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.