Will council agree with its Accessibility Advisory Committee’s (AAAC) motion that this is not just about accessibility or with an administration report to council that accessibility funding should be used?

I shared my concerns with Councillor McArthur, council’s rep to the Committee, and Councillor Pouget who attended the AAAC meeting when the discussion occurred.

1. Shouldn’t rest areas be more important than more planters?
   
   In my January email, I urged council to embrace the spirit of the AODA and consult the public regarding Richmond Street sidewalk repairs even though the report to council did not mention public consultation in accordance with the AODA’s Integrated Accessibility Standards Regulation regarding exterior paths of travel, rest areas:

‘Designated public sectors when constructing new or redeveloping existing exterior paths of travel that they intend to maintain, shall consult on the design and placement of rest areas along the exterior path of travel and shall do so in the following manner: 

1. the public and persons with disabilities.
2. a municipal accessibility advisory committee if one exits.’
   
3. Why use AODA Compliance Reserve Fund?

The January 29 administration report recommended using funds accrued within the accessibility compliance reserve fund which are intended for repairs and improvements designed to reduce or remove barriers and promote greater access to public spaces, goods and services.

The May 13 administration report states the AODA compliance reserve fund was introduced in 2017 as an annual contribution to the reserves of the town of Amherstburg for municipal building and infrastructure improvements to eliminate barriers with regards to accessibility.

The August 2016 Accessibility Advisory Committee Minutes indicate the motion that administration develop a policy that the committee reviews and edits to ensure the town is promoting accessibility in the strategic plan and ask that $50,000 a year starting in the 2017 annual capital budget be set aside for promoting accessibility in public buildings. 

• Which recommendation should prevail?

The Accessibility Advisory Committee’s April 10 motion, following concerns that AODA Compliance Funds were to be used for the Richmond St. sidewalk repairs, was that council consider the reconsideration of the funding source for reduction by 50%. 

The clerk advised the committee that his professional recommendation to council would be to use that fund because that is why that fund was created.

• What type of motion is required?

At the April 10 committee meeting, Councillor McArthur asked, couldn’t council in that very meeting make a motion to reconsider it and then either Council says yes to 50% or no to 50% but it could proceed on the same timeline? 

The clerk answered that yes, if the motion was carefully worded, where it asked for the funding consideration to be reviewed, he didn’t think there would be any reason why they couldn’t be shifted after they were already spent. If for example, it was 31,000 drawn out of the reserve but this recommendation was that it shouldn’t be funded from this reserve then Council could pull the funds from another reserve to replenish that; they do journal entries all the time.

The clerk repeated that if the committee wished to have council look at that and fund it from a different source if it was worded right the project could continue.

Councillor Donald McArthur stated if the committee is comfortable with 50% he’d happily go to council and ask them to reconsider the funding source. 

The May report to council addresses a reconsideration. ‘It is debatable whether such a motion would be permissible though, as portions of the original motion which would be the subject of the reconsideration have already been acted upon, and as such, are not open to be reconsidered. The reconsideration of the funding source would need to be considered outside of the reconsideration on the consultation and/or whether the works should be undertaken. A less procedurally fraught motion would be to cause $16,000 worth of funding to be redirected to the AODA Compliance Reserve fund, from another funding source to offset the associated costs. That said, such a motion is not recommended by Administration as funding this $16,000 from another reserve creates a need to identify $16,000 of unbudgeted and unplanned expense which may have adverse impacts on other projects.’

Didn’t council approve $450,000. of unbudgeted and unplanned expense for pickleball?