In sleepy Burlington, Ont., eight homeowners are fighting to save their backyards from the clutches of the Government of Ontario (the Ministry of Transportation to be precise.)
The homeowners face losing about two-thirds of their backyards. And they must also incur the costs of moving any infrastructure that stands in the way. This would include everything from backyard patios and storage sheds to even a swimming pool.
As to why the MTO is acting in such a fashion, this remains a mysterious question.
The crux of the matter is that the eight homes back onto the Queen Elizabeth Way highway. The current boundary is marked by a chain-link fence. As well, a few metres away from the chain-link fence stands a stone wall. One wouldn’t even realize there is a major highway on the other side of that stone wall unless this fact was brought to one’s attention.
By way of background, the eight homes in question were constructed some 70 years ago. And for seven decades the current boundary existed without controversy. But the MTO is now maintaining that the land in question has always belonged to the government and that the province is simply reclaiming land that has always been government property.
But again, what is the ostensible policy reason for this boundary extension? And why now?
This relatively little patch of land surely cannot be used to extend the highway, nor construct a railway line – the typical reasons for land expropriation by the government, or, in this case, land reclamation.
Rebel News ventured out to Burlington to interview the affected homeowners who have indeed lawyered up and are not bending the knee without a fight. They are also very concerned that in the expanded boundary area, homeless people might set up encampments, which would seriously impact their quality of life.
We also reached out to the media relations department of the MTO. Our queries included:
1. The existing boundary has been in place for some 70 years. Why is the MTO now wanting to extend the boundary?
2. What is the purpose given that there is not enough land in question for any sort of extension of the Queen Elizabeth Way (which is situated on the other side of the backyards)?
3. I understand the residents will not be compensated for the loss of this land. Why is that the case?
Our queries were not even acknowledged, which, alas, is standard business procedure when it comes to the communications strategy of the Doug “For the People” Ford Progressive Conservatives.
In the meantime, this baffling boundary dispute appears to be headed to a court of law. Stay tuned.
Hellbound and Down 