There’s no lack of support shown by council members to a Milton farmer who was on the hook for over $100,000 in development fees, though their hands were tied due to the strict interpretation of the development charge bylaws.

At the heart of the complaint filed by Springridge Farm owner John Hughes were five previously constructed buildings on the farm, including a shade structure and a main admission hut, that town staff deemed feature a retail component and as such — they weren’t granted agricultural and seasonal structure exemptions.

The Hughes family has been fruit farming for six generations, according to the farm’s website. The farm also hosts festivals and has a bakery, cafe and boutique.

“This is a really discouraging cost for our family,” said Hughes at the Nov. 18 council meeting, noting that the buildings — five of 14 submitted for permit approvals to the town in June — have been classified by the Niagara Escarpment Commission as agricultural, agri-tourism or a combination of the two.

Calling them “agricultural supporting buildings” that are important to make their farm business viable, Hughes was hoping council members would reconsider and overturn staff’s recommendation on the charges.

Development charges are fees collected by municipalities to fund various municipal services.

In the case of Springridge Farm, the town’s share of the collected fee was over $17,000 and the educational portion was roughly $3,500, which will be remitted to the local school boards. The rest will go to Halton Region.

As explained by the town’s legal expert Paul DeMelo of Kagan Shastri LLP, who fielded a question from Mayor Gord Krantz on the discretion that council may have in reducing the rate or waiving the fee, the bylaws must be applied consistently.

“There is no discretion in the application of the bylaws,” he said. “There’s no provision to allow for the waiving of fees.”

DeMelo made similar points earlier in the meeting, saying that there is no jurisdiction to amend the bylaws but rather to determine whether or not they have been properly applied and interpreted.

In his assessment, staff’s recommendation is the proper interpretation of the bylaws.

Coun. Kristina Tesser Derksen said she believes there’s a fundamental issue with the bylaws.

“I can’t see how it could be contemplated within the spirit of the legislation that you’d be paying those types of charges for those types of structures,” she said, adding that Milton is a special place for agriculture.

“We want to preserve these family farms. We want to preserve that type of business, but they have to be allowed to adapt and have to have the flexibility and certainty to adapt to a changing service model that they have to provide to the public in order to stay viable,” she said.

According to the town’s chief financial officer, Glen Cowan, the maximum life cycle of a bylaw is five years.

“So, we will be back either next year or the year after to update (the development charge bylaws),” he said.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

In the meantime, Coun. Colin Best put forth a motion, which was then approved by council, to defer the matter and direct town staff to come back with recommendation on how to address the development charges payable.

“We don’t want to set a bad precedent. But we want to do the right thing,” he said.