The Seminary of Sacred Knowledge appealed the town’s refusal of the Zoning By-law Amendment to permit the addition of a student residence to an existing school.
Following the August 14 video hearing, a September 20 decision was issued.
Category Archives: Accountability
Council Questioned On Procedural By-law
On September 24, I emailed questions to all members of council.
Councillor Pouget emailed CAO Critchley this morning, These are all very good questions and I for one, would appreciate answers to them, concerning our new procedural by-law. When time permits, will you or one of your staff please respond to all copied in this email?
Critchley answered the questions this morning.
the burg watch: how was it determined that Mr. Bolger will be a ‘presentation’ at the September 25 council meeting instead of a ‘delegation’ when presentation is not defined in the by-law and he will be speaking to an agenda item like a delegate?
Critchley: A “presentation” is a form of a delegation and so the rules for delegations apply equally. Mr. Bolger registered within the time frame set out in the Procedure By-law and notice of the delegation was made public with the revised Agenda which was posted on Friday.
the burg watch: please explain the stipulation that a unanimous vote is required for council to waive the rules to allow audience members to speak freely.
Critchley: The new Procedure By-law has been changed to state that Agendas will now be posted publicly 10 days before a Council meeting. With this change, members of the public have ample time to review the Agenda and determine if they wish to register as delegations (by noon on the Friday preceding the meeting). Given this expanded timeline, there should be very few situations where someone cannot register to delegate in a timely manner. As such, there is now a rule that there must be a unanimous vote of Council to waive these rules. I would note that having procedures around delegations is a normal part of public meeting management that reflect municipal best practices, and that they are needed in order to run an orderly and professional meeting.
the burg watch: did members give any consideration to ontario human rights code accommodations of persons with disabilities when voting to approve the new by-law?
Critchley: I cannot speak to what each member of Council considered when voting on the new by-law. However, I will say that, had any member asked if the new rules complied with the Ontario Human Rights Code, I would have advised them that it does. There is nothing in the new rules that would prohibit a person with disabilities from registering as a presentation or delegation and the Town’s Procedure By-law is in keeping with municipal best practices.
the burg watch: on what date did members of council give direction to admin to update the by-law?
Critchley: August 14, 2023
the burg watch: and, since my september 8 email has not been answered, would you please describe the procedure for delegates to council meetings regarding items that do not appear on the agenda?
Critchley: By “items that do not appear on the agenda” I am assuming you are referring to items raised during “new business”. Should a member of Council raise an item at this portion of the meeting that someone wishes to speak to, Council can direct that a report on the item be prepared for a future meeting and delegations will be able to register to speak to those items in accordance with the Procedure By-law.
the burg watch: The by-law should have defined presentation and the public should have been consulted during the draft stage, a best practice other municipalities utilize. Nowhere can I find the ‘unanimous’ rule; and obviously, you cannot speak to what each member of council considered when voting. My questions were addressed to the members who, as you all know, are mandated to ‘develop and evaluate the policies and programs of the municipality.’
Hotel Dispute Hearing Date Set
An Ontario Land Tribunal public video hearing will be held on October 6 at 10:00 am regarding the Zoning By-law Amendment application council approved in May for the boutique hotel at 256 Dalhousie.
Comparing Procedural By-law Delegate Rules
The Town of Amherstburg’s newly adopted procedural bylaw seems more restrictive than it used to be.
When Mayor Prue noticed a raised hand at the September 11 council meeting, he stated a unanimous vote was required to allow Mr. Amlin to speak.
Section 5, Introduction, states: Any procedure under this By-law which is discretionary and not mandatory under statute may be suspended with the consent of a majority of the members present.
Section 14.5, CONDUCT OF PROCEEDINGS states: The rules of procedure may be suspended by a unanimous vote of Council and shall be time limited and specific.
- Town of Essex If a Delegation is not registered with the Clerk, and Council, by a two-thirds vote of the Members present at the Meeting, gives the Delegation permission to address Council, the Delegation shall only address Council with respect to an item on the published Agenda.
- Town of Kingsville offers residents choices to submit a request or make a written delegation instead of speaking (a procedure that I asked our municipality to establish). Also, for the Committee of the Whole, the Chair may relax the procedural rules to facilitate informal discussion as between the public, Staff and the Members, including but not limited to relaxing the rules related to delegation speaking time and registration.
- Town of Lakeshore written request prior to the council meeting; if no application made, may be heard on a 2/3 vote of Council to speak an agenda item and have options to appear: In-person; computer or smart device or phone.There are also separate Rules for Public Presentations (a person or group wishing to present new items not on the Council meeting agenda).
- Town of LaSalle has separate rules for Delegations – Items on the Agenda – written request by noon at least 4 days prior to the meeting; Delegations – Public Meeting -not required to provide advance written notice of their intention to speak; Delegations – Items Not on the Agenda – submit a written request as outlined in Section 9.2 by noon at least 21 days prior the Meeting; Delegations – Presentation – certain partner and external Persons may be granted presentation status in order to inform Members of matters of significance to the Town. noteworthy: the table of contents links to the sections.
- Town of Leamington offers choices: Delegates can notify the clerk prior to the agenda or can request to delegate to address an item listed on the agenda or if not listed on the agenda as a delegation may request permission at the council meeting to address Council which may be granted upon a resolution of council members.
- Town of Tecumseh Persons desiring to verbally present information on matters of fact or make a request of council, shall give written notice to the Clerk seven (7) days in advance of the meeting at which they wish to appear; shall state the topic to be discussed and any request to be made of the members. noteworthy: It shall be the duty of the Clerk to ensure that the minutes of the last regular meeting and all subsequent special meetings held more than three (3) days prior to a regular meeting, are placed on the next following regular Council meeting agenda.
- Strathroy-Caradoc Right of Public Input and Notice The public has the right to have input and receive Notice of the public decision-making process. The methods for doing so include: writing to the Clerk or Secretary, submitting a petition, or speaking as a Delegation. Should an individual wish to be provided with further Notice related to a matter of business, they are required to indicate this wish to the Clerk or Secretary on the prescribed form; Anyone requesting to address the Members on an item that is not on the agenda may do so at the sole discretion of the Chair; Delegations in person may be permitted at the discretion of the Chair.
- Scugog A delegation not listed on the agenda requires at least a Two-Thirds Majority of the Members present.
- Lincoln The Clerk provides the Chair with all requests to delegate submitted after the deadlines for Council consideration; a majority vote is required to permit the delegate to speak.
- Owen Sound A person may ask a question of the Members on any matter during the Public Question Period portion of a meeting.
Inconsistencies: When Is A Delegate Not A Delegate?
The September 25 council meeting supplementary agenda is for one item: a Presentation – Re: Item 13.2 Street Naming – Brittany Crescent and Stone Street – Norbert Bolger; there are no attachments.
The September 25 revised agenda lists the same item, also without attachments.
The newly adopted Procedural By-law (August 14) definitions include: “Delegation” means a person intending to address the Council or committee on a matter where a decision of the Council may be required.
‘Presentation’ is not defined but ‘delegation’ is and section 9.4 clearly sets out the ‘rules’ for delegations.
9.4 Delegations during other proceedings of Council or Committees are permitted in relation to matters listed on the agenda stemming from all Administrative reports and by-laws; in accordance with the following:
a) Persons wishing to delegate at any Council or Committee meetings, shall advise the Clerk, no later than the Thursday before the meeting. Delegations shall provide their name, contact information, association with any organization (if applicable and the agenda item to be addressed);
b) Delegation requests will first be reviewed to determine if it is merely seeking information and if so, will be directed to the appropriate member of Administration for a response;
c) All delegations shall indicate the item on the agenda they wish to speak to, what action they wish the Assembly to take and shall provide a copy of any material intended for public distribution;
d) 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.
Since Mr. Bolger will be speaking before council ‘in relation to matters listed on the agenda stemming from all Administrative reports,’ why is he a ‘presentation’ and not a ‘delegation’?
Minutes Need To Be Corrected
The September 11 minutes, attached to the September 25 agenda contain errors:
CAO Critchley is noted as being present, however Mayor Prue stated she was on vacation and Deputy CAO Osbourne was seated next to Prue where Critchley usually sits.
Motion Flooding
Councillor Pouget’s motion was to direct administration to provide Council with a complete report, regarding the recent flooding issues in Amherstburg and administration’s recommendations related to flooding control, including the possibility of any necessary upgrades to our sewage treatment plant and/or pumping stations, and the possible installation of any generator(s), if required. We are requesting this report prior to the 2024 budget deliberations. Before it was carried unanimously, Prue called on the clerk.
clerk: The only thing I was going to add is when the mayor approached us regarding this, we had prepared a motion. I understand you have a motion as well. The motion would have read Council direct administration provide a report regarding the recent flooding event of August 23 and 24 with recommendations related to flooding control, including any upgrades municipal drain pumping stations affected by the recent flooding event. This report is to be brought to council prior to the 2024 budget deliberations. So I think it captures the spirit of what you’re intending as well.
The minutes state what the motion would have read: Council direct Administration TO PROVIDE a report regarding the recent flooding event of August 23rd and 24th with recommendations related to flooding control, including any upgrades to municipal drain pumping stations affected by the recent flooding event. This report is to be brought to Council prior to the 2024 budget deliberations.
What’s omitted? complete report, sewage treatment plant, and the possible installation of any generator(s).
Listen to the audio.
Motion Boblo Dock
Councillor Pouget moved: To direct administration to correspond with the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries to request the immediate removal of the old Boblo Dock in the Town of Amherstburg, due to safety concerns in one of the busiest waterways, the Detroit River. Further to that, we are requesting administration to provide photos to back our fears of a section of that dock breaking off and causing serious injury or impeding boat traffic in the shipping channel, before inclement weather sets in.
The motion read aloud was:
To direct administration to send a letter and photos to the Honorable Chris Lewis, to ask a question of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans during discussions to understand why the former Boblo Dock has not yet been removed. Carried Unanimously after Prue stated he’s not honourable.
The minutes state:
That a letter to Chris Lewis, MP BE SENT to request that a question is asked in the House of Commons to the Minister of Fisheries, Oceans in regards to the Bob-Lo Dock.
What’s omitted? photos.
This isn’t the first time minutes have been erroneous.
Town’s Organization Chart 2022
Click to view full screen: former members of council are listed.
September 11 Council Meeting RECAP Part 1
Awkward comes to mind; out of order business, a resident being denied an opportunity to speak, motions/notices of motion, belabouring points, apologies and then the usual time wasters like passing the gavel and stating a question was already answered when someone else asked it.
Another time-waster, kudos. Compliments from Mayor Prue for admin being almost up to date with the minutes; Councillor Crain thanked and commended staff for a 50,000 surplus being used for future maintenance projects at the Libro; Councillor McArthur didn’t want to throw staff under the bus – they spent a lot of time crafting that new procedural bylaw.
During the Duffy’s discussion, when Mayor Prue noticed a raised hand in the audience, he stated that council changed the procedural bylaw and that generally does not allow for this; council would now have to unanimously vote to hear Mr. Amlin.
Is it ironic that the August 1 memo to council was titled, Procedural By-law Renewal for Greater Civic Participation and Engagement?
Deputy Mayor Gibb opined they cannot give an opportunity to people who are physically in the room that they aren’t giving to people who are watching from home for whatever reason, be it you know, physically not being able to be here. He said he was sorry but he wasn’t going to support it. He felt it was a question of equity between those who can physically be here and those who can’t.
Mayor Prue stated he didn’t have to go any further, it wasn’t unanimous; he also apologized and advised Mr. Amlin they couldn’t hear him.
Councillor McArthur wanted to back up Gibb as he didn’t want to leave him hanging out on a limb. He stated they’ve all received emails that it’s unfair to people who can’t be present in the room and to have people in the gallery come up and speak. You know, that’s one reason. And the second reason is he didn’t want to throw staff under the bus. They spent a lot of time crafting that new procedural bylaw to address what they perceive were deficiencies that could potentially allow meetings to go off the rails. He mentioned as a former journalist, he loved it but doesn’t anymore; it sends a bad message to staff. They unanimously supported that procedural Bylaw and he also apologized to Mr. Amlin.
At one point Prue stated they had a motion duly moved and seconded, then stated he thought they did then they did.
Councillor Pouget inquired about correspondence from North Star. The clerk advised it did not come in time for the agenda submission so it would be on a future agenda. Pouget said time was of the essence and she understood that she could bring it up under new business. Mayor Prue stated it was her prerogative to raise it under new business that can be dealt with at this meeting just not now.
Moving on to 18.1 Economic Development Advisory Committee minutes. Gibb commented on the request to ‘consider’ and then noted he meant that for the next item.
Next item, 19.1, Co-An Park Advisory Committee minutes and Prue acknowledged Gibb had a question or something. Gibb mentioned the accessibility advisory committee meeting to ‘consider’ an item. The clerk mentioned Co-An park and Gibb clarified he was speaking to 19.2 as thought they had dealt with 19.1 and the discussion continued.
Next, 19.2, Accessibility Advisory Committee minutes. Gibb’s question was about the committee calling on the town and the developer to build a sidewalk along Pickering drive; he asked if this is something to debate in budget or if they were going to get some kind of recommendation from staff.
Related: AAAC Discussed New LCBO At Length.
Since McArthur made the motion at the committee meeting, he provided a background.
Prue acknowledged the Deputy CAO, who stated no, they can not compel the developer to put the sidewalk in; it would be a town expense. She would suggest that if Council wishes to move in that direction, it may be appropriate for the director of infrastructure services to provide a report first, because current policies around the types of roads that Pickering is does not require a sidewalk on both sides. So should Council elect to put a sidewalk on both sides they will probably need to ensure that they’re not setting any precedents that all collector roads throughout the town then require sidewalks on both sides.
The discussion continued about the location of the sidewalk, whether it would be a portion to the first driveway or all the way to the sidewalk on Pickering.
Prue passed the gavel to comment about the LCBO. He said it’s one of the smallest he’s seen anywhere and it has a sidewalk and a ramp; what is being proposed is less than we have now. He mentioned how the town would have to pay; the Ontario government took away the authority of this municipality and council to insist that this be built. He ended by saying he just finds this horrendous and then took the gavel back.
Then there was a question of whether it would be possible to seek funding and the answer was probably not.
McArthur moved a two part motion that carried for 1. that administration approach the developer to see if a creative solution can be found to address this issue and provide access for all people, which seems redundant, considering the advice the developer cannot be compelled and discussion has already taken place, and 2. if that goes nowhere, that administration come back with a report in time for the 2024 budget with options to put a sidewalk there.
Next item but they had to revisit 19.2 for the third part of the AAAC motion.
Drainage Board minutes, unfinished business and next item Notice of Motion 22; no, go back to 21. New Business which will be in an upcoming post.
Open Air – Town Survey Questions
What is the town asking its residents in a survey that was to be posted after the Uncommon Festival but is now posted at talk the burg. A sign in is required.
What is your postal code?
Have you attended Open Air Weekends in 2023?
IF you have answered NO to attending Open Air, can you tell us why?
Do you like the current Open Air footprint? (one block of Dalhousie, one block for Murray Richmond – see black line identifying the footprint on the map)
IF you answered NO to liking the Open Air Footprint, what changes would you like to see to the Open Air Footprint? (This only references the footprint, NOT the hours of operation.)
Could you check each block you want included in the 2024 Open Air Footprint?
Do you like the current schedule, Friday 3 pm to Sunday 8 pm?
If you said NO, to the above question, what days of the weekend would you like to see Open Air in operation? Please check all the options you like.
Would you like to see Open Air Weekends return in 2024?
IF you answered NO to Open Air returning in 2024, can you tell us why?
Comments
Open Air – Have Your Say!
During the August 14 council meeting Open Air discussion, Heidi Baillargeon suggested the survey be posted after the uncommon festival; the town’s open air survey is now available at talk the burg.
Baillargeon was asked about surveying residents and answered that they have surveyed residents many times during Open Air.
the burg watch email to CAO Critchley was to request on what dates did admin/tourism dept. conduct Open Air surveys of Amherstburg residents/ratepayers?
Critchley: I believe that there have been several community surveys placed on Talk the Burg with respect to Open Air in the past but I do not have the precise dates. As you may know, Council has asked that a new survey be prepared and it will be issued in the Fall.
the burg watch: knowing the precise dates would be helpful for the public and for decision makers. a ‘talk the burg’ site search yielded no results.
Critchley: I am attaching copies of all surveys that we were able to locate regarding Open Air. I would note that we have surveyedvisitors to Open Air and the businesses inside and outside the footprint. We have not done a resident wide survey, however that is being prepared and will be done this year.
the burg watch 