by SUSAN MANN
Pumpkin farmer Kevin Shantz is caught in the middle of a turf war between Wilmot Township and Waterloo Region over the placing of road signs directing customers to his operation.
Shantz grows and sells pumpkin and sweet corn on his farm in the township just west of Kitchener. On Sept. 24 and 25, he was making preparations to sell his 25-acre pumpkin crop by putting up eight directional signs on different roads, including regional roads. Two days later, on Sept. 27, the township’s bylaw officer gave him 24 hours to pull most of them down.
Even though Waterloo Region passed a bylaw this summer allowing signs on regional roads, the signs on regional roads in Wilmot are in question because the township says its bylaw prohibiting signs on all roads within its jurisdiction prevails.
Shantz says he installed signs the previous 10 years and they were allowed to stay up, despite the township’s bylaw.
But the township enforced the bylaw this year and Shantz says he thinks it’s because it’s a municipal election year. “I can’t see any other motive behind it. They are picking on the other farmers as well. It’s not just me.”
Shantz questions why a local mayoral candidate was allowed to put up 1,000 signs but he’s prohibited from installing his eight.
What does Shantz think of the jurisdictional battle between the township and region? “I think it’s politics and they’re going to give me an answer in January but that doesn’t sell my pumpkins right now.”
Shantz says he put extra directional signs around Kitchener and “moved them out of Wilmot. And they’re fine there.”
Andrew Martin, Wilmot Township planner and economic development officer, says the enforcement of the township’s sign bylaw “has nothing to do with the election and everything to do with what really seems to be an ongoing ignoring of regulations.” Election signs have an exemption in the bylaw, he notes.
Martin says Shantz was told the rules and regulations for signs last year “and he’s continually chosen not to follow those rules.” The sign ban has been in place since 2002.
Martin says this isn’t an issue with all farm operations. “It seems to be one person that doesn’t seem to like the rules.”
He says the township is trying to be reasonable and even flouted its own rules by allowing Shantz to keep signs at the two intersections closest to his farm — as long as he met regional requirements for setbacks at the intersections. Shantz lives on a regional road.
The township plans to update its sign bylaw next year with a new council to incorporate some modified provisions of the region’s bylaw that would likely allow signs at the intersections closest to the farm.
Waterloo Regional Council passed its bylaw this summer allowing signs (including farm directional signs) on all regional roads. It contains some stipulations and restrictions regarding sign size, structure and placement, says Peter Katona, executive director of Foodlink Waterloo Region. Foodlink is a local non-profit that promotes farm and rural business.
Katona describes Shantz’s situation as a “misunderstanding over jurisdiction.”
Mark Reusser, Waterloo Federation of Agriculture vice president, says the signs are only up for a few months during the year while the farmers’ product is available and are intended to provide directions rather than advertising. “A few signs placed strategically go a long way toward directing people to a place they’re not familiar with.”
The township’s decision to exercise a form of jurisdiction over regional roads within its boundaries “has never happened before in Waterloo Region,” Reusser says. “They’re saying their sign bylaw takes precedence over the region’s.”
Martin says both bylaws apply in the township. But according to the township’s legal opinion if one is more restrictive that would apply, he says. Waterloo Region spokesperson Bob Henderson couldn’t be reached for comment.
The Federation’s position is “we have the right to put up signs on regional road,” Reusser says, describing the two years of consultations to establish the region’s sign bylaw as long, difficult and protracted. But “we were happy with the outcome.” The consultations involved the region, townships, Foodlink and the federation.
More meetings are planned between the region and township to sort the matter out, Reusser says. BF
Comments
let me see if I've got this correct - this farmer wants to be able to undercut all the retail stores who have to comply with every municipal bylaw, yet he doesn't want to comply with the same regulations they do.
Cry me a river - either comply with the regulations, or leave retailing to those people who can, and do.
I'm guessing the comment on leaving retail to those people who can and do knows very little about farmers. Every farmer is a retailer. They produce a product and sell that product. In this case the farmer is selling their product directly to customers instead of a grocer who would increase the prices so they can make a profit. Thank goodness these farmers are selling direct so we can cut out giving our money to the middle men and actually support those creating the products we need and want.
Farmers don't have the resources to produce a weekly flyer that comes in the "junk mail" to advertise what products are available. So why not update the sign bylaws to allow these businesses to advertise to those trying to find their locations.
I'm a farmer, but all of my uncles on one side of my family, as well as my grandfather, owned their own stores, and spent their entire working lives in retailing. Therefore, I really don't like it when farmers, especially those farmers with no understanding of retailing, give retailers a bad rap, and then go out of their way to cut retailers out of the picture every time they get a chance to do so.
If this guy wants to undercut retailers, he has no business complaining about what he has to do to undercut them.
Post new comment