The following letter was sent to Lord Mayor Gary Zalepa. A copy was forwarded to The Lake Report for publication.

Dear Mr. Zalepa:

I write further to my email of June 5 concerning your conflict of interest opposite the Rand Estate and Benny Marotta’s plans therefor.

You did not respond to my email. You did, however, give an interview to The Lake Report, which published it on June 11 (“Zalepa says Rand conflict no longer applies“).

In that interview, you state that you previously had a non-pecuniary conflict as a Charlotte access was part of the Marotta Rand subdivision proposal. And that as that is no longer the case, you no longer have a conflict.

Even if no Charlotte access was now proposed or possible, I believe you are in error in your conflict assessment and that your conflict does not rise and fall based on a Charlotte access.

However, and in any event, your understanding of what may transpire opposite the new Marotta proposal is incorrect.

I believe I’m correct in saying that Paul Lowes, the planner representing the Marotta companies, advised during the June 2 public meeting that some form of access/egress on Charlotte remained a possibility.

And even if that recollection is incorrect, based on last night’s meeting, you are clearly aware that town heritage planner Sumra Zia issued a report to the town’s municipal heritage committee on July 3.

That report is in essence a “start-over” directive to the Marotta companies, requiring them plan their proposal with a heritage-first, “constraints-based” approach consistent with the 2024 Ontario Land Tribunal decision and your own council resolution of Dec. 15, 2023.

Specifically on the subject of access, Ms. Zia’s report requires the Marotta companies to go back and wholistically assess all access options to determine which access(es) have the least heritage impact. Charlotte is therefore back in play.

You have either not considered the point or chosen to ignore it.

It will be plain and obvious from both the 2023 Denise Horne report as well as the 2024 tribunal decision (including the testimony of the Town’s own witnesses at the tribunal) that the 200 John panhandle access is the least preferred street to service Mr. Marotta’s desired subdivision.

It should also be plain and obvious to you that a Charlotte access is required to be examined pursuant to Ms. Zia’s recent report.

Given that the Marotta companies completely razed that part of the Rand Estate in the clear-cut of November 2018, it can easily be envisaged that from a heritage perspective, a Charlotte access, perhaps for emergency purposes at a minimum as was the case when you originally declared a conflict, is back on the table.

I was therefore astonished to see you as an active participant in the committee of the whole meeting dealing with Ms. Zia’s report, and even more astonished to see you moving a motion opposite that report and the municipal heritage committee meeting, at which it was unanimously approved.

I believe that is highly problematic for you to have done so and I question whether the resulting council vote last night is legitimate.

I provided you with an opportunity to do the right thing, which you have obviously declined to do. Please be advised that I intend to pursue this in the appropriate forum(s).

Derek Collins
Old Town