Fees and fines

Council hopes to manage tourism, not deter it

Council approved a list of new fees and penalties in regards to parking, camping and launching boats at last week’s meeting. After a tumultuous 2020 summer, a Tourism Management Plan was put in the works, and fees and stiffer fines make up a large part of it.

Paid parking will be implemented, doing away with the traditional launch fees at nine County boat launches. The new fees will be $10 per day for a vehicle and $20 per day for a vehicle with trailer. The annual launch pass that is available will be converted to an annual launch parking pass to be valid at any of the nine listed launches. Two tiers of annual passes would be offered at $50 and $100, the discounted pass being available for purchase at Shire Hall with proof of residency. These fees come into effect on June 1.

Several seasonal no-parking areas, including roads adjacent to Sandbanks and North Beach now carry a fine of $400, up from $35. The fine for illegal camping in municipal parks, beaches, and recreation areas has also jumped, from $75 to $500.

Wellington Beach be will be free for resident use and weekend visitors will be charged $10 per person, whether in a vehicle or walking into the beach. The beach gate will be staffed from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. from June 4 to September 19 on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays. Residents will be able to get a pass from Shire Hall or one of the public libraries.

Councillor Bill McMahon was worried about the County’s parking schedule not lining up with the opening date at North Beach Provincial Park. The park doesn’t open until June 12 and closes September 19. Meanwhile, the County’s parking restrictions are in effect from May 1 to October 31, meaning many local residents who normally park and walk into the beach in the offseason, can no longer do so. McMahon claims that many of the infractions that have been handed out to date are in Hillier ward, on roads such as Huycks Point, Stinson Black, North Beach and Arthur Road. “I am just wondering, should we really be reconsidering the timing for these particular sections of road? I really have a tough time justifying why we are ticketing people in the so-called shoulder season,” he said.

CAO Marcia Wallace explained that the decision council was making was to set the fees, not the timing, as it had already done that earlier this year. “What’s before council tonight is the fee. Not the time period of parking or no parking. That was a decision council already made, but could be revisited with a motion.” She explained that a motion could be put forward to change the parking by-law, but it would need a two-thirds council majority, and if it failed, it couldn’t be revisited for a calendar year. Council could also wait until four council meetings had passed, and discuss again. Wallace also noted that council needed to set the fee schedule in order for staff to start handing out fines. “We have been in a situation now for a few weeks where the no parking area had been set, but there was no means to charge a fine or a fee for parking illegally.” said Wallace.

Worried that council might be ‘shooting itself in the foot’, councillor Brad Nieman asked if maybe the fees should be revisited. He believe visitors might just pay a lower fine to be able to park where they like. “Four hundred dollars is a lot of money for a parking fine. And I know through all the conversations, we said $400 would catch people’s attention. Are we shooting ourselves in the foot?” he asked. Councillor Jamie Forrester thought the steep fines would have the desired effect. “In my mind, these numbers were not put there to make money, they are to alleviate a problem of safety. If it solves the problem in two to three visits, and they don’t park there anymore, than that’s the goal,” he said. Councillor John Hirsch agreed, saying even though the new fines are a radical departure from the past, they are indeed needed.

“I am a little interested in why we are having some of this conversation to be honest. There is nothing new here,” said Hirsch, who pointed out council had already discussed timing and dollar amounts. “This past weekend, the number of people who were prepared to flout those no parking zones—hundreds and hundreds of them—is the exact reason we need to be doing this. I think we stick with our guns and approve this motion tonight.”

Mayor Steve Ferguson agreed that the fees and charges were necessary because of the safety hazard and what was witnessed last year. “I don’t have difficulty with the amounts. I must say I am struck by the fact that some of the fees, particularly on North Beach Road, don’t align with the park opening date,” he said. “People are coming here, and we saw it time and time again last year. We expect we will see some of it this year, the degree of which is unknown at this point, but people will come and visit the County and abuse some of our amenities, including parking, making it difficult for other visitors and locals alike.”

Although he agreed with the amount of the parking fines, McMahon still thought the timing didn’t match up correctly. “In reality I don’t have problem with the amount of money attached to the violation. We don’t always get it right. I just believe that staff and council got this wrong. We missed this one because we weren’t aware of when the park was open. I can see by the looks on all these faces that I am not getting much backing on this, so I am prepared to come back on June 22 and have another look at this,” said McMahon.

The fees and schedules passed with a majority vote.

Meanwhile, a group of County residents have put together a group, named Residents for Reversal, in hopes of organizing a campaign to have the decision reversed by the council to impose parking restrictions on all water access points in the County. The group is made up of a growing list of residents from across the County who have come together to ask council to revisit the management of water-access points in a way that can avoid completely eliminating access to the spaces that residents and their families have enjoyed for generations and which provide essential mental and physical health spaces—especially in a year where many of those very spaces and opportunities have been lost to COVID. Wellington residents Jenn Donville and Molly McCrea are leading the charge. Donville says County residents recognize and understand the challenges faced by the County with the sudden and increased growth in tourism. “Our tourist strategy needs to promote enjoyment by visitors while benefiting local business and the community at large. It should showcase the welcoming nature and natural beauty of the area, while ensuring the safety and welfare of residents and visitors and protecting our natural spaces and habitats,” says Donville. “However, we feel that the recent sweeping access restrictions on all spaces not only fails to thoughtfully manage the different requirements and nature of these areas, but will disproportionately impact residents of the County, especially low and fixed-income residents, residents who are essential workers and full-time workers, elderly residents and children,” she says.

The group will be reaching out to support council members in their reconsideration of these restrictions. Donville and McCrea are hopeful local voices will be heard through sharing personal and family accounts of the mental and physical impact of the restrictions, and by organizing a petition to demonstrate constituents’ support, by consulting with and hearing from local businesses, and by making recommendations for some alternative solutions that respond to the unique needs of residents and spaces across the County.

If you’d like to stay updated on upcoming actions or wish to contribute to the group, email peclocals@gmail.com.