A debate at London city council surrounding an already pulled back curfew on gas-powered lawn and gardening equipment boiled over Tuesday afternoon.
The civic works committee proposed holding a public meeting on the idea of a curfew on the use of gas-powered lawn and garden equipment from 6 p.m. to 8 a.m. The bylaw currently prohibits the use of all lawnmowers, chain saws and leaf blowers from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m., except for Sunday when the prohibition lasts until 9 a.m.
Soon after proposing it, Ward 11 Coun. Skylar Franke pulled back the motion after fierce pushback from the community.
“I received a lot of communication, I imagine everyone did, including all of council as well as various staff departments,” Franke said during Tuesday’s meeting. “After listening to the feedback from residents from across London, it was very clear to me that the 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. suggested proposal for limiting gas equipment was too restrictive. And therefore, I’m hoping to pull it now.”
While Franke did retract her support, the motion, along with the committee recommendation, still needed to make its way to the council floor for discussion and voting.
The email you need for the day’s
top news stories from Canada and around the world.
The debate began with Ward 10 Coun. Paul Van Meerbergen reminding council members that voting-age Londoners are “intelligent adults” who should be treated as such.
“They are certainly capable of making their own decisions when it comes to lawn mowers and lawn equipment,” Van Meerbergen said. “Frankly, we have to resist the dark temptation to turn this council into a Politburo of groupthink and indoctrination.”
The statement drew immediate pushback from the council, with Mayor Josh Morgan requesting Van Meerbergen retract the “groupthink” part of his statement.
Van Meerbergen continued, saying that the motion was “trying to indoctrinate a certain point of view to the people of London.” Ward 7 Coun. Corrine Rahman raised a point of personal privilege.
“I guess my indoctrination isn’t working, since I’m speaking against what you’re saying, But I think the councillor owes an apology for that,” Rahman said.
Morgan once more asked Van Meerbergen to retract the language used and asked him to make the point “respectfully and with language that does not make significant assumptions about other councillors and what influences their votes.”
Van Meerbergen doubled down on the statement, saying that he had not used “any unparliamentary language” nor singled out any individuals on council. He highlighted his specific use of the word temptation.
“It’s a temptation to go towards that area, that was clearly spelled out in my words. I will not retract because we do have freedom of speech within our limits,” Van Meerbergen said.
Morgan relented, saying that while he doesn’t agree with the phrasing, the word “temptation” would change the context of Van Meerbergen’s comments. Ward 1 Coun. Hadleigh McAllister challenged the ruling, saying he was “quite tired of allowing it.”
“I take issue with being referred to as the Politburo. I think it’s out of line, I think that language is inappropriate,” McAllister said. “This isn’t the Cold War. This isn’t the committee of un-London activities and I think it’s disparaging the council as a whole to use that language.”
McAllister’s challenge failed 8-6, with Councillors McAlister, Anna Hopkins, David Ferreira, Elizabeth Peloza and Skylar Franke voting against Morgan. All others voted in support, with Ward 4 Coun. Susan Stevenson absent. If the vote had succeeded, it could have led to a vote of Van Meerbergen’s removal from the meeting.
Councillors voted unanimously to axe the curfew proposal. A proposed education campaign on environmentally-conscious lawn care and a multi-municipality funding proposal to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities for best practices and incentive programs were also voted down.
© 2024 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.