The Candidate Platforms 2026 page has been updated, including 2022 information, whether they showed favouritism towards bloggers’ questions to the candidates (they did), and Open Air position if known (it’s obvious).
Candidate Q & A 2026
Featured
I am the first local Amherstburg blogger. My questions to the candidates in 2014 created an historical first opportunity for residents to submit questions anonymously through to the candidates. Since then, others copied my format and several Facebook pages keep residents more informed about who wants to represent our town.
I will continue to question candidates, although not all respond any more than they respond to my emails.
All questions will be sent after nomination period closes August 21.
If you have a question, please use the form.
And VOTE October 26.26.
Opinion – Dangerous signage
Reply
One single sentence about a sign became a saga of 16 emails over 10 days.
Signs keep us safe so if they pose a danger, I’m concerned. I thought others would be too, especially because it was on town property.
According to a sign by-law memo to council, “Construction Zones: Temporary routes around construction must also be accessible.”
Also, if barriers exist, the town wants to know about them, right? I’ve learned the operative word is ‘if.’
The bright yellow sign at Richmond and Bathurst grabbed my attention on June 10. I knew it wasn’t compliant with the Ontario Traffic Manual Book 7 – Temporary Conditions, which contains best practices for traffic control in work zones.
I immediately emailed the one sentence, “the attached photo of the sign at the Bathurst and Richmond intersection is not compliant” to CAO Critchley and Councillor Diane Pouget.
I usually copy the other council members on my emails, but they rarely respond. So, this time I just copied Pouget since she’s the only one who has consistently represented residents.
McArthur said, “Whether Councillor Pouget is on council or not on council, if I have a problem that I need town hall to solve, I’m going to councillor Pouget okay, and this community knows that.”
Yes, I know that.
“Use alley” is added in marker on either side of the word ‘side.’
Critchley: “Thank you for your email. We will look into this today,” June 11.
Critchley: “This situation has been reviewed. There are no issues with the signage provided and it does not violate any legislation. While not a standard sign, it nevertheless conveys the messaging intended, and is placed in such a way as to provide notice to allow those using the sidewalks to transition to the sidewalks that remain open for the intended purposes.” June 15.
the burg watch: “Thanks. It’s unfortunate that the town is ok with non-compliant signage that creates a barrier for people with vision disabilities and therefore does violate legislation.” June 15.
Critchley: “This initial sign is a warning that the sidewalk is closed beyond. If you carry on beyond that signage you will see a full barrier and fencing, closing off the area that someone with a visual impairment would identify with their cane when approaching. There are often practical limitations to the possible scenarios that may exist with a given solution in the world, but the Town follows best practices, provincial regulations and the guidance of upper levels of government in its actions.” June 15.
the burg watch: “A person with a visual disability would encounter the barrier at the initial non-compliant sign. Best practices include compliance with the Ontario Traffic Manuals.
As you know, MTO-approved traffic signs follow precise guidelines outlined in Ontario Traffic Manuals (OTM) that make signs legally enforceable.
Under OTM Book 7, temporary construction signs must strictly use black text on an orange retroreflective background, or black text on a white background for specific regulatory tabs. Red text on yellow does not adhere to official MTO/OTM standards and is a barrier for some people with vision disabilities.
For a proper sidewalk closure, the correct standard is to use the TC-40 “Sidewalk Closed” warning sign or the TC-40T “Sidewalk Closed” tab.
The TC-40 must be accompanied by a directional arrow (left or right) to guide pedestrians safely toward an alternate route.
OTM compliance would optimize pedestrian safety and reduce liability risks. June 15.
Critchley: “This sign is NOT a Town sign and has been placed in relation to a private project. As such, the sign does not have to follow MTP standards. If you have an issue with the sign, please reach out to the contractor doing the work. June 16.
the burg watch: “Thanks. Given that the sign is on town property directing town residents, I assumed the town would take an interest in ensuring compliance and pedestrian safety, including persons with disabilities.” June 16.
the burg watch: “Out of concern for pedestrian safety, including persons with disabilities, I’d like to contact the contractor. Would you please provide me with the contact information. Thanks” June 17.
the burg watch: “You advised, if I have an issue with the sign to reach out to the contractor. I have an issue but I wonder if the town and town council share my concern about the safety of persons with disabilities on town property. So, this afternoon I spoke to the contractor, who told me the town approved the project and supplied the signs, which he showed me. As I pointed out to you, the signs are not compliant so why is the town providing non-compliant signs that potentially endanger pedestrians?” to Critchley and all council members this time on June 18.
Contractor holding sidewalk closed sign provided to him by the town.
Councillor Pouget: “When time permits, will you please advise if the signs, that Mrs. Saxon is referring to is compliant to keep our residents safe, especially those with disabilities? Are these the Town signs and if not compliant, will they be replaced for safety reasons?” emailed Critchley, copied council, on June 19.
Critchley: addressed to Pouget without acknowledging her title: Good Morning:
The sign is actually the responsibility of the contractor. However, as I have told Ms. Saxon, the sign is compliant.
Critchley: to me, cc council, “Good Morning:
As originally relayed, while the sign is non-standard, it is not “non-compliant.” Compliance refers to a legal requirement, the OTM is a guideline. In this instance, the contractor did not have a sign, and asked for this to be provided to assist their works. As the sign exists 10 feet behind a saw horse with retror-eflectivity barring the path, and fencing secures the entirety of the site, staff we comfortable utilizing it for this purpose. As you may not be aware, retro-reflectivity is used for headlights and other typically street based conveyances. As it is not typical for headlights to be on sidewalks, it does appear that the safeguards staff authorized are both adequate and appropriate.
Thank you for your concern. June 19.
the burg watch: “The non-compliant signs are a public safety hazard as well as non-compliant with the AODA. Why wouldn’t the town ensure the safety of its residents and mitigate all potential risks to the town? Why wouldn’t the town just implement best practices like so many other municipalities?
It has been claimed that input on barriers in the community are welcome and will be addressed yet once again it appears accessibility is not a priority.” June 19.
Critchley: Madam:
“The signs are not a public safety hazard.
If you can provide a reference to the section(s) of the AODA that you are concerned about we would be happy to review that.” June 19.
the burg watch: “Madam,
The signs are a public safety hazard if they are not legible, are not the correct colours, incorrect contrast, do not contain arrows directing pedestrians to an alternate route, and are a tripping hazard – those are the facts. I notified the town of the barrier and then it’s the town’s responsibility to address the concern. The AODA is readily available online for you to review.” June 19.
I noticed different signs on June 26.
Hand printed sign on Richmond Street and Bathurst stating use other side but wheelchair access is via Murray St. As a reader pointed out, Murray Street only has one useable sidewalk – on the north side – between Bathurst an dRamsay and it’s not in good condition either.
Hand printing on sign indicates last pedestrian crossing at Sandwich Street at Richmond next to the library.
I have submitted a freedom of information request for all the contractor’s documents/applications the town approved.
Open Air barrier follow up with Botsford
TJ Botsford’s answer to my question about removing Open Air barriers was, “The town of Amherstburg relies on an excellent Accessibility Advisory Committee to look into these matters. It is my understanding that the Accessibility Advisory Committee ensures all events including Open Air are accessible for residents in Amherstburg. If you have concerns, I would suggest that you contact the Accessibility Advisory Committee.”
I reached out on Facebook and followed up with an email:
I asked on your Facebook post about Open Air: what specifically led to your opinion that there is an excellent accessibility committee? Is it your understanding or a fact that the committee ensures all events are accessible?
Botsford: “Residents who wish to serve on the Accessibility Advisory Committee must meet specific eligibility criteria, as required by mandate. It is, therefore, my understanding that those selected possess the knowledge and experience necessary to effectively advise the Town on accessibility barriers and related concerns. I trust that the individuals currently serving on this committee carefully consider the needs of residents and take the time to regularly review and reassess accessibility issues as circumstances and community needs change over time.”
4 Months to Municipal Elections 2026
“Voting isn’t the most we can do. But it is the least.” Gloria Steinem
VOTE on Monday, October 24, 2026.
What are the candidates’ position on Open Air? Lena Lazanja
Sometimes they play favourites and don’t answer my questions. But I’m continuing the tradition I started in 2014. For now, I’m only asking about Open Air and will set aside a page just for their Open Air answers – IF they answer.
| the burg watch: As you know, Open Air remains a contentious issue, especially because of Councillor Crain’s motion to not revisit it until the end of this term. Will you remove barriers that deny people with disabilities equal access to the community when streets are closed during Open Air weekends? Lena Lazanja: In the planning/application stages of public events in Amherstburg, accessibility concerns are addressed by the Accessibility Advisory Committee to ensure that all events (including Open Air) are made accessible for residents/public. To be clear, to provide “accessibility” (for Open Air) the event organizers should focus on the proactive design and/or modification of products, devices, services, or environments to ensure they can be used equitably by everyone, including people with disabilities. The purpose of providing an equitable environment is to remove physical, technological, and systemic barriers, allowing all individuals independent and equal access. Sometimes, such barriers are not immediately recognized by event planners. For example, socio-ecomomic barriers are often overlooked, due to it being “invisible”. Many times, barriers are only fully recognized once an event is underway, through lived experience. For this reason, it is critical that organizers and committees frequently re-evaluate event plans. refer to the public’s feedback, to fully understand accessibility issues and address them properly, as they come to light. As a Councillor, I would assume that the Accessibility Advisory Committee was adept at ensuring all events including Open Air are accessible in Amherstburg, because that is their job. However, should new concerns arise, based on evidence and public input, it would be negligent of me if I did not look into the matter further. Creating and maintaining accessible environments is a team effort, so that everyone is able to enjoy what Amherstburg has to offer. Linda, I hope this answers your question. Also, I would be willing to continue to participate in your blog postings by answering any questions you might have throughout the campaign months ahead. However, I would appreciate you removing my/other candidates names from a “did not respond” section. Campaign time is a very busy time, and sometimes candidates are so inundated with information and requests, that some things slip through the cracks. We are not required to answer blog requests for public posting. Since it is voluntary, I know that we would appreciate not being singled out…as in my case, it makes me appear as though I refuse to reply, rather than a simple oversight. I appreciate your support on this. Also, for future reference, my last name is Lazanja (you have misspelled my name on your blog) the burg watch: I did not include you, as you state, in a “did not respond” section. I will not remove your name or other candidates’ names because I reported factually, the “candidates that haven’t answered to date.” You may not be familiar with my blog but in a 2014 post I acknowledged, “While the candidates have never been obliged to answer, by doing so allows for scrutiny beyond the campaign marketing materials. Some candidates’ answers are thorough, well thought out and responsive; others have ignored requests for specificity and others are misinformed.” I will always continue the tradition of naming candidates that aren’t responsive. Readers have a right to know if their concerns will ‘slip through the cracks,’ regardless of the excuse. I’m sure you can appreciate people not coming to your facebook page and telling you what content you should or should not be sharing with your readers. I have corrected the misspelling of your name, but I left your misspelling in place – another tradition to record verbatim responses.Answers and questions back from other candidates will be posted in future posts.Candidates that haven’t answered to date: Frank Cerasa |
Council Members’ 2022 Campaign Financial Statements
A look back at the current council members’ 2022 financial campaign statements.
Opinion – Performative political rhetoric vs. reality
Flag raising and speeches emphasizing the importance of seniors and people with disabilities requires minimal effort, although it mirrors the town’s adherence to minimal standards.
Amherstburg’s ‘age friendly’ status was celebrated but no one could describe the “initiatives that help make our community more welcoming and accessible for seniors.”
Reactivating the seniors advisory committee and paving the disgraceful seniors centre parking lot would be meaningful and impactful.
Prue’s dig to critics of a slow pace was followed by an explanation; they work within budgets and try their very best to commit to accessibility.
Council took no meaningful action regarding the number one complaint of accessibility in the residents’ Open Air survey.
Residents’ feedback is ignored, dismissed or doubted. I was denied the opportunity to delegate to council about the multi-year accessibility plan.
On the contrary, council exercised no restraint when it committed almost $500,000 for pickleball. Only after the motion carried did Prue ask, “how do we pay for it?”
Julie Spasuk mentioned in her letter to the RTT last week how $1000 in paint and signage would make a meaningful difference. But the years long barriers continue despite the pleas for access.
Accessible parking spaces throughout town lack proper signage and therefore avoid enforcement.
The town was to highlight new accessible parking spaces during National AccessAbility Week. However, I question their useability.
One space adjacent to Briar Ridge park for $500 in paint and signage requires right wheels to curb to exit onto what? a curb? grass? There’s also a raised edge barrier to the sidewalk entrance.
Residents noticed the two pickleball court spaces are in the wrong place with incorrect dimensions and provide no barrier free path to the viewing area.
Having advocated for a strong commitment to accessibility for decades, I can confidently state the flag raising and proclamation are performative.
There is a wide gap between political rhetoric and the many barriers Amherstburg’s residents with disabilities encounter daily.
Linda Saxon
Windsor Police Negotiations: Councillor Pouget’s Inquiry
Councillor Pouget emailed questions pertaining to a River Town Times article about Councillor Crain’s and Deputy Mayor Gibb’s meeting with Windsor Mayor Drew Dilkens to Mayor Prue, CAO Critchley and council on June 11.
Critchley provided information to which she is privy, set out below Pouget’s questions.
Pouget: I am corresponding with you this morning, regarding an article that appeared in the River Town Times on June 10, 2026, written by Ron Giofu.
As you are aware, I was in a Conflict of Interest, regarding policing, due to a close family member working for the Windsor Police Service. I publicly declared this conflict each and every time, that policing was discussed. When Amherstburg announced, that we were no longer negotiating with Windsor Police, I was no longer in a conflict.
However, on March 9, 2026, I discovered at an In-camera Meeting, that I was once again in a conflict, regarding Item E – Negotiations associated with policing services in the Town of Amherstburg, and I declared accordingly. I did not know the outcome of that meeting, nor should I.
Since then, my close family member has retired effective May 1, 2026 from Windsor Police/Amherstburg and I am no longer in conflict.
I am only aware of police negotiations through the media. I was surprised and very concerned to learn, that 2 members of Council met with Windsor Mayor Drew Dilkens to discuss policing, even though it states, that our Council voted twice to discontinue talks with Windsor Policing.
With all due respect, I am requesting the following information regarding said article:
- Who gave permission to Councillor Crain and Deputy Mayor Gibb to meet with Mayor Dilkens, on behalf of the Town of Amherstburg, if Council had already rejected negotiating with Windsor Police on 2 occasions?
Critchley: I do not have any information on this question. - If either person requests a reconsideration regarding policing, will I be provided all pertinent information, so that I may speak and vote on all policing issues? Gibb’s statement: “We will just have to wait and see what Council decides. I am looking forward to having the discussion publicly.”
Critchley: Yes, as you no longer have a conflict, you will be provided with all information on the matter.
- I find Deputy Mayor Gibb’s statement demoralizing for the Mayor: “Why the mayor (Prue) didn’t talk to Mayor Dilkens, you’ll have to ask him.” There is no mention of former dialogue exchanged between our 2 municipalities, that led to this conflict.
Critchley: I do not have any information on this item. - Crain and Gibb refer to a an Amherstburg resident on board, that makes a debate worth happening. When time permits, will you please advise, who the resident is and how many times he or she has corresponded with the Town of Amherstburg, regarding our mutual agreement with Windsor Policing? What information has he or she supplied, if any?
Critchley: There is a Provincial Appointee on the Board named David Hammond whom I believe lives in Amherstburg. I have never received any correspondence from him.
related: Amherstburg Resident On Windsor Police Service Board
Inconsistencies: Deputy Mayor Gibb On Committees
Deputy Mayor Gibb’s inconsistent approach to committees’ involvement: committees are ‘experts’ but they shouldn’t determine service level.
May 13, 2024 Council meeting
Big Creek watershed email from resident and discussion.
“I’m not going to oppose this motion. I mean, it is what it is. I just personally, I think it’s a little bit, um, I think that this should have gone through the environmental committee. I kind of feel bad that we’re cutting them out of the loop because that’s really their purview. But like I said, this is, I’m not going to oppose it on that. I just think in the future we should think about our committees because they meet and they’re the experts. I would have preferred it to go through that committee first,” said Gibb.
June 25, 2024 Council meeting
Gibb asked Councillor Pouget to clarify her motion to “make a motion to direct administration to request the audit and finance committee to perform a cost analysis study of the Libro Centre.”
“As a member of town council, I’m not comfortable with having a committee determine the level of service that we’re going to provide to our residents. That’s, I think a decision of Council. I would be glad to have that discussion during budget as far as the Libro Centre budget goes, but I can’t support having a committee make that decision for our residents.” said Gibb following clarification.
Flag raising another minimal effort
Another ceremony. Another speech. Another photo op.
Some of Amherstburg’s politicians attended the town’s National AccessAbility Week flag raising ceremony at the Libro Wednesday morning.
Aside from Councillor Diane Pouget, the only council member who has consistently advocated on behalf of residents with disabilities, the others embraced the optics of inclusion.
Mayor Prue delivered a political speech. It sounded like he was reading from a script meant to assure the small crowd that accessibility and inclusion matter in Amherstburg.
I wasn’t convinced. Formed by my lived experience as a person with a disability, attitudinal barriers guide decisions that negatively impact Amherstburg’s disability population.
Prue recognized council members in attendance and wanted to thank the members of the Disability Committee.
(The correct name is the Amherstburg Accessibility Advisory Committee).
“It’s National Accessibility Week, and across all of Ontario, across many parts of Canada, people are wearing red shirts. If you’re wondering, some people, why there’s so many red shirts here today, this is the, this is the logo for today, Red Shirt Day, and people are coming together to celebrate and to acknowledge the accessibility, the importance of accessibility in all of our communities.”
(No, red shirts are not the logo. Red Shirt Day is an Easter Seals Society initiative that is held on the Wednesday during National AccessAbility Week).
Prue acknowledged, at least on this occasion, “that many individuals continue to face barriers every day. These barriers can limit participation and independence, and it is our shared responsibility to remove them.”
(Yet my input on barriers that prevent equal participation has been ignored, dismissed and has resulted in litigation against the town and town clerk).
“Accessibility and inclusion go hand in hand when we design a community to be inclusive, we create a better, more welcoming place for everyone.”
(Yes, but stating a fact doesn’t make it a reality).
Prue then stated council remains, “committed to preventing and reducing barriers in Amherstburg, and to working alongside our accessibility advisory committee, community partners, and residents to make meaningful progress.
(oh, but my April delegation request to call for council to act and create a community engagement policy was denied).
“I just want to say on behalf of the town council, on behalf of everybody who is here, occasionally, some of you may think that we don’t do things fast enough, but I will tell you, within the budgets we have, we try our very best to make that commitment that every event, every festival, every street, every playground, everything that we do has accessibility written right into it.
(Every street can’t have accessibility written right into it when it’s closed. Fourteen weekends of closures that prevent equal access to our own community. Street closures have nothing to do with money or timelines but I think they have everyting to do with attitudinal barriers).
“We’re very proud in the last this year to open two or three new playgrounds, all of which are hugely, hugely accessible.”
(No, they’re not hugely accessible. They’re minimally accessible according to minimal standards).
“They’re designed for children, especially to make sure that they have the same opportunities as other children to go to the playgrounds and to participate in all of the very best ways…”
(Some children with disabilities will not have the same opportunities because minimally accessible playgrounds will exclude some children).
Prue thanked the accessibility committee again, noting they meet about once a month, and they have a lot of thorny issues.
(The committee does not meet monthly, and I don’t recall thorny issues being dealt with. The committee didn’t even discuss my list of barriers encountered when voting).
“They are the eyes and ears of our community, and they advise us as councillors what to do and how to make the community more accessible,” said Prue.
(But Amherstburg isn’t an inclusive community. There are legislative obligations to consult with the public and people with disabilities as well as the committee. I asked for the dates of those consultations; no answer).
Before Prue read the proclamation, he explained his chain of office.
“The chain of office is worn every time there’s a big public event where something of note takes place, or when the mayor is with important people, this is this meets all three criteria. So that’s why it’s being worn today, because you are important. All of you are important to our town in making sure that we do right by the people who need just that little nudge to fully participate.”
(And the ‘nudge’ comment convinced me this was just another speech. It confirmed my belief that attitudinal barriers are prevalent along with a disability model that should’ve faded away a long time ago).
Prue then read the proclamation.
What are the candidates’ position on Open Air? Bill Petruniak
Sometimes they play favourites and don’t answer my questions. But I’m continuing the tradition I started in 2014. For now, I’m only asking about Open Air and will set aside a page just for their Open Air answers – IF they answer.
| the burg watch: As you know, Open Air remains a contentious issue, especially because of Councillor Crain’s motion to not revisit it until the end of this term. Will you remove barriers that deny people with disabilities equal access to the community when streets are closed during Open Air weekends? Bill Petruniak: I sent a proposal to council last year as a compromise solution. They did not respond. The reason given is that they could not discuss Open Air until 2027. I proposed to open up Dalhousie street for one way traffic from North to South and only block off the east vehicle lane. This would allow more parking, access to at least a couple of handicap parking spaces, and make it possible for people who are physically challenged to be dropped off right at Richmond and Dalhousie. I offered to pay for all signage and to even make the sign posts. No reply. This would not satisfy all AODA requirements but at least it would be a start. I asked that a dialogue be started regarding making Richmond more accessible during Open Air but no response either. None of them seem to care. May 25. Answers and questions back from other candidates will be posted in future posts. Candidates that haven’t answered to date: Frank Cerasa |
the burg watch 