ANTHONY REINHART
Globe & Mail
Jan 10, 2007
For as long as there have been cottages, there have been cottage rituals: morning coffee on the dock, campfires after dark, good reads on rainy days.
From earliest boyhood, Don McKenzie has ended each stay at the family hideaway, on
"And when we get to the top of the road, he always looks back and says, 'Bye,
Ms. McCulloch fears that "this time," which came and went during a sombre late-December visit to remove all their belongings, will be the last. On Dec. 1, the federal government told her family and 67 others that they had two months to clear out their cottages and leave their buildings behind, on land they had leased from the Chippewas of Nawash First Nation.
Print Edition - Section Front
The cottagers have always known the leasing arrangement could end, but Ms. McCulloch, a
Specifically, the leases always acknowledged cottagers' ownership of their buildings and the right to remove them within a month of termination. In turn, early termination of any lease by the band traditionally required a one-year notice.
On paper, the notice requirement changed in 1995, when all the cottage leases expired, and negotiations began between the band and Indian Affairs to come up with new ones. From that point, the previous lease stated that holdover tenancy was to be month to month, although, in practice, Indian Affairs continued collecting cottagers' rent on behalf of the band yearly, not monthly. Similarly, the band kept collecting its service fees, for such things as garbage pickup and road maintenance, once a year.
All the while since 1995, Indian Affairs continued to tell cottagers, in writing, that new leases were in negotiation, and lots changed hands and cottages continued to be sold to new owners.
The documents show that in at least one case, Indian Affairs sent a draft copy of a new lease, in June of 2000, for an existing cottager to show to potential buyers. The band, meanwhile, billed the annual $500 service fee, for the "2006/07 season," to at least one cottager last July 28.
"The practice was that we thought we had yearly tenancy because we were paying on a yearly basis," Ms. McCulloch said.
"Clearly, one would expect fair notice, especially when there's negotiations ongoing for a long period of time. And, certainly, if things aren't going well, one would expect to be told so, as opposed to being abruptly told you have to vacate."
The first sign of trouble appeared last May, when cottagers' annual $1,500 rent cheques were returned, uncashed, by the government. A No Trespassing sign was erected at the entrance to the cottage road, saying permits were required to enter. Later that month, cottagers received temporary permits to occupy the land until Oct. 31. An accompanying letter said leases had expired and no authority to issue new ones had been given by the band.
Still, the band charged service fees for 2006/07 and sent no notice to cottagers as Oct. 31 passed.
Cottagers made repeated requests to the government for information, and on Nov. 24, one of them received an e-mail from an Indian Affairs official who wrote that "negotiations are ongoing" between the government and the band.
The bad news came a week later, on Dec. 1, when Indian Affairs sent registered letters to cottagers saying their temporary permits had expired Oct. 31, and "therefore you no longer have the right to use and occupy the said land."
Cottagers were advised to call the band office to arrange appointments to remove their belongings before Jan. 31.
More jarring was the issue of building ownership: "You are not allowed to remove or dismantle any structures affixed to the land," said the letter, signed by Leea Litzgus, the department's
"The First Nation is of the view that the fixtures on the reserve now form part of the reserve land."
And thus began the cottagers' scramble, over the holidays, to collect their things, while lawyers began talks with the band and Indian Affairs on the fate of their buildings and tenancies.
For Ms. McCulloch and her in-laws, who have been leasing on
Worse, perhaps, are the unanswered questions.
Last month, an Indian Affairs spokeswoman said the Nawash band voted, in September of 2005, to redesignate the cottage lots for continued leasing, but a new band council, elected shortly afterward, did not approve that vote, effectively ending the leases.
Yesterday, another department spokesman, Brock Worobel, said Indian Affairs is awaiting word from the band on a possible redesignation vote this spring.
Still, cottagers say they have received no updates from the government and no meaningful information from the band, although they had always enjoyed "wonderful relations," Ms. McCulloch said.
"We would like a meeting with the other parties," she said. "I think that would be a really good starting place."
In the meantime, her garage in
Her photo albums, filled with images of a growing family enjoying summers, birthdays, the occasional Christmas, await new memories.
"I think you can reach a resolution better with a rational approach," she said.
"We don't want to become adversaries, but we do want our significant stakeholder interests to be recognized."