A developer who threatened to sue the Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake over a controversial proposal for the Rand Estate has not yet taken formal legal action, according to Lord Mayor Gary Zalepa.

Instead, Solmar (Niagara 2) Inc., owned by Benny Marotta, has filed for a judicial review of an Ontario Land Tribunal decision regarding access to the Rand Estate — not a lawsuit, Zalepa said.

“There is a court filing that Mr. Marotta made to judicially review the (tribunal) decision,” Zalepa said. “But that’s not a lawsuit per se — that’s just his right to have that reviewed.”

Solmar’s threat to “commence proceedings” against the town last month has not materialized in the form of a legal claim.

“I haven’t gotten anything,” said Coun. Maria Mavridis. “I don’t even know if the threat is there, to be honest with you.”

The issue concerns vehicle access to the proposed development at 200 John St. E. and 588 Charlotte St.

In an April 9 email to the town’s legal counsel, Scott Snider, Solmar lawyer Sara J. Premi said the company would ask the tribunal to close the file and abandon required studies if the town did not agree to access via the panhandle or Charlotte Street “by end of week.”

The email continued, stating the developer would instruct “litigation lawyers to commence proceedings again(st) the town and will name the lord mayor, deputy mayor and council members as defendants.”

No legal action followed. Premi declined to comment. Neither Marotta nor Snider responded to requests for comment by press time.

“I have not received any formal lawsuit or any further documents from Mr. Marotta regarding this matter,” said Zalepa. “Currently, it’s all speculative.”

A judicial review does not re-evaluate the merits of a decision but examines whether the tribunal acted lawfully and fairly.

Earlier this year, the tribunal ordered Solmar to consult with the town and Save Our Rand Estate (SORE), a federally incorporated not-for-profit group advocating for the estate’s preservation and responsible development.

The legal threat appears to target only council, excluding SORE.

“(It) was directed to the individual members of council,” SORE wrote in an email. “We are not fearful. And regretfully, not surprised.”

SORE’s lawyer, Sonia Patel, said in an email to The Lake Report, “As this matter is currently before the court, we are unable to comment.”

Zalepa said the town is prepared to respond appropriately if a legal filing arrives.

“We would just review it properly, get our expert advice from our legal counsel and then respond as needed,” he said.

Mavridis noted councillors are now protected if legal threats arise — but that wasn’t always the case.

“There wasn’t any bylaw in place, but now there is — to protect councillors,” she said, adding, “Everyone has the right to sue.”

Before April 29, the town had no bylaw to protect councillors from legal action related to their official duties. The adoption of a new bylaw followed a lawsuit filed against Mavridis by the owner of Sunset Grill, Scott Gauld on April 8.

Under the bylaw, a councillor must repay the town if found guilty. If cleared or the error was unintentional, the town will seek to recover costs through its insurance, Mavridis said.

Coun. Wendy Cheropita said the situation is unsettling and unclear.

“It does leave me with a little bit of unease,” she said, adding that she has been a councillor for six years. “I don’t recall anything like that happening.”

She praised chief administrative officer Bruce Zvaniga for keeping councillors informed but expressed concern about using taxpayer dollars for councillors’ legal defence.

The tribunal decided to deny access to the Rand Estate via both the panhandle — a narrow strip connecting to John Street East — and Charlotte Street, which includes part of the Upper Canada Heritage Trail.

“It wasn’t council’s decision to not allow the panhandle. It was the ruling from the land tribunal,” said Zalepa, who declared a conflict due to the proximity of his home.

“Key to developing the project is finding an access route into the subdivision so that residents can enter and exit the new community,” states Solmar’s March 24 application record

Zalepa said the decision to sue the town rather than the tribunal is “for Mr. Marotta to explain.”

SORE, meanwhile, said “it doesn’t make sense to sue council,” arguing the town likely rejected panhandle access for the same reasons the tribunal did — harm to heritage features, tree loss and safety concerns raised by traffic experts.

SORE also believes council rejected Charlotte Street access because of the impact on the trail and nearby residents.

The group says the best access point is between 144 and 176 John St., which was used until the 1990s.

SORE maintains the entire Rand Estate should be planned comprehensively, not in segments, as it says Marotta has tried to do since 2018.

Zalepa said the town will consider any new application from Solmar if submitted.

“We’ll have to wait and see what the outcome is of that review,” he said.

“It’s just like anything — when we’ll hear, all of a sudden, that there will be a decision. We look forward to seeing that.”