Tonight is a continuation of “As the deadline looms”…..on the previous episode, we saw posturing and pontificating as the deadline for the election approaches faster and faster. Tonight’s episode was continuation of posturing, pontificating and drama. The smell of election “silly” season was in the air. In fact, it may have filled the room. Here we go.
**Councillor Meloche was absent tonight**
The meeting was called to order on time at 6:00. Mayor DiCarlo said that instead of the National Anthem, he was asking for a moment of silence in honour of Councillor Meloche’s wife, who passed away last week. Everybody stood and it was complete silence for a minute.
Audit Findings Report for the year ended December 31, 2017 – Cynthia
Swift and Alison Piccolo , KPMG LLP
Ms Swift spoke first about the audit findings for 2017. She said they received full cooperation from management during the process. She said everything was in accordance and in order from the prior year. There weren’t any issues with any areas. It was a relatively short and quick presentation. There weren’t any questions and the report was accepted.
Input into the Use of Former Duffy’s Property in the Parks Master Plan –
Brian Beattie and Kevin Sprague, AMA Sportsmen Association
Mr Beattie spoke first and said he had some points and ideas he wanted to address to council. He said that the town had an amphitheater at one time. He said it lasted 3 years and there were so many complaints that it was torn down. He spoke about Colchester Harbour and a newspaper article that praise them for waterfront accessibility. He also said that the Kings Navy Yard Park is the only area with accessible fishing yet it’s a small area. The Mayor advised him that nothing was being decided tonight about the Duffy’s property. The CAO advised it would still move forward for further public consultation. However, council would listen to their ideas tonight.
Mr Sprague then addressed council. He felt that purchasing the Duffy’s property was a great decision. He expressed concern that there has been no public marina nor a public boat launch for years. He felt that the majority support a public boat launch. He also felt that Amherstburg’s area for fishing is too small (53 feet according to his measurements) at the Navy Yard Park. He felt that the residents want a public marina. He said he had spoken to hundreds of residents and that most are against the amphitheater. He said he has spoken to over 500 people who have signed a petition that they want a public marina and a public boat launch. He said his petition included that people want a boat launch, parking, a wharf, look-out and transient boat slips.
The Mayor advised that all of those things are in the proposal except for the ramp. The CAO said the issue with a boat launch would be parking…..and the need to acquire more property for parking.
Mr Sprague said he talked to the Dalhousie Street business owners and various people going into Canadian Tire throughout the weekend and that most were upset about the amphitheater and don’t want it. He felt the space where the proposed amphitheater would be could be used for parking for the public boat launch users. Mr. Beattie felt that this parking area could be used for other attractions for River Lights or Belle Vue.
Councillor Pouget said she had attended the public meetings and that the business owners do not want a boat launch. She also felt it could be a liability since it can be a catchment and become slimy. She also mentioned that the public wouldn’t want to put other marina’s out of business.
Councillor Fryer said he agrees with the concept but doesn’t think that the waterfront is an area for parking. He mentioned looking into a valet system and acquire other property for parking. The town could then valet park cars for the boat launch users. He said it may cost a bit more but…..
OK. I managed to hold back my thoughts. Until now. My personal opinion…..here it comes, like it or not. Feel free to skip ahead if you usually don’t agree with me. No way, no how, no way at all should that prime property be a parking lot for anybody. To me, that would be a total waste of a valuable piece of property. How much of the population would use a public boat launch? 5%? 10%? As for valet parking…………..welcome to the Hilton version of a public boat launch???? What the heck? What are we? Made of money bags? OK. I’m done now.
Centennial Park Baseball Diamond Relocation Process – Mary Lippert
and Greg Leal, Amherstburg Minor Baseball
It seems that Amherstburg Minor Baseball wants to have input about the relocation of the 4 ball diamonds that are currently at Centennial Park. The Public school board has purchased the land to built a new high school, so the ball diamonds among other amenities will be gone and need to be relocated.
Ms Lippert addressed council. She explained that 351 children are registered this year to play baseball. They host 4 house league tournaments per year and one travel league tournament. They host approximately 828 players (plus parents, siblings, grandparents etc) during a tournament and they use 3 different locations to do that. She told us that the River Canard Park, which is on town property, is being managed by LaSalle and that they charge Amherstburg Baseball for use of the park. (What???? This needs to be looked into…..) Ms Lippert had concerns if that something wasn’t put into place and very soon the kids will have nowhere to play baseball next summer. She said she was open to having the 4 ball diamonds moved to the Libro but cited concerns if they’d possibly be ready for next summer. She also had other concerns about who would set up the diamonds, open the gates etc. She stressed that the Amherstburg Minor Baseball League wants input into how the new diamonds will be built.
The CAO expressed that there is a plan and recommendations in place in the Parks Master Plan for baseball provisions and consultation. He did explain that the ball diamonds will be gone for next summer since the school board is on a time constraint to build the new high school. The Mayor expressed that it would be one year of inconvenience but that it takes time to plan and build the new diamonds properly. Councillor Pouget explained that the reason the school board chose the Centennial Park site is that most students can walk to school (reduced busing) and also the downtown restaurants would still be able to serve the students.
Anyway, it was a pleasant discussion of concerns and questions. Council accepted the delegation. No final decision was made about anything at this point.
Amherstburg Parks Master Plan – Steve Langlois, Principal Planner,
Monteith Brown Planning Consultants
Draft Parks Master Plan
As you may be aware, the town embarked on a new endeavor and that was to create a Parks Master Plan for the town of Amherstburg. I will summarize it, but it’s truly worth a read if you have the time.
Mr Langlois spoke and explained that the framework was to identify, evaluate, plan and look at policy development in regards to ALL of the parks in Amherstburg. It’s a comprehensive plan. He pointed out that the median age of our population is increasing……it was 36.6 years in 2001 and was up to 44.5 years in 2016. He also said that parks have to do more now than they had to do in the past. Public input was sought to see what types of usage the parks get at the moment and what types of amenities people would like to see. He said that the Duffy’s site was absorbed into the plan and had high levels of support for the concept. He felt that there were people for and people against a public boat launch.
So here’s the deal :
Current park land supply is 112.6 hectares.
Current provision of park land is 5.1 hectares per 1,000 people
Current Needs are 87.7 hectares or 4.0 hectares per 1,000 people.
The current surplus of park land is 24.9 hectares.
The future predicted surplus will be about 9.2 hectares in 2031.
The town has sufficient park land at the moment. In fact we have more than most communities have per capita. Obviously, it costs money to maintain these parks. The plan does not identify any surplus parks however, it does recommend to relocate facilities to the Libro Centre. However, the Lion’s Pool needs to have it’s own conversation with public input. He also said that the floral program should continue to be supported and an expansion considered. (Funny but I think the floral program was one of the very first things this council looked to cut when they first got elected……?)
After his presentation, there was much commentary, most probably from councilors that intend to seek reelection. Or maybe they just enjoy hearing their own voices. Or maybe both. In my opinion, there was nothing that was mind blowing said, so I’m moving on.
Lame Duck Provisions
Here’s my pre-meeting blurb:
We’re nearing election time and soon our town council will go into Lame duck status. This means, I think, that council will be limited in their decision-making capacity. Obviously, the business of the town must continue during these several months of “lame duck” status. In order for the business of the town continue, council is being asked to approve a proposal that the CAO can deal with the disposition of any real or personal property of the municipality which has a value exceeding $50,000 at the time of disposal and that he can make any unbudgeted expenditures or incurring any other liability which exceeds $50,000. However, it is obviously not carte blanche for the CAO. He must consult with the town Solicitor and/or the Director of Corporate services prior to selling any property or making any expenditures. The CAO must also advise council in writing should he need to act upon either of these issues. Basically, it’s time for council to get their ducks in a row before they go lame duck! ha ha! Pretty punny. 🙂
Now tonight’s show down, because it was just that, a show down.
So, Councillor Pouget made a motion to put a MORATORIUM on the disposition of property exceeding $50,000 AND a MORATORIUM on making any unbudgeted expenditures over $50,000. The Clerk pointed out that a moratorium would not be necessary since if these lame duck provisions were not placed on administration, council would not be able to make any of these types of decisions either. Councillor Pouget felt it was foolish and unfair of council to allow administration to be able to spend money or sell property since they’re not elected and that it would be giving administration carte blanche.
The Mayor pointed out that if the motion doesn’t pass, there’s no need to have a moratorium, since administration NOR council would be able spend money for ANY reason that was unbudgeted. (So, no donations to ERCF I guess LOL) The Clerk explained that council will go lame duck on July 27th and will have limited authority after that date. Until the new council is sworn in in December, well, no decisions could be made. Pouget went on about how strongly she felt about this and that she’s trying to protect the CAO and the residents.
The CAO gave an example…..if on July 28th a fire truck gets totaled in an accident, there would absolutely nothing that could be done to replace it without this approval of designating power. He said that administration would follow the policies established by council and they would be protected by following policy. Councillor Pouget felt that we’ve gotten loaner fire trucks in the past and that we could just do that (for 4 months??) again. Mr Galvin spoke and explained that many municipalities pass these types of resolutions and that part of the resolution shows the “power” does not go to any ONE person, there are checks and balances and lawyers must be consulted. He explained again that emergencies can happen that and that there should be checks and balances to allow administration to deal with an emergency.
Councillor Lavigne then spoke. He researched this item when he saw it on the agenda. He cited another even scarier example…..should something happen at the water treatment plant, nothing could be done if these provisions aren’t put in place. He did not feel it was carte blanche for administration. He felt that this provision would protect the municipality and the residents and protect against something major happening. He then said he didn’t understand about the disposition of property portion.
CAO Miceli explained that both items came up in the research, the disposition of property and also the unbudgeted expenditures. He said he was more concerned with the unbudgeted expenditures. Councillor Lavigne used another example of one year there were mechanical issues at the Libro Centre. They weren’t able to make ice until it was repaired. He wondered what would happen should that happen again in September and nothing could be done until December to fix it and make the ice??? The Mayor used an example of a road or bridge emergency and they could be forced to close a road until December. Councillor Pouget felt that the town just go to the province if there were an emergency and they would help get the situation under control. The CAO pointed out that there will be 4 months of lame duck time and that the province doesn’t always move quickly. Councillor Pouget then said she’d withdraw her motion for a moratorium and would vote against the motion.
The CAO said that in terms of property acquisition that there is a senior hub coming and a tenant, a nurse practitioner, will be need approval for a lease agreement but that was all he could say. Councillor Pouget felt that was not a disposition but the CAO said that a lease is a disposition of property.
In the meantime, during all of this back and forth, Councillor Lavigne googled this motion and discovered that A LOT of municipalities have this provision for lame duck period. There was more and more back and forth. Councillor Pouget wanted to specify what type of unbudgeted expenditures would be okay. Councillor Courtney made a motion to only approve the unbudgeted money part, but then later withdrew it. (Are you all managing to follow this??)
Finally, Councillor Lavigne made the motion as presented to allow administration to be able to dispose of real or personal property of the municipality exceeding $50,000 and also to be able to make unbudgeted expenditures over $50,000 during the 4 month lame duck period. Councillor Fryer seconded the motion and said that it’s a matter of trust. He pointed out that council has to allow the municipality to function.
Councillor Pouget then reiterated all of the points she had previously made and expressed her extreme opposition again. Councillor Fryer then said it was a code of conduct violation, it’s one person’s opinion and that it was ridiculous and “horse crap”. Councillor Pouget then said she wanted a code of conduct violation for Councillor Fryer. And Councillor Lavigne pointed out AGAIN that EVERY municipality he was looking at on Google has this same provision. And drum roll please……the recorded vote :
In support : Deputy Mayor DiPasquale, Councillor Fryer, Councillor Lavigne, Mayor DiCarlo
Opposed : Councillor Courtney, Councillor Pouget
So, after a VERY heated debate, council has their ducks in a row and are ready to go lame duck on July 27th. Phew.
Information Reports
There were some questions about the accounts receivable. I’m not really sure what was going on here, not really sure at all. I’ll do my best. There were 4 items that said “Belle Vue” and Mr Prue had a couple of questions about them. (He’s the chair of the Conservancy I think). Two amounts said Belle Vue property, one said “ERA Architects” and one said “Crown Park Corp fundraising”.
The CAO said they were not related to Belle Vue. Councillor Pouget said she had called the Treasurer this morning had asked what they were about and he had told her Belle Vue. (Hasn’t Councillor Pouget declared a conflict about Belle Vue? I thought if a councillor declares a conflict, then they’re not supposed to discuss the issue? Why was she calling the Treasurer and asking questions about Belle Vue expenditures?????? ) The Treasurer said it was a transfer of money for expenses and that’s how recovery is done. Councillor Lavigne then started questioning who is Crown Park Corporation. Then somebody started talking about a Community Foundation. I was lost and confused. The CAO said there would be a report to explain it all. I guess I’ll wait until the report comes out to try to figure out what the heck this weird discussion was about.
In the meantime, the deadline continues to loom. For me too, I guess. At least there wasn’t an in-camera meeting tonight, so that’s a good thing, right? I think it’s quite clear who will be running again…….see you in two weeks for the next zany episode of “As the deadline looms”……the action only seems to be gearing up.
Share this: shares are appreciated!
amherstburg2 