Headline News

New Mono noise bylaw won’t ban activities, Mono mayor says

September 4, 2025   ·   0 Comments

By JAMES MATTHEWS, LOCAL JOURNALISM INITIATIVE REPORTER

Mono’s proposed updated municipal noise bylaw has received its second reading.

The second reading during council’s Aug. 26 meeting brought the draft legislation closer to becoming enacted.

Fred Simpson, the town’s clerk, inked amendments to the last version of the proposed updated noise bylaw in May. The current version takes into account concerns about expected activities and timeframes.

“It has incorporated language that addresses the concern of farmers,” Mono Mayor John Creelman said. “I think it goes a long way towards what we are ultimately trying to achieve.”

Changes were made to the list of prohibitions that pertained to the time and day of activities. What remains includes commercial contracting activities, domestic tools, and lawn maintenance, Simpson said.

“Everything else was removed,” he said.

Initially, the proposed change to the legislation came about because of certain events at the Island Lake Conservation Area and Orangeville Agricultural Society (OAS) Event Centre.

Much of the proposed changes have been informed by Mono residents. Public input was gathered by way of a survey sent to all residents, written comments submitted by residents and stakeholders, and oral comments during two public sessions.

As many as 377 people responded to the survey, and that is considered statistically representative of the community. The survey focused on the Prohibitions by Time of the bylaw.

Respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement or disagreement with each of six prohibitions detailed. Do you agree or disagree with the prohibited days and times for this activity?

Many of those comments solicited earlier this year pertained to regulating specific sources of noise at certain times of the day. A number of residents advocated for the elimination of Prohibition by Time. Stakeholders, on the other hand, generally argued in favour of maintaining that mechanism.

Deputy Mayor Fred Nix asked if the proposed bylaw would enable landowners to be fined if they rent their properties to people for events that violate the noise bylaw.

Simpson said that was specifically discussed by municipal staff when the proposed updated bylaw was being drafted.

“Right now we lay charges (against) either or both, depending on the situation,” Simpson said.

The new noise bylaw has opponents.

Mono resident Carol Terentiak said in an email to council that at least people from Mono can go to nearby Orangeville to “party and enjoy life” after 5 p.m.

“We have a great facility in Mono at the (OAS Event Centre) for concerts, music, rodeos, circuses, etc. but this stupid bylaw will kill the sort of fun that people like to have especially in the summer,” Terentiak wrote.

She said it is ridiculous to prohibit amplified noise after 5 p.m. when many music festivals and backyard parties take place in the evenings.

“This is gone too far,” she wrote. “You have taken away my right to play Neil Diamond in my backyard at a party level of noise at 7 p.m. That is too far.”

Gudrun Eves said in an email to council that it’s a shame a few complaints from residents near the Fairgrounds have brought council to such a decision.

“I really hope you reconsider this move and think about how many families this potential new law will impact,” Eves wrote. “There are so many events that will have to be shut down due to a few squeaky wheels that have nothing else better to do than complain.”

Councillor Melinda Davie suggested council allow questions during the meeting from people about aspects of the proposed rules.

Mono resident Marc Darby said no “entity” should get an exemption until they are in good standing with the town.

Coun. Elaine Capes asked if the definition of person in the latest draft includes organizations as the OAS and the Credit Valley Conservation Authority, which owns property in the town.

“Corporations are persons,” Creelman said.

Simpson said some recommendations from residents he believes would be good additions to the proposed bylaw include Darby’s suggestion and details that deal with amplified noise.

Capes asked for a definition of what constitutes amplified noise.

“Speakers,” said Simpson. “Loudspeakers.”

Davie said rules that regulate noise in the town have always prohibited noise that disturbs people. As such, the definition of noise according to the new bylaw is sound that disturbs people.

“And that’s all you need,” she said.

But the proposed new bylaw includes addendums that list specific activities. People reading that may think the activities themselves are banned by the legislation, Davie said.

Mono is a rural area in which residents pursue activities that aren’t common to urban areas. So it wouldn’t be fair to use the noise bylaw of an urban centre as a template for Mono’s updated bylaw.

Modified mufflers on vehicles are regulated alongside dirt bike use on private properties and rural road allowances.

“I caution us to make an exhaustive list,” Davie said.

“I think we run into trouble when we forget that this is a bylaw that is controlling noise,” Creelman said. “Not banning activities. And there is a big difference.”

“Well, it is complaint driven,” Nix said.

“If we want to have a bylaw that bans dirt bikes, we would have a bylaw that bans dirt bikes and it would be short and sweet,” Creelman said. “But this is more complicated because it’s attempting to control noise that comes from certain activities. Those activities can go on as long as there’s no complaints.”

Readers Comments (0)