Monday February 26th special town council meeting – the police contract

Well, it’s over. The vote is in and we will be moving forward toward a 20 year contract with the Windsor Police Service. I’m giving you the ending before the beginning, since well, I’m sure the word is out by now about how the vote went down.

I arrived around 5:00. There were still many seats in the gallery. By about 5:30, the gallery was full. There were (I’m guessing) around 30 or so people also standing in the lobby. The meeting started promptly at 6:00 and was done by about 6:35. That was a pleasant surprise.

**Deputy Mayor DiPasquale was absent tonight.**

Councillor Pouget declared a conflict of pecuniary interest because her son-in-law works for Windsor Police Service. She then left her seat.

There were only two delegations. The first, Mr Stewart questioned about the cost per capita of policing. The CAO explained that Windsor’s cost per capita is higher since they offer more services. He also explained that Amherstburg’s cost per capita will go down with this new contract and that the two costs per capita will be maintained separately.

Mr. Stewart wondered why the 10, 15 and 20 year contracts were now on the table and felt that had a longer term been offered from the beginning, some may have been in favour of the switch. CAO Miceli explained that after the public consultations they heard from the public that they were concerned of a cost increase after 5 years. He felt that the process had worked, administration was able to address the concern and then went to work at getting longer term numbers for a longer contract. The CAO also explained that the savings in years 1 to 5 are hard numbers and that the rest are based on budget parity with a 2% increase.

Ms Simone then spoke and seemed concerned about the Human Rights Complaint currently ongoing in Windsor is an issue with WPS. She felt that council should wait for the judgement on that case before proceeding.

Then, the motion…….

Councillor Fryer made the following motion :

1. The report from the CAO dated February 9, 2018 regarding Police Services for the Town of Amherstburg BE RECEIVED;
2. The CAO BE DIRECTED to finalize the terms and conditions of a contract for policing services with the Windsor Police Services Board/City of Windsor for a term of 20 years commencing January 1, 2019;
3. The CAO BE DIRECTED to bring back a final contract SUBJECT TO APPROVAL by the Ontario Civilian Police Commission.

Councillor Meloche seconded.

Councillor Lavigne was the first to speak. He seemed happy that the meeting had been expedited, since people had had many opportunities to express themselves. (I’ll agree with that!) He said it was a very difficult decision and probably the most difficult of this council. He acknowledged that administration worked hard, that the numbers are sound and that he won’t criticize the WPS proposal. He felt that he had been put there by the people of the community and that he won’t criticize the people that want to keep APD and pay more taxes. He felt he can only use the people that showed up at the public meetings, sent emails or that he spoke to to gauge the public’s will. He felt that he won’t debate savings when people are ready to spend. He pointed out that this council has hired new staff, bought properties etc. and spent money. He felt his job is to represent the will of the people that he spoke to and that he would be voting against the proposal since it was the will of the people.

Councillor Meloche then spoke of the many articles that he’s read about policing and financial sustainability. He felt he has to look down the road long term and that many communities struggle with the costs of policing. He felt that Amherstburg is the safest community because of the people, not just the officers who police us. (I agree, it truly is the people that make a community and that keep it safe, in my opinion….) He said that he understands the emotional side, but that he must look at this issue in the long term from a business perspective and that he would be supporting this motion. (Councillor Meloche was booed from some of the people in attendance while he spoke and after he spoke. I don’t like that. Not one bit. To me, booing someone shows a lack of manners. In order to be polite, I will now apologize to anyone reading who may have been booing during the meeting if I hurt your feelings.)

Councillor Courtney spokenext, she said that she agreed with Councillor Lavigne. She said that everyone has a different idea of what makes up a councillor. She said she had vowed to listen to the people and that she has spoken to many in the community and read all of the comments from the public meetings. She said she thinks it’s a good contract and will save money and will respect whatever decision is made. She felt that she must listen to the people that want to keep APD as is and that she thinks we’ll continue to be the safest town in Canada. She indicated she would not support this motion.

Councillor Fryer then had a chance to speak and felt that council has a fiduciary responsibility to ALL of the rate-payers. He feels that this is a really good contract, that administration has spent a lot of time and effort on this issue, since it was put into motion at the first meeting of this current council. He felt that people will debate this issue but that people will probably not notice any change. He cited how our debt has come down yet is still high in comparison to Windsor’s. (Yup. It doesn’t happen often…..I agreed with Councillor Fryer….after the meeting he even thanked me for the blog–I’m not sure which one, but that’s okay…..we’ll see if our agreement is short-lived or if we’re in this for the long-haul LOL who knows?) (Councillor Fryer was also booed. Yuck. I think you all know my feelings about that.)

Then it went to the vote:

Opposed : Councillor Courtney and Councillor Lavigne

In Favour : Councillor Fryer, Councillor Meloche and Mayor DiCarlo

In conflict and did not vote : Councillor Pouget

In conflict and absent : Deputy Mayor DiPasquale

After the Mayor voted, somebody yelled “shame” from the hallway area I think. You know what I think is a shame? People’s lack of respect and manners. That’s a shame.

Amherstburg tried something new tonight with technology. They live-streamed the meeting so that people could watch from the comfort of their home. It seems the highest number of people watching at any one time was 105. Then approximately maybe 80 or 90 people at the meeting (could have been a bit more, not sure….). Ironically, we talk often about the “majority” or the “silent majority”…….I think the silent majority were the ones who don’t much care either way and just want council to do right by the tax payer. My husband spoke to someone at the arena tonight who really had no idea about what the deal was about policing and didn’t seem to care either way…..there’s your “silent majority” right there…..

Anyway, I was curious, really about what a councillor’s role and responsibility really is. Should they be listening to about 100 or 150 very vocal people that they perceive to the “majority”? Here’s what I found :

Section 224 of the Municipal Act states:

“It is the role of council, A. to represent the public and to consider the well-being and interests of the municipality…and…E to maintain the financial integrity of the municipality.”

From the Ministry of Municipal Affairs :

“Municipal Councillors Guide. As a Councillor, you have a representative, a policy-making, and a stewardship role to play in your municipality. Often these roles will overlap. You will be called on to consider and make decisions on issues that will sometimes be complex and controversial. Most of those decisions will have long-term consequences for your municipality that extend beyond your four-year term of office, and should be made in the context of your municipality’s directions for the long-term health and welfare of your community.”

From what I found above, I have to commend Councillors Fryer and Meloche as well as Mayor DiCarlo for following through about the “well-being and interests of the municipality” and making a decision based on “the context of your municipality’s directions for the long-term health and welfare of your community.”

The decision has been made. I sincerely hope that everyone can accept it and let our town move forward in peace.

In preparation for Monday February 26th special town council meeting-the great police debate

Well, I am about to say (or write I guess) something I thought I’d never say……I’m really excited to write tonight’s blog. I read through the reports about the Windsor Police Proposal last night, but I wanted some time to digest them. Much like I attended a public consultation meeting to get more information, I’ve tried to look at this whole process as objectively as possible from the very beginning before I formed my opinion. So, I felt it was important to digest and think about all of the information that I read in the reports. I can start by saying that I think every single “i” was dotted and every single “t” was crossed in the reports and they were informative too. I learned a few things (I love learning new things!). So, here we go, the summary as I see it about the Windsor Police Contract Proposal for our great Town of Amherstburg!

Of note, according to the agenda, council will be meeting in-camera at 3:00 to discuss:

ITEM A – Windsor Police Service Proposal – Section 239(2)(i) – A trade secret or
scientific, technical, commercial, financial or labour relations information,
supplied in confidence to the municipality or local board, which, if disclosed,
could reasonably be expected to prejudice significantly the competitive position
or interfere significantly with the contractual or other negotiations of a person,
group of persons, or organization.

I guess it couldn’t be a council meeting without an in-camera meeting LOL.

There are two reports included in the agenda. There is the JPAC (Joint Police Advisory Committee) report and also CAO Miceli’s administrative report. I’m going to pull out the highlights as I see them.

Basically, the JPAC report walks us through the process of how we got to today. The JPAC report brings us from the original request for police costings that was one of the very first issues this council dealt with in December 2014, all the way up to the public consultation meetings and to the present day. The JPAC did not provide a recommendation to council. Their report was a nice appetizer, but the meat was found in the administration report from the CAO.

Basically, a 20 year contract is on the table and is being proposed. That’s great news!

Also, Amherstburg would need to bring back a final contract subject to approval by the Ontario Civilian Police Commission (OCPC). The OCPC approval is required as an exemption because Windsor and Amherstburg are not contiguous municipalities (we don’t share a border) and we’re separated by the Town of LaSalle. However, there is a precedent showing that Amherstburg would probably be able to get the required approval from the OCPC since they just granted this exemption to St. Mary’s. St. Mary’s recently entered into a contract with the Stratford Police Service, yet the two communities are separated by Perth. Also, I would have to think that if council approves this, the OCPC wouldn’t oppose a decision made by a municipal council.

As most people are aware, I believe, was that the request for proposal promised us the same or better levels of service. What was presented at the public consultation meetings, showed us how things would be maintained at the same excellent level, but the report brings out all of the “better” levels we can expect.

Here are some of the “extras” that we would get, included in the costs, if council votes for the Windsor Police Proposal :

1.Canine Units (24/7)
2. Emergency response (tactical) unit (24/7)
3. Explosive disposal
4. Crime scene/forensic expertise
5. Collision reconstruction
6. Crime Prevention expertise
7. Enhanced training/professional development opportunities
8. State of the art technology and technical support
9. Certified crisis negotiators

Here are some more “extras” that we would get, also costs included :

• additional 12 officers to assist with traffic (RIDE programs, speeding enforcement etc.) (I understand that if you’re a lead foot, like my husband, you may not appreciate this as a valuable extra LOL)
• additional training resources with 7 additional staff members available for Professional Advancement/Training
• twenty plus auxiliary officers and 18 bike patrol officers for special events
• two teams of 8 staff for crisis negotiation (I wonder if they’ll be available Monday night? LOL )
• explosive disposal unit with 7 staff

The list goes on and on and on…..

As well, the following services will be available on line (a nice technological advantage):

1. Online Crime reporting
2. Police Record Checks
3. Traffic Complaints
4. Autism Registry
5. Vulnerable persons registry
6. Bicycle Registry
7. Sexual assault reporting
8. Media portal
9. Interactive crime reporting

However, even though these things can be done on-line, Amherstburg residents will still receive a uniform officer response.

 

Technology

Technology is a huge issue in any organisation or business and policing is no different. The Windsor Police Proposal actually offers several enhancements (all included in the costs) to what Amherstburg currently has. The Windsor Police Proposal offers the ability for us to be part of a multi-jurisdictional regional records management system, which would be linked to lap tops and I-phones that would be issued to each police officer. (I’m going to repeat myself here…..this is phenomenal!) EACH officer will get a lap top and an I-phone for use in their cruiser and to help them with their duties. And, it’s included in the costs!!!!!!!!!!!!! (I feel like I’m writing a commercial, no up front costs, free financing, 2 for the price of one LOL! Sorry…..I digress…..) As well, there will be in-car driver’s license scanners to pre-fill reports, view offender mugshots and auto-generate queries of persons or vehicles to local and national crime databases. This is HUGE!!!!! Enhanced communication!!!!

How are laptops and Smartphones such a wonderful addition? Let me count the ways :

• the officer can spend more time visible in the community, rather than at the station writing reports
• officer safety (GPS tracking unit installed in the phones)
• officer accountability (GPS tracking unit)
• IT department expertise to manage the devices and also to manage them should they be lost or stolen
• dedicated email and voice mail so that residents can follow up with individual officers
• Smartphones allow the officers to more quickly begin to document things when they’re on a call while they wait for specialized support staff to arrive

And, the price of all of this technology is included in the contract! In fact, we’ll be saving money too (more on that later). The list of day to day advantages to have this technology available is almost endless. Oh and Amherstburg is keeping the body-worn cameras too! Woo hoo!!! The technology aspect improves officer and resident safety without a shadow of a doubt.

O.P.P.

Some of the extras mentioned above (K-9, tactical units etc.) are currently available to us from the OPP. Many have said that there is no cost for those services from OPP. They are technically correct. At the moment, the OPP has not billed Amherstburg for any of these extra services. However, I learned something new……the OPP is mandated to charge for services not provided by the municipality. Why have they not charged us if they’re mandated to do so? I don’t know the answer to that. However, they could begin to charge us for these services at any given moment……and then what? I think everyone is aware of the financial shape our province is in…..is it a matter of time a higher level of government enforces the mandate to charge the municipalities? I don’t know.

THE contract

Some residents have expressed that we should be able to see the contract and read all of the fine print in it (as if we’re lawyers and would even understand the legalese lol) . I’d like to kindly point out that we, the taxpayers have never, ever seen any contract for anything! We don’t see copies of the contracts to repave roads….we didn’t see a contract to build the new arena…..we didn’t see the contract for the new street lights….etc. The list of contracts is endless. We get the main ideas, but not the nitty gritty. Only council gets the nitty gritty. I guess if you really, really, really, really, really want to be able to read the fine print in all of the town contracts, well, get elected to council. That sounds like fun! LOL All of these contracts are protected by the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection Privacy Act.

The Referendum debate

As you may be aware, I was not a fan of putting this issue on a ballot. I felt (and still feel) that this is a decision for council, this is what they were elected for. Well, boy did I learn something when I read this report. Now, not only am I not a fan of a referendum, I think it would be a huge, giant mistake! Besides the timing and red tape of making this a referendum, there is a HUGE, GLARING issue! Here’s the problem…..hold on to your hats…..at least 50 per cent of the eligible electors in the municipality must vote on
the question for the results to be valid! (I’m sorry, I had to take a short break to try to decide whether I should laugh or cry about this…...) Voter turn out in the last election was 47.27%. Unfortunately, Amherstburg is notorious for poor voter turn out. The only time Amherstburg had a higher voter turn out was in 2010 when mail-in ballots were used. (Before you get all excited and think we could have mail-in ballots, council decided a good six months ago or more to go with the regular electronic ballots of the past for 2018 and it’s too late to change that now…..sorry…..but that I knew because I sit through meeting after meeting after meeting after meeting…..) So basically, considering we are consistently under the 50% voter turn out mark, it would be extremely unlikely that the referendum would be legally valid. (Now I feel like I’m giving my opinion on how to gamble with statistics….first commercials, now gambling…..it’s a weird night tonight.)

Talk The Burg Survey

This part of the report made me almost ill. Speaking of poor turn out……well, only 213 people filled out the survey. 213 people of a town of 22,000! So, basically, chuck that all out the window, it is completely and utterly statistically invalid. (I do have a background in statistics so I can say with confidence that the survey wouldn’t hold any relevance, reliability or validity.) However, it does show that we’d be very hard pressed to get a 50% voter turn out for a referendum, don’t you think?

Telephone survey

This made me feel a bit better. They were able to contact 600 residents and here are the results :

“ Do you support the current proposed question of contracting community policing to the
Windsor Police Service?” The results were:

• 18% – strongly support
• 22%- support
• 19% – I do not support
• 22% – I am strongly against
• 19% – undecided

So the 50/50 split is pretty clear. What I find interesting is the 19% of undecided people. Personally, I take that as being that one fifth of the respondents are putting their faith in council to decide what is best for the community of Amherstburg as a whole.

And now, the Game of Risk

In the risk analysis of the report, administration says that there is political risk associated with a decision on this issue regardless of the outcome. I agree. This is a decision that will leave some people upset either way. I’ve seen people “threaten” that they will or will not vote for certain members of council based on how he/she may vote on this issue. I call bull. I would be willing to bet that these people’s minds are made up about who they will or will not be voting for. I often refer back to Carolyn Davies from last council’s term……There was a lot of pressure put on council from a small but loud and vocal group about the Essex Power Lines shares. Well, Ms Davies gave in to the pressure and voted according to how that small, loud group hoped she would. Guess who didn’t get re-elected anyway? Did you know that that same small, vocal group were also the catalysts for getting policing costs to save money? Did you know that the same small, vocal group from last term were also the ones who pushed for the Deloitte report? Did you know that the Deloitte Report recommended to council to seek cost sharing and cost saving ventures such as shared police services? Just some tid-bits for thought.

Council needs to vote in the best interests of the entire community as a whole, every single time. It’s the right thing to do in my opinion.

$$$$$$$$$$ And now the money $$$$$$$$

I’m not an accountant, but I can see that a savings of $3,128,355 is anticipated over the life of a 5 year contract. Since, we now have the ability to get a 20 year contract…..the savings is anticipated at $14,557,845 over 20 years. That’s $14.5 Million over 20 years. That’s HUGE! Not only is the savings huge, but we’re getting better technology and many extras with the deal. I just can’t see how this can be bad. How many extra kilometers of roads can be repaired over the next 20 years with this money?

Severance ?

There seem to be conflicting legal opinions about if the officers would be eligible for severance pay. Basically, for an officer to be eligible for severance pay, he/she would have to quit effective January 1 2019 and not accept a position with WPS under the new contract. Translation, he/she would have to quit and be unemployed to be possibly eligible for severance. (Would any one actually do this with such a well paid career? I would have to guess that the officers would want to continue with their career and maintain their seniority? ) Then the Amherstburg Police Association would need to successfully argue that the terms of the collective agreement with the Amherstburg Police Service Board were violated thus triggering severance. IF this were all to happen, there could be a potential of having to pay $2.4 Million in severance costs. It seems the details about all of this has been shared with council in a private and confidential memo. So, IF this worst case scenario were to play out, exactly like this, our 20 year savings would be reduced to $12,106,820.

Conclusion

The Windsor Police Proposal is better than I had anticipated. We save money, everybody keeps their jobs FOR 20 YEARS if they want and we get some extras included that we don’t currently have. I can’t see a down side here.

I have summarized the highlights as I see them from a very lengthy report. Some of my haters will probably say I purposely left things out or didn’t talk about certain issues. Well, it’s true, I had to leave some things out and didn’t talk about certain issues. This is a summary. The full agenda with reports is 229 pages. The CAO gets paid big bucks to write lengthy, fully comprehensive reports. I get paid $0 bucks to write up summaries of what I think is important. Perhaps you may find other things important that I do not. Therefore, here is the link to the full 229 pages:

Click to access 2018%2002%2026%20-%20Special%20Council%20Meeting%20Packet%20-%20Police%20Services%20RFP.pdf

It takes quite a bit of time to read it all, but I will say another thing I’m not sure I’ve ever said before…..I really enjoyed reading the report. I think it left no stone un-turned and as I said, I learned a few things along the way.

As for Monday night……Monday night will be a council meeting, not a public consultation meeting. I hope that the Mayor is prepared to explain the rules of conduct to the general public during a council meeting. Even more so, I hope that all of the residents of Amherstburg are prepared to act in a respectful manner. And ultimately, I really and truly hope that the residents can accept the decision made by council, whatever it may be.

 

 

 

Monday February 12th Regular Town Council meeting

**Deputy Mayor DiPasquale was absent.**

I’m going to try not to bore you to tears…..I may have to gloss over some of the meeting because most of the interesting stuff happened near the end. Now, don’t go scrolling down to the end, that’s like reading the end of the novel before the beginning…..tsk tsk tsk

Most items carried with little or no discussion, so I’ll just touch on the ones that had some discussion, or at least interesting discussion or sort of interesting discussion….

I did notice and speak with Susan Whelan at the meeting. I thought that was interesting….wonder if she’s thinking of getting back into politics, maybe at the local level???? She was taking notes also? Maybe she’s looking to start a blog? hmmm…..who knows?

LED Streetlight Conversion – RFP Results

Councillor Fryer was very happy to see that the town will finally be switching to LED street lights all through town. He was particularly happy to see that there was going to be follow-through allowing lights all the way from Ranta Marina to Malden Road…..until….

Councillor Meloche was concerned that the budgeted amount was $450,000 and now the cost had risen to $1.18 Million. There was a whole lot of back and forth. I will save you having to read it all….long story short, yada yada yada…..it was finally shown that administration was simply going to be issuing an RFP to install street lighting on County Road 20 from Ranta Marina to Malden Road…..so simply an RFP, the lights are not guaranteed. Also, it was pointed out that the savings by switching to LED would create savings that could be paid back into the process. There will be LED lights installed in the right of way areas in ALL of Amherstburg. (I just fed you a plain bread sandwich, no meat, please enjoy it…..the meat of this was over rated. ) Summary of this section, switch to LED lights costs some money, they use less electricity so we save money.

Request for Dedicated Parking Spaces – Stefano Storey and Chad Denomme, Storey and Denomme Family Dentistry

This was another discussion that kind of went all over the place. The recommendation from administration was that the entire public parking lot at the corner of Ramsey and Richmond be designated as 2 hour parking Monday thru Friday from 8 AM to 5 PM. Clear, right? Not so much for everyone…..Councillor Courtney felt that two hours was too restrictive and used the example of a family wanting to go for dinner and ice cream, especially during peak tourist season. Mr Galvin (here I go, I’ll just invent him a new title, it’s so long and I have yet to master it…..), Director of Planning and Legislative services, spoke about the necessity to balance short term and long term parking in a downtown core. He said many of the complaints stem from people being parked all day and that a 2 hour time limit is fairly standard for a downtown area. Then Councillor Fryer felt that council shouldn’t approve this since he was okay with 2 hour designated spots, but not 2 spots for the dental practice. (I’m going out on a limb here, but from what I read in the report, they were designating the whole lot not 2 spots……). Even one of the dentists got up and seemed confused by this. He had felt that they had decided to scratch the 2 spot idea and designate the whole lot (yep, I think that was it….). Ms Rubli pointed out to council that the request for 2 spots had been denied in October 2017 and that the recommendation was to follow up on this. Administration was now recommending changing the whole lot to 2 hour parking.

There were some concerns mentioned for the merchants and where they could park. It was suggested that there is plenty of all day parking available just outside of the downtown core area for employees. The Mayor pointed out that there is a municipal lot behind the Heritage Plaza that has all day parking available. (My personal opinion here…..having worked at a few different places, employees should never be taking up prime parking spots…..those are for the customers…...). Anyway, finally, the motion carried to approve the lot as 2 hour parking. The only one opposed was Councillor Courtney.

Information Reports

Council received the accounts payable report. Councillor Pouget said that she had called Chief Berthiaume today since he couldn’t attend tonight’s meeting. She had concerns with his report that there were 460 (I think that’s the number she said, hard to understand….if I’m wrong, I’ll change it…) fewer traffic charges and 18 fewer parking tickets. She wondered if drivers were suddenly engaging in better behavior. It seems they were one officer short and had to take an officer off traffic duty.

(Just a thought…if Windsor was responsible for policing would they have been able to send a replacement officer to cover that position???)

Councillor Pouget also again questioned the $27,000 paid to the Police Association. She felt that it wasn’t transparent and that more information should be given. The CAO said that there had been a private and confidential memo. Councillor Pouget compared it with an example of a legal fee paid to McTague Law Firm of XX dollars on the payable report. The Clerk pointed out that it shows McTague Law Firm since the cheque went directly to them and provides the same information, since the town is bound by privacy legislation. I can’t say I disagree here. As a taxpayer, I have no idea why or for what reason we paid McTague Law Firm, it simply shows a roll number. So, I guess not knowing why or what reason we paid $27,000 to the Police Association is basically the same thing.

New Business

Councillor Meloche asked about the next meeting (Feb 26th). He was wondering if it would be moved to another venue since the policing issue may draw a large crowd. The CAO pointed out that he would need council direction to move the location of a council meeting. So, Councillor Meloche made a motion to move the meeting to the Libro Arena. Councillor Lavigne seconded the motion. Councillor Pouget mentioned something about needing an invitation (I did not catch this……any one else catch it??) . The Clerk pointed out that the meeting was already advertised in the River Town Times as being held at town hall. Councillor Fryer spoke and said he understood the concerns. He felt that perhaps that they could provide audio and video of the meeting (live streaming…..? hmmmm…..just a thought……I could stay home and blog from my lazy-boy……oooohhhh……wouldn’t that be awesome!!). Anyway, sorry, for the fantasy there…. Councillor Fryer went on to say that in his opinion it would be much easier for council and the mayor to control the meeting at town hall and that council should do business where they always do business. (And there it is……I think every one knows I don’t often agree with Councillor Fryer, but tonight, right then and there I did……the Feb 26th meeting needs to stay in control, no yelling, no screaming and no name-calling and I think the wide open Libro may have allowed for a repeat of the awful Saturday public consultation meeting……)

The buses 

For those of who who read the news this week, Councillor Fryer had had an issue that the school buses ran last week on Wednesday when the weather was quite poor. He had said he was going to bring the issue before council and he did. Councillor Fryer made a motion to invite the consortium for bus cancellations to come and give a presentation to council. Councillor Courtney did not agree. She said that as a former school board trustee that there are 21 quadrants that are involved to make a decision and it’s very difficult. If buses are canceled due to dense fog in Leamington for example, people are angry in the rest of the county. If there is a prediction for freezing rain in the afternoon, then they cancel and the freezing rain doesn’t happen, people are angry. Councillor Fryer felt that Windsor cancels the buses the night before but that the county waits until 6:20am to do so and it’s too late. Councillor Lavigne said he didn’t feel it was council’s mandate to pull the bus companies into a council meeting for an inquisition. Councillor Pouget felt that the safety of the residents is council’s paramount responsibility and that nobody would be chastising them, it’s simply a polite invitation and they can choose to come or not. Councillor Meloche felt that this was a no-win situation and that it’s very subjective. It finally went to a vote (not recorded but I watched)…..in favour Councillors Fryer and Pouget and opposed Councillors Courtney, Lavigne and Meloche. So the motion failed and the bus company will not have to come and justify themselves to town council.

Then, as is the norm lately, council went in-camera to discuss :

SPECIAL IN-CAMERA COUNCIL MEETING

ITEM A – Closure of Portion of Sherbrook St., West Side of George St. – Section
239(2)(c) – A proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the
municipality.

There it is folks. I did the best I could with the little I had. In two weeks, it’s the big one heading our way…..the great police debate! I better get my rest for all the writing and note-taking coming my way!

 

 

In preparation for Monday February 12th regular town council meeting

Monday’s agenda is 310 pages and doesn’t appear to have anything super exciting on it, but I’m about to skim through…..I’ll see what I can find.

Looks like a whole lot of boring…..LOL. Council is probably trying to rest up and prepare for the big February 26th meeting!

Temporary Extension of the Exemption Regarding Non- Residential
Development Charges

From the report : “Development charges are fees collected from new development at the time of issuance of building permits. The principle behind development charges is that “growth pays for growth” so that the cost of growth related infrastructure does not fall on the existing community in the form of higher property taxation or user fees. Development charges help to ensure that municipalities have adequate funding to invest in a timely manner in necessary capital improvements so that average service levels do not decline as a result of capital growth. This capital financing tool is integral to the Town’s long-term fiscal stability. ”

It looks like they’re looking to do a study and amend the by-law regarding development charges.

Placement of the Southwest SWM Pond on Maintenance – Kingsbridge
Subdivision

It looks like the storm water pond near the Kingsbridge subdivision is now complete. They’re looking to place it on a one-year maintenance program and a 2 year (or 1 year) maintenance program for the landscaping. I don’t think I can manage to make this seem exciting or interesting.

Roster for Engineering Services for Drainage Works (2018-2020)

I’m going to quote from the report again, because I’m at a loss on how to make this an interesting topic also.

“The development of an engineering roster for drainage services for the Town will permit the Town to service its drainage engineering requirements in a more efficient and cost effective manner. Administration is recommending the following firms for the Town roster for engineering services for drainage works under the Drainage Act:
 Rood Engineering Inc.
 N.J. Peralta Engineering Ltd.
 R. Dobbin Engineering Inc.
 Dillon Consulting Ltd.
 RC Spencer Associates Inc.”

It looks like the RFP went out and all is in order. Will there be much discussion on this? Perhaps some of our councillors who think they are also engineers will like to discuss this? …..LOL

LED Streetlight Conversion – RFP Results

Okay. Councillor Fryer has been asking about this issue at almost every meeting for quite some time and now it’s finally here! The conversion to LED streetlights will allow the town to pay less in hydro charges and recoup the cost of the new lights relatively quickly. I would guess this will be approved very quickly.  The best part of it all is right here, the winning bidder is… : “Anchor Hydro…Achor Hydro has included a 5 year warranty to cover all labour involved with the replacement of faulty fixtures. It should be noted that Anchor Hydro is a local company based in Amherstburg.” Nice to see a local company can benefit from this as well. A true win-win.

Request for Dedicated Parking Spaces – Stefano Storey and Chad
Denomme, Storey and Denomme Family Dentistry

It looks like the municipal parking lot next to the old Pizza V, where the dentist office now resides, will be designated as 2-hour parking from Monday to Friday from 9 AM to 5 PM. Will have to wait and see what council decides to do.

Queen Charlotte Storm Sewer Easement: King’s Navy Yard Park

This is some type of easement agreement for the sewer system. How can I make THAT exciting? Sorry,  no can do.

Removal of Part Lot Control- Golfview Subdivision

Looks like a little bit more construction will be underway in the Golfview Subdivision. That’s great news!

2018 Tanker/Pumper & Rescue/Pumper Tender Results

Looks like we’re going to be purchasing a new fire truck (cost around $817,000) and selling Tanker 2 (whatever that is….?) The tender went out, the prices are in, I’m guessing council will move forward with this. It’s been in the works for a while too.

Licence of Occupation Agreement – Parks Canada Property at Kings
Navy Yard Park

Did you know this? I did not know this. From the report : “In November 2007, the Town entered into a three (3) year agreement with Her Majesty the Queen (Parks Canada) to take care of a portion of property on the grounds of the Fort Malden Commissariat Office within the King’s Navy Yard Park. Since that time, the Licence of Occupation Agreement has been renewed every three (3) years so that the Town can properly take care of the Rhododendron beds within that area. ”

Until recently, I did not know that part of the Navy Yard Park was federally owned. This agreement seems to simply be a continuation of an existing agreement. It gets renewed every so often.

Accounts Payable

Well, we paid our quarterly installment to ERCA of $17,649.80. Then, it looks like we again paid ERCA a 1st quarter general levy installment of $29,378.70. Legal fees came in around $17,000.

Then, as per the usual, council will go in-camera to discuss :

SPECIAL IN-CAMERA COUNCIL MEETING
That Council move into an In-Camera Meeting of Council directly
following Regular session pursuant to Section 239 of the Municipal Act, 2001, as
amended, for the following reason:
ITEM A – Closure of Portion of Sherbrook St., West Side of George St. – Section
239(2)(c) – A proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land by the
municipality.