Category Archives: Accountability

Amherstburg Accessibility Advisory Committee’s Motion vs. Administration Report

Posted on by

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?

I Am Not A Piece Of Paper

Posted on by

The April 10 Accessibility Advisory Committee minutes on council’s May 13 agenda do not accurately reflect the motion made regarding my delegation.

On April 10, I asked the committee numerous questions about accessibility at the proposed hotel at 256 Dalhousie. 

Following my delegation, Chair Shirley Curson-Prue asked, “Could I have a motion to receive the report please?” The audio is available online. No report was presented, and the minutes incorrectly state the motion was ‘that the delegation be received.’ 

During my June 23, 2022 delegation at the Amherstburg Accessibility Advisory Committee meeting, I mentioned that one question that is repeatedly asked is do we need a motion. I also encouraged the committee to review duties of the Chair and members.

Following my delegation, Chair Shirley Curson-Prue asked, “May I have a motion to receive this document?” The audio is available online. No document was presented and the June 23 meeting minutes incorrectly state the motion was ‘that the delegation be received.’ 

If administration is correcting improperly stated motions, perhaps committee members need training to accurately word motions, especially to receive delegates who are not pieces of paper. 

41 Minute Efficient Council Meeting

Posted on by

No, not Amherstburg. The May 1 County of Essex Council meeting lasted 41 minutes. It was a short agenda but still, there was no passing the gavel, no admin whispering into the chair’s ear, no wait a minute the CAO, clerk or other employee wants to speak, no long winded speeches, no multiple or repetitive comments on the same topic, no confusion about motions. Just efficient handling of business at hand. Deputy Mayor Gibb did share a personal anecdote about one of his daughters, although I’m not sure why; what has that got to do with the issue?

Preferential Treatment Of Delegates

Posted on by

The April 22 council meeting seemed typical: Prue passing the gavel, speeches guised as questions, confusion about whether motions were made, the difference between notices of motions and motions, personal anecdotes, windbaggery, and Deputy Mayor Gibb’s refusal to allow an audience member wanting to speak. I expected once again Councillor Crain would be the one to object. But what stood out was the preferential treatment of delegate Linda DiPasquale, who spoke for 8 minutes and 40 seconds. At no time did the mayor stop her after the procedural by-law mandatory 5 minute limit and ask for a motion to continue as required.

This wasn’t the first time a delegate was welcome to exceed the time limit. The Amherstburg Soccer Club’s delegation at council’s March 14, 2022 meeting was 18 minutes, followed by a 48 minute question and answer session with members of council and staff for a total of 66 minutes.

Open Air Approved/Not Approved

Posted on by

Open Air was approved during budget, according to Deputy Mayor Gibb, but Councillor Pouget stated it was not approved. Where’s the motion?

On March 26, the day after the March 25 council meeting discussion of Open Air, I requested the information below from CAO Critchley, who answered on Saturday during the long weekend, noted in blue after each request.

  1. council’s motion to approve Open Air for 2024. 
    All motions were referenced in the report that went to Council on March 25, 2024, a copy of which can be found on the Town website.
  2. the cost of open air for 2023. 
    This information is contained in the presentation  made by the Director of Development/Deputy CAO at the Council Meeting of March 25, 2024, which presentation will be attached to the Minutes of this meeting. The Minutes of the meeting will be available on the website once approved by Council.
  3. what undue hardship the town would endure if open air ended. 
    As the words used in this question have a particular meaning in law, I will refrain from answering it in this venue.
  4. any documentation that administration included the exclusion of people with disabilities as a risk in an open air risk analysis. 
    The footprint for Open Air was reviewed by the Accessibility Advisory Committee in December 2023. The minutes of that meeting are also available on the website.

    I emailed back: Question 3 does have meaning in law but that shouldn’t prevent you from answering it; you didn’t answer question 4 which should be yes or no and if yes, include documentation. I didn’t ask about the accessibility committee that, as everyone should be aware, cannot speak on behalf of council or administration. I specifically asked about administration.

Don’t Like The Rules? Object!

Posted on by

The Heritage Committee has drafted a council resolution, something that I would have thought was outside the committee’s mandate. It seems ironic that residents are expected to comply with the rules, including the more restrictive Procedural By-law, but provincial rules are sometimes met with objections from the town.

April 10, 2024 Council Agenda iincludes: 17.1 Heritage Committee Meeting Minutes – March 21, 2024

  • The Heritage Committee recommends that:
  • The following Council Resolution BE ADOPTED and BE CIRCULATED as appropriate:

WHEREAS Subsection 27(16) of the Ontario Heritage Act stipulates that any non-designated heritage property listed on the municipal register of properties as of December 31, 2022 shall be removed from the municipal register on or before January 1, 2025, if the Council of the municipality does not give a notice of intention to designate the property under subsection 29(1) of the Ontario Heritage Act on or before January 1, 2025.

WHEREAS Since January 1, 2023, municipal staff and members of the municipal heritage committee in this municipality have been diligently working to: review the municipal heritage register; research the heritage value and interest of listed (non-designated) properties; review and research the heritage value and interest of non-designated properties; contact owners of such properties; determine which properties should potentially be designated in accordance with the provision of Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act; and take all required steps to designate such properties; and

WHEREAS the above-noted work involving 125 listed properties in this municipality is extremely time consuming and cannot be completed by December 31, 2024 with the limited municipal resources available.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

This Council authorize Administration to send a letter to Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario, and Michael Ford, Minister of Citizenship and Multiculturalism, requesting that Subsection 27(16) of the Ontario Heritage Act be amended to extend the above-noted deadline for five years from January 1, 2025 to January 1, 2030.

The Town of Amherstburg already requested two extension requests for the legislated website accessibility compliance deadline.

Listen To The Music

Posted on by

Bethany D’Alimonte, Musicland owner, delegated at the March 25 council meeting in favour of Open Air. Listen to the audio at the end of this post.

Councillor Pouget was the first to thank D’Alimonte and asked if she was representing the entire core area downtown or just a specific group; D’Alimonte said she was representing all businesses. Pouget asked if she got permission from all the businesses including the hairdressing shops and the barber shops. D’Alimonte said she talked to pretty much everyone downtown and they’re not against Open Air; they’re against the people who are overbearing it.

When Pouget asked what she meant by ‘overbearing, D’Alimonte answered that they are against the people who are trying to come at them saying that they are against open air; that they’re not against open air and words have been twisted.

Pouget relayed that last year there were a large number of businesses that did not feel 14 weeks was a good compromise, that it was going to hurt their businesses and they left in tears.

Councillor Donald McArthur then thanked D’Alimonte and mentioned in the old days if you needed equipment in a pinch to play music you had to go all the way to Windsor; now they can go to downtown Amherstburg; he thinks it’s fantastic. He asked about summer plans, D’Alimonte’s garage door, and if it was her intention to play music and fill the streets with the beautiful music.

D’Alimonte said plans for the summer were to incorporate what they did last year; they added to open air by having live music off their front stage; she mentioned plans to host an open mic night and this year do it from their stage as well as one weekend near the town clock and stage.

Councillor Courtney also thanked D’Alimonte and asked about the spike in revenues she said she noticed. D’Alimonte repeated the 151.9%. Courtney asked if she attributed that strictly to the open air, the closing of the streets for generating that profit? D’Alimonte said she did.

D’Alimonte agreed with Courtney that she was fortunate to be in the footprint of open air and very grateful for the opportunity.

Listen to the audio.

Open Air Questions Linger A Year Later – Undue Hardship?

Posted on by

Last spring, following my delegation to council regarding Open Air, I emailed members of council.

2023

request: a description of the undue hardship the town would endure if all the Open Air barriers were to be removed so everyone could equally participate in the community, on and in publicly owned public spaces, as i explained on Monday, March 13, 2023.

two weeks later: it’s now been two weeks since i asked the question below which hasn’t been answered. if no elected official can provide a description of the undue hardship, maybe someone could find the answer from administration? or if members of administration are receiving emails to council, one could answer? I expect someone would know the answer and await it.

Councillor Pouget answered: I do not know the answer to your question.  Do I have your permission to forward your email to administration for their review and response?

2024

Followup subsequent to my delegation to council regarding Open Air Monday night, I emailed Councillor Pouget: did you ever get an answer to my question that i asked on march 15, 2023? 

march 15, 2023: i’m writing to request a description of the undue hardship the town would endure if all the Open Air barriers were to be removed so everyone could equally participate in the community, on and in publicly owned public spaces, as i explained on Monday, March 13, 2023.

Councillor Pouget answered: Sorry, I did not receive a response.

Email request to CAO Critchley, cc to council:

  1. council’s motion to approve Open Air for 2024.
  2. the cost of open air for 2023.
  3. what undue hardship the town would endure if open air ended.
  4. any documentation that administration included the exclusion of people with disabilities as a risk in an open air risk analysis.

Councillor Pouget answered:

  1. To my knowledge, there was no motion to approve Open Air in 2024.
  2. There is no official cost for Open Air in 2023 because it did not include the cost of our Public Works employees.
  3. I personally don’t believe there would be any undue hardship for the Town if open air ended.
  4. Council has never received any documentation to include the exclusion of people as a risk in an open air risk analysis.

Will Street Signs Meant To Honour Veterans Be Readable?

Posted on by

There were the typical kudos to admin for getting the job done so quickly, to Deputy Mayor Gibb for raising the issue before he was elected, and to the Legion for their ‘sense of community.’

How appropriate is it to honour veterans but not ensure signs are large enough for them or other people with vision disabilities to read? 

I emailed members of council in advance of the February 12 meeting and stated there is no mention in the report of accessible sign design or design standards. I urged members to consider the fact that Highway Gothic typeface is mainly used throughout Canada and Ontario, including on provincial highways and in cities including Windsor; it makes reading signs easier.

Mayor Prue did ask council to consider making the signs larger and mentioned that it didn’t cost any more money, but he could have made the motion himself especially since he passed the gavel.

Amid the claims that we are an inclusive community, possibly striving to become a designated ‘age friendly’ community, it was deplorable to hear a question about the cost of bigger signs and an answer that there is an assumption there will be some additional costs. Given the budget approval, how does anyone justify limiting funds for this expenditure? Besides, if the signs will slowly be replaced council could have directed administration to bring back a report on the cost with actual figures for larger and more readable signs. 

When the town applied for a $100,000. grant for wayfinding signs, one of the project priorities it listed was ‘accessible, diverse, equitable and inclusive: The sign design will take into consideration AODA requirements, MTO roadway recommendations and eligibility standards.’ Did the town create a wayfinding plan? Consult the Ontario Traffic Manual? Consult the CNIB?

Why were those priorities not incorporated for the poppy street sign designs? I have asked that the town’s procurement policy be updated to include more than the consideration of AODA training. The AODA Integrated Accessibility Standard Regulation states designated public sector organizations shall incorporate accessibility design, criteria and features when procuring or acquiring goods, services or facilities. 

Council needs to make a stronger and more consistent commitment to removing barriers in our community. Still, council’s motion will result in a celebration that will be a great photo op and a reminder to pay tribute to veterans even if the signs are too small for some to read.