Lake of Bays residents are questioning the reason behind the new Road Licence Agreement Program
Lake of Bays residents are questioning the proposed reasoning behind the Township’s new Road Licence Agreement (RLA).
The Township implemented the RLA last July, which is mandatory for properties with unopened road allowances, and makes owners financially responsible for upgrading roads to Township standards, which includes surveys and administrative fees, and a million-dollar liability insurance.
According to the Township’s website the RLA was introduced to reduce Township premiums. However, Lake of Bays resident and representative of several community groups repealing the RLA, including a petition of 756 signatures, Andrew Mullins, disagrees.
He indicates, “There is no factual evidence of liability or insurance costs driving the RLAs.”
Other Township residents raised the same point in the public meeting on September 9th, asserting that there haven’t been any liability cases related to unopened and unassumed roads, links to insurance costs, or proof of insurance risks.
Mullins added that research into RLA and liability/insurance, specifically responses to Freedom of Info Requests (FOI) to the Township about statements and claims made about liability leading to increased insurance costs “has proven to be quite untrue.”
“The Township has been advising that the crux of the RLA’s revolves around liability and rising costs for insurance directly related unopened/unassumed roads being used for access to properties throughout the Township. Based on direct questions as a part of FOI’s and responses from Council during meetings, this has been found to not be true. The Township has based policies, far reaching policies, without actual facts,” said Mullins.
He has received documentation from the Township confirming his argument that “no risk assessment was conducted, none by the Township, an independent agency or an insurance company.”
A Freedom of Information request made by resident, Linda Mullins, on October 16th, asking for any reports for risk assessments for unassumed/unopened roads, resulted in Township documents confirming, “No risk assessment has been completed to date.”
Andrew Mullins also expressed concern about the suggestion that insurance increases have an impact to the RLA, especially when compared to other similar municipalities. He said, “The costs provided generally match the increases found in other rural municipalities, but without unassumed/unopened roads for property access and subdivisions with assumed roads or a small crossing of municipal land, and without an agreement.”
He continues, “This confirms that insurance is renewed on a yearly basis matching other Townships, allowing for direct comparison,” adding that it’s concerning because it discredits the RLA link to liability and costs.
According to Mullins, the Township approves the road construction and collects the revenue, without contributing services, yet requires residents to do the upgrading, maintenance, insuring, and assume liability “with added costs and the municipality not taking their fair share.”
Under the Municipal Act “The municipality that has jurisdiction over a highway or bridge shall keep it in a state of repair that is reasonable in the circumstances, including the character and location of the highway or bridge” (2001, c. 25, s. 44 (1)).” Road allowances, opened or unopened, are categorized under “Highways” in the Act (Clause 26).
In the August public meeting, Council agreed to consider the public feedback, and said they would post answers to resident’s questions on the Township’s website.
According to the Township’s website, responses to concerns raised in the public meeting “will be provided in a future update” and residents can continue to provide feedback at engage@lakeofbays.on.ca.
Residents are joining forces in a public group called Muskoka Lake of Bays RLA, a private group for more information called Repeal the By-law, and the petition page called Lake of Bays Property Owners Unite.
