Tag Archives: accessibility

Candidate Q&A Analysis: Where does Shawn LeBlanc stand on accessibility, Open Air barriers and the law?

Posted on by
Reply

Local election season is about looking past slogans and analyzing how candidates plan to govern. Recently, the burg watch questioned council candidate Shawn LeBlanc regarding accessibility—specifically his own campaign office and Open Air barriers.

Read the email exchanges below.

Here is a breakdown of the exchange and what it means for local voters:

1. Campaign Office Accessibility

  • The Reality: LeBlanc confirmed his campaign office is based out of his private home and is not accessible.
  • The Takeaway: For voters with mobility challenges, a candidate running an inaccessible campaign creates an immediate barrier to face-to-face democratic participation. True inclusion starts before Election Day.

2. The “Seeing is Believing” Stance vs. The Law (AODA)

  • The Reality: When pressed on the Open Air barriers—which The Burg Watch noted was the number one complaint in the Open Air residents’ survey—LeBlanc stated he was “not aware of any barriers” and that it was “hard to commit to removing” them without seeing it himself.
  • The Takeaway: In Ontario, accessibility is not a matter of a candidate’s personal observation. Under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA), municipalities and local leaders have a binding legal obligation to proactively identify, remove, and prevent structural barriers in public spaces. Prioritizing personal “awareness” over documented community data risks putting a municipality out of compliance with provincial law.

3. The “One Person” Fallacy

  • The Reality: LeBlanc downplayed complaints by stating, “As of this moment I have one person telling me otherwise so I can’t comment on what I don’t know is happening.”
  • The Takeaway: Accessibility is not a popularity contest or a majority-rules issue. Under human rights frameworks and the AODA, if a single physical barrier prevents one person with a disability from equally participating in their town, a legal and moral obligation to fix it already exists. Minimizing public survey data by framing it as a solitary complaint avoids systemic accountability.

The Bottom Line:
LeBlanc expressed a strong passion for accessibility in theory, promising to “do all I can for any resident once elected.” However, there is a clear gap between promising to “be a voice” later and refusing to acknowledge documented, legally protected barriers right now.

An effective municipal leader doesn’t wait to stumble over a barrier themselves—they trust the data, they listen to the residents who live it every day, and they understand their mandatory legal duties under the AODA.

What do you think? Does a candidate need personal proof to act on accessibility issues, or should they immediately respect the AODA standards and resident surveys?

Email exchanges between the burg watch and Shawn LeBlanc:

July 23 from the burg watch: Is your campaign office accessible? Will you remove Open Air barriers that prevent people with disabilities form equally participating in the community?

July 27 LeBlanc: Hello and thank you so much for reaching out. Currently my campaign office is my own home and not currently accessible. I am not aware of any barriers that exist in open air that impact accessibility. Happy to help wherever I can.  

July 28, 2026 the burg watch: The number one complaint in the Open Air residents’ survey is accessibility. Aside from the survey, residents have called attention to the Open Air barriers for years. Now that you’ve been made aware of the barriers, will you commit to removing them so people with disabilities can equally participate in their own community?

July 28 LeBlanc: I love your passion for accessibility. As I am not aware of anyone who has ever complained about this or observed it, it’s hard for me to commit to removing any barriers. However if I see or talk to any of these residents while on the campaign I will absolutely be a voice for making sure open air along with anything in our community is accessible for all residents. 

July 28 the burg watch: Oh, but you are aware now since I provided you with the information for you to be aware. It seems paradoxical for you to say ‘it’s hard’ for you to commit to removing any barriers since you’ll have a legal obligation to do so if you’re elected but that you’ll absolutely be a voice and make sure our community is accessible.

July 28 LeBlanc: I stand by what I said. If there are barriers that are making open air inaccessible I will make sure that’s not happening. As of this moment I have one person telling me otherwise so I can’t comment on what I don’t know is happening. Rest assured I will do all I can for any resident once elected to make their voice heard. 

July 28 the burg watch: Ok. But if one person encounters a barrier, you still have an obligation to address it. Is there a number of people you have in mind before you to take action? Because if you keep saying ‘if’ there are barriers, then I have to tell you that statements like that are ableist and attitudinal barriers.

July 28 LeBlanc: You have made me aware and when I have an opportunity to do something I will absolutely address it. In fact this weekend when I am open air weekends this will be my top priority to look and see if this is an issue and I can report back. I would also meet you down there if you ever wanted to show me in person. 

July 28 the burg watch: I’ve made you aware, which is more than I am obliged to do. You are the one campaigning, so you will be the one to fulfil legal obligations. I hope you become educated enough to do that.

Jully 28 LeBlanc: I appreciate your feedback. I hope you have a great night. Thank you for the input. 

Mickle Park Playground – How Useable?

Posted on by

As posted in June 2023. Amherstburg’s accessibility committee ENDORSED this playground, despite the barriers.

Below is an email to Councillor Pouget and Councillor McArthur on June 12 in advance of the council meeting.

After watching the June 5 Amherstburg Accessibility Advisory Committee Meeting, and reading some of the documents, I have some concerns regarding the recommendation to ENDORSE the playground design proposed for Warren Mickle Park’s playground redevelopment.

I’m writing to both of you because Councillor McArthur is council’s rep on the AAAC and Councillor Pouget consistently represents the interests of people with disabilities.

Ms. Heidi Baillargeon advised the AAAC an RFP resulted in three proposals that went through a Review and Scoring committee, and this was the design that was selected for installation at Warren Mickle Park. Ms. Baillargeon also advised the AAAC that it is partly a ramp structure, there are a number of accessible components, and that ‘a wheelchair can only go up to the first deck.’

It is preferable to use person first or identity first language and not refer to the assistive device alone.

How did a Review and Scoring committee approve this proposal?

What Makes a Playground Inaccessible? (aoda.ca)

  • Multilevel platforms
  • Stairs
  • Narrow walkways
  • Monkey bars
  • Bucket swings
  • Swings
  • Slides (plastic or metal)

Would someone please explain how the proposed Warren Mickle Park will be AODA compliant and inclusive if children with disabilities can’t access or use all the equipment? 

From the Parks Master Plan 2018, “It is essential that parks are inclusive and barrier-free, as guided by the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA). To ensure that the parks system is able to serve people from all segments of the community, accessible seating, washrooms, shade (structures and trees), parking, connections to key destinations and safety must be prominent considerations.”

While Ms. Baillargeon mentioned the CSA Z614:20, a safety standard, there was very little discussion regarding the AODA, Regulations, inclusive playground guidelines and mandatory public consultation.

The Integrated Accessibility Standards Regulation of the AODA mandates public consultation as follows:

“When constructing new or redeveloping existing outdoor play spaces, obligated organizations shall consult on the needs of children and caregivers with various disabilities” and shall do so in the following manner: 

1. designated public sector organizations and large organizations must consult with the public and persons with disabilities. (emphasis added).

2. Municipalities must also consult with their municipal accessibility advisory committees, where one has been established in accordance with subsection 29 (1) or (2) of the Act. 

Outdoor play spaces, accessibility in design 

80.20 When constructing new or redeveloping existing play spaces that they intend to maintain,obligated organizations shall,

(a) incorporate accessibility features, such as sensory and active play components, for children and caregivers with various disabilities into the design of outdoor play spaces; and

(b) ensure that outdoor play spaces have a ground surface that is firm, stable and has impact attenuating properties for injury prevention and sufficient clearance to provide children and caregivers with various disabilities the ability to move through, in and around the outdoor play space. O. Reg. 413/12, s. 6.

There was also no discussion regarding the 2021 survey that no children under the age of 18 participated in. 

Will the four benches be accessible? Will the bike racks be accessible? Will there be any braille elements? Will accessible washrooms be installed? Will accessible parking spaces be available? Will accessible signage and wayfinding be installed? The concept plan 2021 included a picnic area and in answer to the question, What park amenities would you like to see at Warren Mickle Park, 50 (74.6%) said picnic table: will accessible picnic tables be installed?

Also of concern is an AAAC member’s comments regarding the slide: he could only see one problem with it – that is you put it in this park and people find out about it, they’re gonna want it in all the other parks and that means retrofitting. Then the member asked about the cost for that.

In is my understanding that AAAC members identify barriers and ‘provide advice and recommendations to Council on accessibility issues within our community’ and council makes budgetary decisions for what accessible projects it prioritizes.

What are the candidates’ position on Open Air? Saurabh Katara

Posted on by

Question: 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?

Saurabh Katara:

Thank you for reaching out and for asking this important question.

Yes—I will work to remove barriers that deny people with disabilities equal access to the community when streets are closed for Open Air. Open Air is valuable to our community, and accessibility should be part of it—not something residents have to give up for the event to work.

I’m not going to pretend I already know the exact operational solution without first understanding the barriers people are experiencing. During the campaign, I intend to speak directly with residents affected by these closures so I understand what changes would make the biggest difference.

Candidates that have not answered yet are listed below. I emphasize yet since Lena Lazanja incorrectly stated, “I would appreciate you removing my/other candidates names from a “did not respond” section.

As I informed Lazanja, I listed “candidates that haven’t answered to date.”

Candidates that haven’t answered yet:

Molly Allaire
Frank Cerasa
Stephanie Pouget-Papak

RECAP Accessibility Advisory Committee Meeting July 23, 2026

Posted on by

The committee didn’t accomplish much. The only agenda item, the 2026 Municipal Elections Accessibility Plan was just to receive for information – 51 one minutes and 39 seconds until adjournment.

Chair Shirley Curson Prue rarely reads the land acknowledgement but this time she did; she usually just hands everything over to staff.

Tony Pietrangelo, current committee member and councillor candidate provided two memorable moments:

1.Pietrangelo asked if they were having internet voting.

    Council voted to continue with the costliest, most labour intensive and least accessible in person voting on September 8, 2025. 

    Had it not been for my December 2022 delegation, council would have voted back then for in person voting.

    Pietrangelo was present at the October 23, 2025 accessibility committee meeting when admin advised it of council’s in person voting decision.

    Of course, the committee moved to endorse the 2026 Municipal Elections Accessibility Plan.

    Members still seem unsure of whether to make motions. Typically, the committee limits motions to receive minutes and adjourn but not to receive updates, direct admin to report back, or to take action.

    I did delegate to the committee in 2022 and offered suggestions for the committee to be strong advocates and follow procedural rules, but they disregarded my input as usual.

    2. The second memorable moment was when Pietrangelo enthusiastically praised the National AccessAbility Week flag raising. 

      It was a performative gesture. 

      If I were to describe this event to anyone not in attendance, I’d say a small crowd gathered, Prue read a speech, and a staff member raised a flag – that’s it. 

      small crowd gathered for National AccessAbility Week flag raising at Amherstburg park in 2026.


      This minimal effort is typical of communities that lack a strong commitment to inclusion and accessibility.

      “It’s now part of our standard practices,” advised admin.

      It’s a low standard.

      The town wants to know about voting barriers – at least that’s what the committee was advised. But my input on voting barriers has been disregarded for a few elections by both council and the accessibility committee.

      Councillor Pouget’s motion on December 12, 2024 was that my submission regarding voting barriers be sent to the committee. Of course, the committee didn’t discuss my submission any more than it discussed my previous submissions or my delegations about barriers.

      The town wants more people to vote – at least that’s also what the committee was advised. But staff recommended, and council approved, the most inaccessible traditional in person voting which may limit voter turnout. 

      No one should be surprised that barriers can repress voter turnout and influence feelings of efficacy for voters with disabilities (Schur et al., Reference Schur, Ameri and Adya2017).

      Admin should have recommended a greater variety of voting methods to meet the needs of a variety of voters to increase voter turnout. It’s counterproductive to limit choices and then complain of limited results.

      Of course, council should have directed admin to report on the costs of each voting method in December 2022. 

      Very briefly, the committee mentioned a library audit.

      The library was to have been audited in January 2024. 

      An inoperable push button at the hub, future sidewalk repairs, and pickleball parking were noted.

      Almost an hour for business that could have been addressed probably within 15 minutes.

      Meeting adjourned.

      What are the candidates’ position on Open Air? Tony Pietrangelo

      Posted on by

      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?

      Tony Pietrangelo: As you know I am on AAAC and want nothing more than to help people living with disabilities in Amherstburg.
      I have registered to run for town council in our next election. That will be my way of getting things accomplished in a way that is beneficial to all. My insights into accessibility will help me help others. 

      the burg watch: You didn’t answer the question. And what, specifically, will accomplish?

      Tony Pietrangelo: If I get elected I will help you in any way I can.

      the burg watch: You’re not answering the question: Will you remove barriers that deny people with disabilities equal access to the community when streets are closed during Open Air weekends? 

      2 weeks later, June 10.

      the burg watch: You haven’t answered my original question so maybe you can answer this one: did the Accessibility Committee identify any barriers at Open Air? It’s a simple yes or no question.

      What are the candidates’ position on Open Air? Chris Gibb

      Posted on by

      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?

      Chris Gibb: As the town’s Accessibility Committee has not identified any barriers, I would need you to be more specific and advise me as to which barriers you have identified. I would then be able to address your concerns.

      note: I delegated to council on Open Air barriers; I’ve submitted over a dozen emails to council members and I’ve written several letters to the editor about the exclusion.

      the burg watch: Would you direct me to the minutes of Accessibility committee meetings where the committee did not identify any barriers to open air?

      Chris Gibb: Sorry but I do not recall the exact date of the particular meeting. Perhaps one of the committee members would be able to help.

      the burg watch: I asked Tony Pietrangelo, candidate and accessibility committee member, did the Accessibility Committee identify any barriers at Open Air? It’s a simple yes or no question. 

      Pietrangelo did not respond.

      NOTE: Gibb answered his wife’s 2022 question about Open Air:

      “Personally, I am a huge fan of the Open Air program and I hope to see it continue. I see Open Air as a unique way for the whole “Amherstburg Family” to get together and strengthen our connections with each other, and also develop new connections with new people. If we are going to maintain our small town sense of community as we grow, we have to find ways to gather together and celebrate our fantastic town. We will be seeing a tidal wave of new growth in the next 5 to 10 years with many residents who are new to Amherstburg, if we want to keep our small town charm, we need to have opportunities for those new people to be welcomed into the “Amherstburg Family”, Open Streets is one of those opportunities.”

      Open Air barrier follow up with Botsford

      Posted on by

      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.”

      What are the candidates’ position on Open Air? Lena Lazanja

      Posted on by

      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

      Ultimate Ironies In Amherstburg

      Posted on by

      The Town of Amherstburg denied my request to delegate. Again. This is the second time the procedural by-law was cited to deny my public engagement, even though my requests were in compliance with the very restrictive procedural by-law, as acknowledged by Deputy Clerk Sarah Sabihuddin.

      Other municipalities welcome residents to speak to items on the agenda. But no, Amherstburg orders that a delegate can speak to an agenda item if it requires a council decision and the item stems from an admin report or by-law.

      I completed the online delegation form, identified agenda item 15.2  Amherstburg Accessibility Advisory Committee Achievements in 2025 and 2026 Multi-Year Accessibility Plan; I wish to delegate as a form of civic participation. I will request council to create and enact a Community Engagement Policy.

      But, admin set a precedent this time – “demonstrate how the requested action is connected to the matter under consideration.” 

      I insisted I complied with the procedural by-law but the deputy clerk countered with, in part, “At this time, your request identifies a proposed action (the creation and enactment of a community engagement policy); however, a clear connection to Item 15.2 – Multi-Year Accessibility Plan has not been established. As a result, the request does not meet the requirements set out in Section 9.4(c) of the Town’s Procedural By-law, which requires delegations to clearly identify the agenda item and the action requested in relation to that matter.

      Accordingly, your delegation request has been deemed non-compliant with the Procedural By-law and is denied for the upcoming meeting. You remain welcome to speak to this matter should you wish to resubmit a delegation that clearly demonstrates how your comments relate to an item that is before Council prior to 3:00pm today.”

      • Irony 1: “The Town of Amherstburg actively encourages public engagement by inviting members of the community to participate in Council and Committee meetings, fostering a sense of inclusivity and transparency in local governance.” 9.1 of the Procedural By-law.

      But delegates must follow very strict rules to participate.

      • Irony 2:  A delegation is a person intending to address the Council or Committee on a matter listed on the agenda where a decision of the Council may be required. 9.2

      But Mayor Prue, in his 2022 inauguration speech stated, “I hope Council will agree to allow more public deputations without having to all put our hands up and waive the rules every single time. I think people should have the right to make a deputation before Council when the item is on the agenda.”

      “When the item is on the agenda.” That’s what he said. So why agree to the very strict rules?

      • Irony 3:  (The very strict rules). 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 (this is the very strict rule cited for my denial this time);

      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. 9.4 (This section is the one Deputy CAO Melissa Osborne relied on to deny my request to speak at the Economic Development Committee Meeting. Note: it states council, not committee).

      • Irony 4: The Clerk may, from time to time, establish or amend procedures related to the Delegation Process, provided that such procedures do not conflict with the provisions of By-law 2023-085. 9.5

      Council’s legal role is to create policy so admin should not be allowed to use discretion to establish or amend procedures that conflict with the intent of section 9.1 of the procedural by-law: “The Town of Amherstburg actively encourages public engagement by inviting members of the community to participate in Council and Committee meetings, fostering a sense of inclusivity and transparency in local governance.”