"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."

Margaret Mead

WHO'S WHO?

Respondents: initially three cabin owners Jim Duffee, Lisa Wildman, and John Danilak. Included as Respondents were Norm Zigarlick and Joanna Ritchot. Combined age at the time of the 2019 cases: 287. Self-representing out of financial necessity not arrogance. In the beginning: a 2019 provincial court case against Duffee, which was scheduled for trial with the individuals named above registered as witnesses, was dropped to "narrow the issues" in a Queen's Bench case naming all five as Respondents. Duffee's court participation ended with the May 2020 decision denying the Park Authority a writ of possession and directing that they issue him a lease. This court directive has yet to be honoured.

The Applicant is Suffern Lake Regional Park Authority. A Regional Park Authority is described as an Other Legislated Entity, a public body performing a function of Government, a form of local government. Saskatchewan’s Ministry of Parks, Culture and Sport is responsible for Regional Parks with Ministries of Government Relations and Environment also playing significant oversight roles. Legislated administration of Regional Park property taxes is assigned to one of the Rural Municipalities involved in the creation of the park. In the case of Suffern Lake, the Rural Municipality of Senlac (RM411) holds taxation jurisdiction.

Back in the early going, we thought telling the Park Authority about the seriousness of truckloads of barked pine wood being imported into Saskatchewan and putting forests at risk was valuable information that they would appreciate; we thought trying to get voting rights for cabin owners who paid taxes was a noble effort; discussing conflict of interest and financial reporting discrepancies in gaming fundraisers with the Park Authority and oversight ministries and related agencies would lead to better management practices…

We were wrong on all counts.

And with the ongoing government moaning about finding the budget dollars to appropriately fund education, we absolutely believed we had done the right thing by reporting tax irregularities that impacted provincial Education Property Tax incomes.

We were so, so wrong.

The Saskatchewan government does not appreciate anyone exposing their deliberate oversight failures. They are far more invested in punishing the messenger and devising coverups than acknowledging the wrongdoing and correcting their agents.

Documented tax irregularities (TAX FRAUD):

Suffern Lake Regional Park: (Evidence: FOIP and LA FOIP materials, affidavit statements, confirming correspondence from former SAMA CEO Blank, and SAMAView public records) Property values were kept falsely low through failed reporting to Saskatchewan Assessment Management Agency (SAMA) in order to evade equitable taxation. Our efforts, undertaken in collaboration with SAMA, have already doubled the amount of EPT paid to the province. The Park Authority has been supported by oversight bodies, including Ministries, in filing five lawsuits directly related to taxation concerns. Our experience of the bias created by a politicized judiciary has resulted in the unprecedented request for four conduct reviews, three related to one judge, all based on the adjudication of summary applications initiated by the applicant, the Park Authority, an agent of government.

Lemsford Ferry Regional Park: (Evidence: FOIP and LA FOIP records, SAMA confirming correspondence, social media) The RM of Clinworth, taxing authority for the Park, never had the cabin community assessed and instead inappropriately licensed cabins as if they were RVs for decades generating a small income for themselves but completely evading the tax processes. Drastic measures were taken to avoid exposure of their wrongdoing - the Park was dismantled. This had the added benefit of hiding the substantial amount of unpaid tax monies the collection/repayment of which, as per The Municipalities Act, the Minister should "pursue aggressively". SARM resolutions also confirm that Municipalities are concerned about having to pay missing tax incomes.

Eston Riverside Regional Park: (Evidence: LA FOIP and FOIP records, Ministry of GR and SAMA confirming correspondence) Materials from the Administrator of the RM of Snipe Lake, tax authority for the Park, confirmed 32 of 97 cabins historically benefitted from inappropriate wholly-exempt tax status creating obvious taxation inequities. Further, the entire community was grossly undervalued at $3.3 million (average value for 97 cabins = $34,020) and SAMA confirmed they would undertake a communitywide onsite inspection to correct the skewed values. Last report we read indicated "lack of funds" prohibited SAMA’s onsite inspections. Government interference?

Wakaw Lake Regional Park/RM of Hoodoo (Evidence: Wakaw Lake Regional Park website, SAMAView public records, SAMA correspondence, government agency meeting minutes) Of the $35 million inappropriate exemptions rescinded provincewide to coincide with the 2021 revaluation cycle, $7 million are found in the RM of Hoodoo. That is an overwhelming 20% of exemption retractions in one RM. One RM out of the 296 in the province. Wakaw Lake Regional Park is located in the RM of Hoodoo. None of those inappropriate exemptions will be found in the Park as they "license" (lease) lots to RVs and allow the building of unattached decks, porches and additional sleeping quarters on the lots. At Suffern Lake, lots have been assessed for value and are taxed accordingly - a direct outcome of our efforts to ensure tax fairness. The right-to-lease an unimproved (empty) lot at Suffern recently sold for $24,000. At Wakaw, resale of licensed lots can reach the six-figure range, yet these transactions remain outside the taxation system creating a thriving "shadow" real estate market. Minutes for the SAMA Rural/Urban Advisory Committee Meeting of March 23, 2021 record the SAMA CEO noting: “There is one resolution that will be brought forward [...] This is related to a request that SAMA consider the rental income approach when assessing Campgrounds in recreational areas across the province”.

The reason we became the targets in a wave of ten contrived lawsuits?

All were initiated to hide government wrongdoing and failed oversight from the voting public.

All were initiated by Suffern Lake Regional Park Authority, a public body performing a function of government.

Nine King's/Queen’s Bench and one provincial, nine progressed to judicial hearings. The same law firm represented the Applicant against the same group of five people (as a group, as pairs or individually). This profoundly arrogant, high-profile Saskatoon firm has an online publication, a guideline on how to defeat “financial weaklings” in court.

The only way we survived as Respondents was because in every case, we were Self Representing Litigants. In other words, we were able to stay in the game because we couldn’t afford a lawyer.

Behind the scenes, the Saskatchewan government played an active role directing and supporting the Park Authority while insisting the Applicant was autonomous and government was not involved. And yes, that is provable with documents and correspondence received through access to information requests.

Suffern Lake Regional Park is only operational five months a year, yet the Park Authority which typically grosses around $150,000 a year (including grants), has launched multiple lawsuits and certainly run up legal bills measured in the tens of thousands of dollars (a former Board representative claims the amount was on the high side of $100,000 in 2021).

They must be experiencing a serious cash problem as the Park was running deficits before they initiated court actions and well before the pandemic downturn that impacted usership on the “public” side of the park where campsites and other facilities generate income.

Obviously, the Park's financial woes could be cured if a few cabins became park property through court proceedings and were subsequently sold. Rolling the dice on Writs of Possession until they can seize and sell cabins seems to be an all-in, risky move. What underlying conditions might lead the Park Authority to justify and undertake such a drastic plan? Perhaps… the action is going on at two levels looking for a two-fold result where getting rid of determined people digging into the provincial regional park tax process would also provide a welcome local windfall?