RECAP Council Meeting February 9, 2026 

Posted on by
Reply

A short meeting lingered due to kudos to each other, to past councils, to staff and then there was a bit of grandstanding – it is an election year.

Memorable Meanderings:

About Crime Stoppers: McArthur snuck in the fact that he was a journalist: “I used to be a newspaper reporter, so I must have written 1000 briefs…”.

About reporting back after conference attendances:

McArthur: “I do think, though, we have to be very careful about managing expectations, sitting in an hour long seminar and summing it up in a cogent, concise manner that fully conveys to somebody that wasn’t in that room all the lessons that were learned is a very challenging thing to do. Ron does it for a living…to sum up something that takes place over an hour or two hours, you can’t really do it justice….Councillors aren’t journalists, and to expect them to have the same skills as someone like Ron is just, is just unreasonable.”

(Most, if not all, members of council attended post-secondary institutions where typical classes are three hours long. Are we supposed to conclude that elected officials should be journalists, like McArthur, who mentioned his skills twice during this meeting?)

Deputy Mayor Gibb: “my only concern that I want to put in front of Council to think about is, when we start directing each other’s behaviour we start down a slippery slope.”

(A procedural by-law directs council’s behaviour, as does the code of conduct).

Councillor Crain: “it says here, the report shall include, at a minimum, the name and date summary of the seminars, workshops and or sessions attended. Feels like a homework assignment.”

Environmental Achievements and Awards

  • Councillor Allaire congratulates the town on its environmental successes and praises the administration’s recommendations.
  • Mayor Michael Prue shows the Robert Pulleybank award and shares the positive feedback from other mayors, including the mayor of Kingsbridge.
  • Mayor Prue emphasizes the importance of environmental protection for future generations and highlights Amherstburg’s superior tree cover compared to other municipalities in Essex County.
  • Councillor Courtney credits the Environmental Committee and council for their support and contributions to the town’s environmental efforts.

Crime Stoppers Presentation

  • Rick Surette, OPP officer, summarizes the role and value of Crime Stoppers in the community.
  • Crime Stoppers encourages anonymous tips that lead to crime solutions and offers cash rewards for successful tips.
  • The program’s principles include anonymity, cash rewards, and protection from subpoenas for tipsters.
  • Crime Stoppers has been successful in solving various crimes, including the 2011 Stanley Cup riots, with security camera footage and community tips.

Crime Stoppers Program Details

  • Crime Stoppers operates as a charity and relies on donations and fundraising events for funding.
  • The program receives tips through various methods, including phone calls, online submissions, and mobile apps.
  • Tips can lead to arrests, charges, seizures of illegal items, and good information that helps investigators.
  • The program also has a preventative aspect by deterring criminals from targeting the community due to the high visibility of Crime Stoppers.

Questions/Discussion

  • McArthur asks about the amount of money paid out as rewards in 2025.
  • Rick Surette explains that less than 10% of tipsters who qualify for a reward pick up the money, indicating a strong civic duty among tipsters.
  • McArthur inquires about the types of tips that qualify for rewards and the process for approving rewards.
  • Surette explains the board of directors uses a records management system to calculate estimated rewards based on the severity and impact of the tips.

Reports 

  • Reports from Corporate Services, Parks and Recreation, and Infrastructure Services are presented and approved without discussion.
  • A motion to approve a special event permit for the Good Friday procession is discussed, with Councillor McArthur suggesting to waive the policing fee, which is carried. 

Fire Department Activity Report

  • Councillor Courtney asks about the disconnect in the Fire Department’s call volume report.
  • Deputy Chief explains the merger of Station One and Three and the reallocation of staff between the North and South stations.
  • The Fire Department is currently hiring to fill the complement of paid on-call firefighters.

Proclamation Request 

Council approved a request from the Fibromyalgia Association of Canada for a proclamation and illumination of town hall.

(Another performative action in my opinion).

Sponsorship Opportunities

Council supports the Amherstburg Chamber of Commerce’s 2026 Business Excellence Awards with a $500 sponsorship for the Employer Award.

(Councillor Crain made the motion, seconded by Deputy Mayor Gibb; both are members of the Chamber of Commerce).

Notice of Motion on Conference Reporting – almost 25 minutes long discussion

  • Councillor Allaire proposes a motion requiring council members who attend conferences funded by municipal tax dollars to provide a written or verbal report to council.
  • The motion is eventually amended to clarify that it applies only to conferences funded by the town of Amherstburg dollars and it is carried unanimously, directing staff to draft a formal policy for council’s consideration.

Inconsistencies: Councillor Allaire – Accountability

Posted on by
Reply

Accountability seemed to be the basis for Councillor Allaire’s motion to seek a draft policy requiring a report following attendance at conferences, conventions, or similar events during the February 9 meeting.

Why now?

Accountability always gets mentioned during an election campaign.

Allaire has already declared she will run again as a candidate in the upcoming election to be held October 26.

Any member could’ve voluntarily given a written or verbal report any time during the last three years and two months.

Any member could’ve posted a report on social media, a tool used extensively by some.

Council’s first Accountability and Transparency policy was passed on November 25, 2019, as mandated by the province.

The policy was updated and presented in an annual report to council on December 16, 2024 – two years into this council’s term.

Councillor Allaire was the first to move the policy BE AMENDED in accordance with the November 26 report titled Annual Policy Report 2024.

The report noted, “there were no alterations to the policy’s core content.”

“Council and Staff are committed to practicing open and proactive communications and involving the community, business sector, developers, public partners and other in the ongoing work of the Town,” states section 6.8 of the policy.

I attempted to hold Allaire accountable for her April 14, 2025 statements about the library.

I asked her if she would explain how this library is not accessible; if this was just her opinion, or if she obtaIned an expert opinion; if she could cite an authority for her statement or a basis, and who is the ‘we?’

I followed up several times, but Allaire did not respond.

During the April 29 council meeting, Allaire asked for a bit more transparency.

Allaire mentioned more transparency again at the May 12 meeting, “which is what I would love,” she said.

In June, I emailed her some of her statements about transparency at meetings: “I’m genuinely asking for a bit more transparency in adding it to our social media” and “I feel that the transparency was limited recently, and I think that that’s what the public really wants” and “I actually appreciate the fact that it keeps some sort of transparency.”

A policy requiring reporting back after conferences might be just another document that gives the appearance of accountability.

People will continue to wonder if a commitment to accountability and transparency is credible until accountability measures are consistently utilized.

How To Complain About Your Municipality

Posted on by
Reply

I was unable to find an Amherstburg Municipal Complaint Resolution Policy on the town’s website, although the Ombudsman Ontario site states every municipality should have a council approved general complaint policy.

The Ombudsman site includes the resource, Tips for Municipal Complaint Resolution Policies.

What is a complaint?
An expression of dissatisfaction made to or about a public organization about some aspect of its programs, services or people where a response is explicitly or implicitly expected. – Ontario Ombudsman

  • Submit your complaint to the municipality, preferably in writing. You’ll need names and titles of people you spoke to or emailed, when you contacted them (dates), what they told you (notes or copies of emails).
  • If you’re not satisfied with the response, determine if the complaint is within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. Learn more at What we can and can’t do.
  • If you’re ready, you can make a complaint online via this form: File your complaint, or by email, phone, or in person.

Contact Information:

Mailing address:

483 Bay Street
10th floor, South Tower
Toronto, ON M5G 2C9

Put Away Your Shovels

Posted on by
Reply

Since 2017, the town of Amherstburg is responsible for clearing and salting all 58 km of municipal sidewalks and trails.

There was some confusion and/or misinformation about sidewalk snow removal in response to my Slushy Sidewalk Barriers post and Facebook post about another dangerous icy sidewalk.

Image description: ice and snow covered municipal sidewalk posing a barrier to people with disabilities.

The town’s website states: Snow Removal on Sidewalks – “At the December 11, 2017 Council meeting Council approved a Town wide sidewalk snow removal program. By-law 2005-04 regulating residents performing sidewalk snow removal WAS REPEALED by Town Council and no longer in effect.”

 “Please be aware that all municipal sidewalks will now be cleared of snow and ice by Town Staff.” – Town of Amherstburg

The town site lists  519-736-3664 as the Infrastructure Services Department number to call for a problem between 8 am and 4 pm.

The emergency after hours number is 519-561-6365.

The Supreme Court of Canada, in Nelson (City) v. Marchi, 2021 SCC 41, ruled municipalities can be held liable for injuries caused by its snow clearing decision.

Ms. Marchi was injured when she crossed a snowbank to access a municipal sidewalk.

The judges said the city owed her a “duty of care.”

Slushy Sidewalk Barriers

Posted on by
1

Sidewalks that have not been cleared thoroughly pose dangerous barriers to people with disabilities, as I discovered last Friday during a trip to the downtown post office.

in 2025 Prue referenced the AODA and said, ‘this town has not been compliant. And I have promised, as mayor, and the council has promised, that we will hence for, hence forward, going forward, always be AOD compliant. And I want people to know that the those who have disabilities have every right to use every one of the services in this town, the same as everyone else.’ So, we have the right – we just can’t exercise it, right? 

Inconsistent Procedural Bylaw Application

Posted on by
Reply

As a delegate denied speaking to the January meeting, I’m concerned about the application of the procedural by-law.

Kurt Reffle’s November delegation was deemed appropriate, while January delegates’ requests were in order but for a future date. 

The committee was informed both must be true: there would have to be a report or by-law before the body and there would have to be an action or recommendation.

Yet administration approved Reffle’s delegation when neither was true. Admin confirmed the November brainstorming session.

The CAO advised me his delegation was pertinent to an agenda item as the committee was discussing its work plan for the following year and he had ideas regarding that which he shared with the Committee.

Reffle’s delegate application noted the item was not on the agenda, although he was to speak to item three, not item one – the work plan. The minutes also note he spoke to item three.

The Deputy CAO mentioned delegates could speak at a future meeting, but they wouldn’t be allowed to address town council on the same issue.

The procedural by-law does not contain a clause stipulating this exclusionary practice.

Specifically, the by-law states, “Delegations appearing before Council, who have previously appeared before Council on the same subject matter, shall be limited to providing only new information in any subsequent delegation request.”

Reffle spoke over 11 minutes uninterrupted. Although staff was in the room, and could’ve announced the time, the CAO advised me the chair was on zoom and didn’t receive the staff’s email in time.

Delegates have been allowed to exceed the time limit four times since 2022.

Since committees are mentioned 45 times in the by-law, including in the ‘Delegations’ section, it equally applies to committee meetings.

The inconsistent application of the procedural by-law validates concerns of inequitable practices.

Defamation And Disability Advocacy

Posted on by
Reply

My defamation lawsuit against the town clerk and town of Amherstburg is the result of my disability advocacy four years ago.

In January 2022, I critiqued the draft multi-year accessibility plan council approved in December 2021.

I submitted what I perceived to be deficiencies of the draft plan to council, as I had done for decades.

I conveyed my concerns about the plan, council’s approval of the traditional voting method for 2022 and highlighted some barriers. 

I provided input on the town’s accessibility plans since the Ontarians with Disabilities Act (ODA) 2001 required organizations to create them annually.

The ODA’s purpose was to “improve opportunities for persons with disabilities and to provide for their involvement in the identification, removal and prevention of barriers to their full participation in the life of the province.” 

The ODA mandated plan contents. 

Plans were to include a report on measures taken, measures in place, and the next year’s measures to take to identify, remove and prevent barriers. 

The town was also required to assess, review and list its by-laws, policies, programs, practices and services to identify barriers.

I delegated to council and the accessibility committee; I emailed and wrote letters to the editor to help raise awareness of some barriers.

I had already advocated for ten years for an accessible library, but the town remained silent.

Throughout the decade the town pursued funding for other projects like a marina and arena, despite the provincial government’s grant stipulation that accessibility was the number one priority.

Finally, my human rights complaint against the town was settled and an elevator was installed in the library along with accessible parking spaces.

The town installed a plaque in the library lobby crediting others with my accomplishment.

I reiterated some of the barriers that were either not included in the plans or were not removed when they could have been.

For example, an accessible town website was relegated to year 3 of the town’s first accessibility plan, then listed as a priority for 2005, and then 2006.

A 2007 report informed council that the website was compliant with W3C accessibility standards but it wasn’t, according to an external expert. 

In 2009, a newly designed website was unveiled and problems continued. 

In 2011, I mentioned difficulty navigating the website. 

In 2014, Amherstburg was invited to hire esolutions when Essex County redesigned its site to meet accessibility standards; Leamington and Essex had already hired the company, but Amherstburg declined. 

According to the town’s site, esolutions redesigned Amherstburg’s site in 2016, although it still had issues.

Thousands of dollars and redesigns later, in 2020 administration recommended, and council agreed, to request the province to extend the AODA January 1, 2021 website compliance deadline to at least January 1, 2022 due to COVID-19.

Following the January 1, 2022 deadline extension request, the province agreed the town’s work should be completed prior to December 31, 2024. 

The new website redesign and refresh was not to exceed $70,000, excluding HST.

The AODA 2005 now requires organizations to review their multi-year plans every five years but report annually on barrier removal progress.

Although the town’s plan review is due by December 2026, the town posted a 2026 Multi-Year Accessibility survey on January 26, 2026.

The survey introduction states, “The Town’s Multi-Year Accessibility Plan outlines the outcomes and initiatives that reaffirm the Town’s commitment to an accessible community and to building an equitable and inclusive society that values the contributions of people with disabilities.”

I do not feel like my contributions have been valued – my decades of input parallel decades of barriers.

Despite my repetitive requests for a strong commitment to accessibility, the town failed to meet the 2025 AODA compliance deadline.

In fact, Mayor Prue even declared, ‘this town has not been compliant.’

Commentary by Linda Saxon

RECAP Accessibility Committee January 22, 2026

Posted on by
Reply

It was another drawn out meeting with uncertainty about the need for motions. Some members are on other town committees that have been repeatedly re-appointed and presumably attended training and received the procedural by-law.

During my June 2022 delegation, I mentioned the committee’s terms of reference, “any actions to be taken by the committee shall be made by resolution.” I suggested a record of motions in the minutes would fulfill their accountability and transparency obligation. 

Obviously, committee members are committee members.

  • Members introduced themselves since a new member was present; staff went first.  
  • Chris Drew, Tony Pietrangelo, Shirley Prue, and Councillor Don McArthur stated their names and the fact they are committee members. 
    (I was expecting a little bit more – maybe about their background, how long they’ve been committee members, why they want to be on it, what they hope to accomplish, etc., not just the fact they’re committee members).
  • I didn’t hear the new member’s name because the audio wasn’t working during her introduction or Marc Renaud’s. (Later in the meeting she said her name was Emily).

Annual Elections

  • Shirley Prue and Tony Pietrangelo were acclaimed as chair and vice chair – a continuation of their roles.

Mic Issues

Emily said something about hearing the clerk, who said he’d try to speak a little closer to the mic; he said sometimes that helps. 

Prue said if you still have issues, let us know, because there is different equipment that we can provide to you if that is not sufficient. Tony uses it all the time.

(Prue often speaks with the mic pointed away from her so it’s difficult to hear her; no amount of equipment would alleviate the speaker’s shortcomings. Assumptions should not be made about the ability of a person with a disability).

Accessibility Enhancements/Improvements

The three proposals for ‘accessibility enhancements,’ or ‘improvements’ (new euphemisms?) were:

  • Create an accessible parking space at Mickle Park for approximately $10,000. The parking lot is gravel. Pietrangelo asked about signage and was told we can include some signage on that. (a motion would create a record for follow up if needed).
  • Create two accessible parking spaces at the Libro, for approximately $20,000. 
  • Create an accessible on-street parking space at Briar Ridge Park, for approximately $500 for paint and signage and conduct public consultations for on street parking.

Emily raises a concern about a blind person crossing near the Blue Haven facility and warning signs. The clerk said, “through you your worship” (no, that’s the other Prue) and then correctly said, “Madam Chair;” he would follow up. Prue asked to hold that for new business.

Prior to the presentation of the three items, the clerk said “we (admin often says ‘we’) were tasked by the committee to come up with some potential improvements that would target accessibility improvements to feature during National AccessAbility Week… if the committee wants to select one, we can flesh that out and bring that back for the Committee’s edification.”

Before summarizing the three items, the clerk said, “we do believe that they’re all achievable in terms of moving it forward for National AccessAbility Week.”

After summarizing, Prue asked about funding. The clerk called her your worship again (still the other Prue). The committee’s recommendation would go to council to access the AODA Compliance Reserve Fund.

Prue asked, “do people want to decide 1, 2, 3, or all of the above; we’re being greedy to say all three?” 

(Since when is barrier removal being greedy? Couldn’t that be a deterrent to asking for more?)

The clerk said, “we have not envisioned doing all three…$20,000 was kind of the top we were looking for. That means we could do one and three, for example, or we could do two and three, but I wouldn’t suggest all three would be within the frame of the funds we’re looking at.” (Who is ‘we’ that keeps being referenced?)

The clerk said, “we do believe that they’re all achievable in terms of moving it forward for National AccessAbility Week.”

Then Prue asked for people’s preferences: do you like number two? Do you like number three? I think three is an easy one. 

Pietrangelo: I like one and two. 

Prue: You like one and two? You’re not getting one and two.

Pietrangelo: Briar Ridge is just the painting, right?  

Prue: Three is painting; one and two you can’t have.

Pietrangelo: no?

Prue: no.

Clerk: It’s two and three.

Pietrangelo: Oh. Two and three. (Prue laughs).

Prue: You have to choose; do you like number one or number two? 

Pietrangelo: I choose two.

Prue: Others? You want them all, I know, just like me, but.

Marc Renaud: we should maybe sit down at the next meeting and go through like, what do we see as the importance of, you know, here and there? We could 

Prue: prioritize. 

Renaud: balance it out so we have more than a minute discussion.

Prue: Yeah, do we have time to do that? Let’s just check.

Clerk: ideally, the focus would be to begin some of the work so that we don’t fall behind so we can get it accomplished for National AccessAbility Week. If we’re not targeting to have these completed, but rather, perhaps just announced, we could certainly do that. So, depending on the committee’s preference, in terms of timeline, the original direction we received was, was to have these amenities installed so that they could be featured as part of that event. 

Prue: so yeah, that’s what we asked for. Marc, you know, going back to the discussion. So, I think we have to pick one.

(The October 23, 2025 motion was: That the Amherstburg Accessibility Advisory Committee REVIEW feasible proposals for infrastructure projects that can be aligned to be completed or in progress for National AccessAbility week 2026).

(The motion followed last fall’s discussion of ‘quick-win accessibility improvements’ such as benches at Golfview Park and parking spaces at the Libro. They were told staff would bring a few of those proposals back and the committee could weigh on which ones they want to proceed on).

Voting on Accessibility Enhancements

  • Councillor Donald McArthur moves to support proposals 2 (Libro) and 3 (Briar Ridge); Pietrangelo seconds, and the motion carries unanimously.
  • Proposal 1 (Mickle Park parking) will be held in abeyance for future consideration.

About a half hour later, it was time to discuss the second business item.

Multi-Year Accessibility Plan Timeline

  • Selena Scebba, appointed Deputy Clerk September 9, 2024, presented the following information to the committee:
  • the multi-year accessibility plan timeline, the second document in their package. (The documents are not included in the public agenda – an issue I have mentioned previously). 
  • a survey launch on Talk the Burg on Monday, January 25, 2026.
  • The multi-year plan gets updated every five years, but a survey is done every year. (The previous multi-year plan was approved in December 2021).
  • The survey will close around February 20, a draft plan comes back to the committee that incorporates those results, hear any changes from the committee, bring it back for final review on March 26 and bring that final version to council by April 27.
  • “We’ll be looking to the committee if there’s anything you’d like to see included on that survey certain areas.” (the royal we again).

Prue said maybe they should have a quick look at the content of the survey. Scebba said she didn’t have it in front of them and explained like past versions, it’ll capture elements such as parks and multi-use trails and playgrounds and ask – are needs being met in those areas? Are your needs being met through recreational programming? sidewalks in town? transportation? communication methods? 

Pietrangelo noted they won’t even have a chance to look at it, add or subtract or change anything.

(Scebba just said, “We’ll be looking to the committee if there’s anything you’d like to see included on that survey certain areas”).

The clerk explained they let their communications team draft those documents to ensure that it’s neutral in tone. “That’s why we wanted to do the consultation with the group here to find out what sorts of questions need to be asked. And then once we understand what those questions are, then we give it to those professionals to draft the way in which they should be worded. So certainly, any suggestions we get from this group would then form part of that,” added the clerk.

Pietrangelo asks, would we be able to see the survey before you put it out? If we wanted to make any changes?

Clerk’s answer: if we did that we wouldn’t meet the timelines that we’re targeting here. (but the committee is being consulted for “anything you’d like to see included” and to “find out what sorts of questions need to be asked” and “any suggestions we get from this group would then form part of that”).

Pietrangelo repeated his opinion that they should have some discussion on the survey questions to see whether they’re right or not. 

The clerk explained there’s always an ‘other’ for people to share something unaddressed in the survey. They could bring it back to the next meeting, but it would throw off the timeline. “Is it more important to have that survey back before us, or is it better to have the survey results in the draft plan?” asked the clerk.

Pietrangelo thought maybe as soon as they get their survey done, they’ll call a special meeting just for that.

Pietrangelo said, through you, Madam Chair, it’s up to you. (But staff answered, not the chair).

The clerk said they did the math on that. To have four meetings between now and nomination day, there just isn’t time to fit them all in. 

Prue requested Pietrangelo to put those kinds of comments together and bring that to the next meeting. (Won’t it be too late to do anything then?) She didn’t think they can hold it up because they have a legislative requirement. (But, as I mentioned before, the five year plan is due December 2026.

Scebba said they’ll use the feedback from all four previous surveys to craft this new survey. 

Pietrangelo asked Scebba if the survey would be emailed to the members when it’s ready to publish; yes it would be. 

Emily wanted to mention she uses CareLink for appointments and she’s pretty much been told that she will never be able to use that because they only have two wheelchair spots on each of the CareLink busses; and they’ve got people who regularly just book it four months in advance – the same time, every time. So, most people in Amherstburg who use wheelchairs can’t use CareLink, which has become a bit of a problem. 

Clerk: that’s the sort of feedback that the multi-year plan should be bringing forward and identifying. There may be areas where services are being delivered by third parties or other levels of government or other entities, but you know, if we can advocate, if we can support, if we can enhance, certainly that’s the areas where that plan can help refine and drive those and bring that information to our attention. Allows us to say, let’s put that in the plan as a focus item; to say, you know, medical transportation, for example, is of concern, or just generally, transportation.

(town council was told during voting the CareLink would be available).

Prue: you should definitely complete the survey. (Surely, transportation to get to medical appointments warrants more attention than just suggesting one mention it in a survey).

Emily also wanted to mention she approached Seasons and a lot of people said that they don’t use the city bussing just because there’s only three ways, in and out, and if more were added a lot of people would feel more comfortable and use it more frequently. Emily shared one experience of going to a movie at the mall with a friend and by the time they got to the mall, the bus home was already gone. So, she thought they might be able to talk with transportation and bring that to their attention. 

Prue asked if she couldn’t use ACS for that. (acronyms should be avoided).

Emily seemed not to hear Prue, who repeated her question but used both the acronym and said Amherstburg Community Services.

Emily said they’re pretty much booked up so they’ve been told no but that’s definitely something we could talk about in the future.

Prue suggested they incorporate more attention to transportation in the survey. (How long do people have to wait to have an accessibility barrier addressed?)

Prue asks another ‘do you need a motion’ question; answer is no.

Unfinished Business and New Business

  • Pietrangelo inquires about the status of the National AccessAbility Week flag-raising event at the Libro and the involvement of local schools.
  • The flag-raising will align with the parking space enhancements at the Libro.
  • Emily points out the pylon in the middle of the sidewalk near the Beer Store that’s been there for about a year and a half.
  • Emily raises concerns about the safety of crossing Front Road near the Blue Haven facility.

Adjourned.

Is Peddie Being Petty?

Posted on by
Reply

Richard Peddie, in his RTT letter to the editor, promoting the “What Makes Amherstburg Great” initiative, states, “Sure there are the small group of people who complain about its weaknesses and think it was far better years past; but how about we ignore them?”

Sounds like the toxic positivity that’s so prevalent in Amherstburg – focus on the positive and ignore any perceived negativity, even when it exists.

Positivity only becomes problematic when it functions to reject negative emotions—if someone responded to a disclosure of distress, for example, with “It’s all for the best, “Just try to be positive,” or “Good vibes only!”
– Psychology Today

Let’s not confuse complaints with constructive criticism, which good leaders welcome and incorporate to make improvements.

Also, one should avoid generalizations, for example, that if people complain they think it was far better in years past. People complain for any number of reasons.

I think those celebrating the town’s heritage must think it was far better in years past. Why else would historic buildings be restored to their ‘former glory’?

Richard Peddie explained during an am800 interview the River Bookshop is an 1887 building and they weren’t accessible in those days.

Too often heritage takes precedence over accessibility; sometimes accessibility is not even incorporated in the initial planning stages, all of which is contrary to the human rights code. Not everyone is aware that heritage buildings can be made accessible.

The River Bookshop, for example, wasn’t renovated to make the entrance level with the sidewalk, no elevator was installed to the second floor, and no automatic door was installed.

Sometimes it takes complaints, like human rights complaints, to effect change.

The Peddies, as the River Bookshop owners, are Respondents to a human rights complaint – not because it was far better in the past, but because we’re now in 2026 where a rights-based approach to disability inclusion is the best model of disability.






Delegates Exceeded Five Minute Limit A Few Times

Posted on by

The reality is that some people receive preferential treatment and no one should be surprised by complaints of favouritism. There might be more instances, but these four stand out.

March 14, 2022: The Amherstburg Soccer Club’s delegation to council was 18 minutes, followed by a 48 minute question and answer session with members of council and staff for a total of 66 minutes.

April 22, 2023: Linda DiPasquale, Amherstburg Pickleball Association, spoke for 8 minutes and 40 seconds. At no time did mayor Prue stop her after the procedural by-law mandatory 5 minute limit and ask for a motion to continue as required.

January 15, 2026: Kurt Reffle spoke to the Economic Development Advisory Committee for about 11 minutes and 12 seconds; only then did Chair Patricia Simone say his five minute speaking limit was up.

January 20, 2026: WEBC spoke for almost seven minutes without interruption at the mandatory five minute limit.