Where do I start?
Monday, Nov. 20 was one of the more intense North Huron council meetings I have taken in during my time here at the Advance Times.
Unless you have been living under a rock, that evening council heard from several residents about the proposed 2024 fees and charges bylaw.
By my count, a dozen individuals addressed council during the public comment portion of the meeting, all of whom asked council to reconsider the substantial increases proposed in the bylaw, notably those in recreation and cemetery fees.
Upon reviewing the proposed fees and the current 2023 fees – and let me tell you, that was some exciting reading – most of the fee increases proposed in the 2024 fees and charges bylaw are reasonable.
In building, for example, those fees are looking at a five per cent increase. Very reasonable.
In recreation, however, those increases are much higher – or lower, in some cases. And they are going to be different, based on council’s passing of an amendment to an amendment of the motion on Nov. 20 (I think I covered all of the amendments…).
For example, home-school group swimming lessons are decreasing, with a rate of $30 in 2024, down from $73 in 2023. Those dubbed “Board of Education” lessons will be $58.10 in 2024 (if my math is correct), whereas there was no charge in 2023 for those.
And those rates are taking into consideration one of the approved amendments, introduced by Reeve Paul Heffer, which stipulated that “70 per cent of the proposed increase will be implemented in 2024.” The remaining 30 per cent will be tacked on to the 2025 rates.
Councillors were confused during this whole multi-amendment process on Nov. 20. I was confused watching this on YouTube (as I am sure several hundred other viewers were). And the reaction from those attending in person was obvious: they are, for a lack of a better phrase, pissed off.
Residents signed petitions against the increases. There were 190 digital signatures on an online petition as of Nov. 22, and 173 individuals hand-signed petitions submitted to council and included in the Nov. 20 agenda.
Aside from two councillors – Chris Palmer and Mitch Wright, and, to some extent, Reeve Heffer – council did not advocate for those people.
It was noted by Wright on Nov. 20 that 40 people at the public meeting in September appeared to be in favour of raising fees for recreation, however four times that number told council through petitions they were not.
As we all know now, council went ahead and approved the new fee structure, effective Jan. 1, 2024 – despite the feedback from the public.
I have spoken to several people about this meeting, including a handful who have no vested interest in how North Huron operates (i.e. they are not a taxpayer). The general consensus of how this issue was handled at the Nov. 20 meeting:
“What an absolute s**tshow that was.”
After letting the events of the Nov. 20 meeting digest, one word came to mind: communication.
The communication around the bylaw can best be described as muddy and misguided.
When the bylaw was first introduced on Nov. 6, there was a lack of communication regarding the proposed increases; specifically, there was zero information provided about each increase (or decrease). To their credit, councillors Wright and Palmer asked why this information was not provided, and asked that staff come back to the next meeting with said information.
That was shot down, and the rest of council pushed through a motion to have the bylaw brought back on Nov. 20 for consideration.
That’s when the anger, the petitions and the comments from the public started. Much of that could have been avoided if the changes were explained to council and the public – communicated, if you will – on Nov. 6.
All that had to be done was staff provide council with a public explanation of the changes. Instead, no explanations were offered.
As I mentioned earlier, the Nov. 20 meeting saw residents communicate their opposition to council through various methods. It fell on deaf ears.
And requests of staff to explain which area municipalities were used as comparators for fees was met with, and I paraphrase, “That was explained in an email to council, no further explanation is needed.”
That, my friends, is poor communication.
Is it any wonder why many residents are frustrated with the elected officials in the township? Time and time again, as reader Verna Steffler pointed out in a letter to the editor in our Nov. 16 issue, residents come forward with solutions and offers to help alleviate costs of certain items, only to be shut down by council and staff.
“The people of Wingham keep trying to be engaged, but you reach a point and ask, ‘why bother?’” asked Steffler in that letter.
After the events of the Nov. 20 council meeting, I can see how ‘why bother?’ is the go-to response from residents.
One year from now, when council goes to review its fees and charges bylaw for 2025, I hope for the sake of taxpayers in North Huron that staff and council learn a lesson from the November 2023 council meetings. I hope more context is included in that report other than, “Here it is, yes or no.”
Taxpayers deserve a fully-communicated explanation, not “it was in an email.”
***
Mike Wilson is the editor of the Wingham Advance Times. Comments and feedback are welcome at mwilson@midwesternnewspapers.com.
