During the months of June, July and August, the City of Sault Ste. Marie has laid 26 charges in relation to vacant properties believed to be owned by shell companies. Jeffrey King in the city’s law department says 11 such charges were filed in June, five in July and 10 in August. And that’s not the whole story. King says another 30 charges were laid in the same three months on properties not believed to be owned by shell companies, which are sometimes used to obscure asset ownership. King adds that since the city adopted stricter property regulations and prosecutorial procedures last summer, its attorneys have won convictions in 100 percent of cases involving substandard structures. In a report prepared for Tuesday’s city council meeting, King provides the following list of recent convictions:
102/104 Albert St. E., owned by 12951274 Canada Inc. (1 Hunter Hamilton) – provisions of Vacancy Act – construction order – ordered $1,000 plus victim surcharge and costs (“plus”) – first offense 427 Sherbourne St., owned by 12864843 Canada Inc. (1 Hunter Hamilton) – property standards provisions (steps) – construction order – $2,000 plus conviction – first offense (although technically second if you look at the numbered company address) – prosecution continues in relation to various properties under this ownership and we should see sanctions continue to increase 38 Copernicus Dr., Property 370893 Ontario Ltd. – provisions of the vacancy (internal works) by-law – 15.2 building order – fined $1,000 plus – first offense 22 Manilla Terrace – Northern Caboodle Inc. – vacancy bylaw provisions – construction order – fined $2,000 plus – first offense 60 London – single owner – two co-owners charge $400 each plus first offense – vacancy bylaw provisions – building order 368 Cathcart St. – sole proprietorship – two co-owners charge $400 each plus first offense – provisions of the Property Standards (External Investment) Act – building order 431 Charles St. – individual property – owner charged $200 plus for first offense – provisions of Property Standards Act (abandoned vehicle) – construction order
“The council armed law enforcement and prosecution with a powerful tool last summer. The above convictions and fines are testament to that fact and continued enforcement will send a strong message to deter repeat offenders,” says King.
“Staff will continue to monitor trends in relation to grass in general, as provincial drives see the benefits of allowing growth to exceed the regulation limit to help plant pollination.” “As of the date of this report, we see no need to make any amendments to the city’s property standards bylaw or yard maintenance ordinance,” King advised Mayor Provenzano and councilors. Speaking this week at a meeting of Ward 2 councilor candidates, Coun. Luke Dufour talked about problems with the city’s old property standards rules “The Property Standards Act that Sault Ste. Marie had in 2018 was based only on the Ontario Building Code.” “The Ontario Building Code only deals with the structural stability of buildings,” Dufour said. “When the city went to expel her [old Sault Area Hospital’s] owner under that statute, the entire prosecution was based on the question of structural stability.” “That left the owner in a position to hire an engineer who was able to write a letter and say, ‘Oh, the building is not falling. That ended the case.” More information is currently being added to this article. Tuesday’s City Council meeting will be broadcast live on SooToday from 4.30pm
