Brother of land donor still has questions for KLT

Jason Bain should be congratulated for the accuracy and completeness of the article he wrote on the barring of attendees to the public meeting on protecting Ontario land happening this Thursday, especially given how little time he had to digest a lot of related material.

There are two points I would like to clarify although both are secondary issues to the larger ones Jason brought out.

The first is that it was not the family who first raised the issue of friends and relatives who had been using the property for decades receiving access rights. No, it was the donor himself who many years before his death requested in writing that specific rights be granted. This was followed by written agreement on three occasions by the land trust to grant them, followed by their refusal.

The other clarification is with respect to the designation of the property as an Ecological Gift, a status with potential tax advantages granted by the provincial government. The estate needed the cooperation of the land trust to achieve this. Not only had they agreed to provide the input required from them, but, in fact they suggested it in the first place.

In the end, they refused to cooperate with the result that the estate incurred many thousands of dollars of additional expense.

These are minor issues, though, compared to the question of whether or not the property is actually and legally protected from development “IN PERPETUITY” as is stated on the KLT web site. Peter Cowan, Douro-Dummer