at any number of these special events. I would be surprised if there were not a couple of people among the ribbers at RibFest who have police records.
As an added incentive to anyone seeking a special events permit, they will be subject to investigations by and comments and recommendations from at least seven different municipal, regional and provincial agencies. They will also be required to submit letters of approval or recommendation from the following: the owner of the property where the event is to be held, the Ministry of Health, Durham Regional Police, the Uxbridge fire chief (two letters), ambulance services, St. John Ambulance, Public Works, Uxbridge's chief building officer (two letters) and the bylaw officer. That's a total of 11 letters.
So many questions, so few answers. I believe that, if a bylaw is passed, one should not have any lingering questions when one has finished reading it. This bylaw, in its present format, raises more questions than a season's worth of Jeopardy!
It seems to me council is in danger of bringing an end to some worthwhile and well-established home-grown special events in Uxbridge, if it does not send this bylaw back for some serious reconsideration.
Tell me, am I wrong?
