Comment
Do you believe?
Do you believe 8,000 new homes will be built in Prince Edward County over the next 10 years? Do you believe 800 will be built this year? Next year? And every year for the next decade?
If so, Shire Hall has a brand-new Economic Development Action Plan (EDAP) for you.
If, however, you are unsure—and you would be forgiven for being a bit skeptical since the County has never, and I emphasize never, witnessed anything close to this volume of new homebuilding—you may have difficulty seeing your community, your home, your livelihood or your future reflected in this new Plan.
The premise is pure fantasy. It will nevertheless likely have been approved by Council last night. The Plan is not grounded in history, experience or evidence. Or reason. Or logic. It might as well be a story populated by hobbits and flying dragons.
Yet it will inform the County’s economic policies for the next five years. Of all the pots boiling over at Shire Hall, does this one matter? I think it does. It is another example of how profoundly Shire Hall misunderstands the fundamental challenges and priorities of Prince Edward County’s economy.
The County sees about 150 new homes built in very good years. Over the past quarter century, an average of 125 new home permits have been issued per year. The peak was reached at the height of Covid when 178 new homes were built in the County. It’s a long way from 800 homes per year.
The Plan offers no factual or evidentiary basis for this foundational assumption. It just is.
What do the pros say?
The audacity of 8,000 homes in a decade is perhaps best contradicted by the County’s own demographic and economics consultants, who estimate that maybe an average of 155 new homes will be built per year over the next decade. It is a forecast Shire Hall commissioned and paid for just 18 months ago—yet it is absent in the new Economic Development Action Plan.
Canada Mortgage and Housing projects a “challenging outlook for new homebuilding in Ontario over the next ten years.” The Canadian Home Builders’ Association is “pessimistic” about the outlook of new homebuilding, with 61 per cent of its members expecting to build fewer new homes this year. The Residential Construction Council of Ontario (RESCON) warns that housing starts are likely to “weaken over the next few years.”
Against this array of flashing red lights, Shire Hall is boldly predicting a breathtaking wave of unprecedented new home buildings in Prince Edward County. It’s bold.
Yet there are other pressures.
Overlaying all this is the looming cost of tariffs on the Canadian economy. Toronto-Dominion’s economists predict that “Canada will likely enter a recession” if tariffs persist for six months. Royal Bank predicts sustained tariffs could wipe out Canadian economic growth for three years. Paul Ashworth at Capital Economics warns that tariffs could plunge Canada into a recession later this year, pushing inflation and unemployment higher.
Does it matter that the County’s freshly minted economic Plan varies so widely from prevailing wisdom? It does. Here’s why.
The Plan promotes a fantasy, begun in 2021, of a new age of growth in Prince Edward County. Developers were staking land, distributing glossy brochures and promoting grand schemes. It was exciting. Especially for those newly arrived from the city. County meets Urban. What’s not to love?
Except the cost. Shire Hall has calculated that it must spend at least $300 million on waterworks upgrades to make this dream happen. Upfront. It has already sunk $50 million into this flickering vision. It’s money existing ratepayers (just 6,000 homes) must fund until the thousands of new homes arrive. As should be evident—even inside Shire Hall—the prospects of this happening in the current economic context are nil.
The Economic Development Plan points to another chronic challenge at Shire Hall. It has no data. It doesn’t measure any aspect of the County’s economy (save for new homebuilding, and this it does badly). Sound economic planning demands objective measures of the forces, trends and factors shaping the County’s economy and prospects. Economics isn’t about feelings. It isn’t aspirational. Wishing won’t make it so.
Among the things we don’t know, don’t track, and don’t measure in Prince Edward County is: Annual production of wine. Number of bottles and producers. Same for spirits. Craft beer. Is it rising or falling? How many tonnes of corn are produced from our fields? Exported out of the County? Soybeans? How many cars crossed the ferry last year? Crossed the bridges? How many folks went through the gates at the provincial parks? What is the size of the ag valueadded sector? Is it growing? Shrinking? How many restaurant meals were served this year compared to last? Retail sales per square foot? What are the trends?
This information would inform a credible economic plan. Information Shire Hall could use to promote investment and guide marketing. Sadly, you won’t find any data in the new Economic Development Plan.
Until these trends and forces are measured and tracked, such economic plans are just creative writing exercises. Without the obvious benefit of hobbits or dragons.
Council seems to be bending over backwards to facilitate development, ignoring the needs and wants of the residents and taxpayers THAT ARE ALREADY HERE.
The reasons for this are unclear, but I believe it may be at least partly because Council is being fed a stream of proposals from Staff.
And Staff has bought into the notion from the Developers and Consultants that the County needs these things.
Staff has then built on that notion, to say that because the County needs these things, the County must spend a fortune in massive infrastructure projects to support the Developments.
These assumptions are further fueled by at least one County media outlet (not this one) that insists that growth is inevitable, there is a coming large influx of residents and home-buyers, and the County must spend all this money on the strength of Developer and Consultant reports.
Staff and Council have lost sight of the fact that their primary responsibility is to the people THAT ARE ALREADY HERE.
The residents and taxpayers that are already here, have not asked for these developments, as far as I know.
All of these developments have been initiated by outside Developers and Consultants. Because they could care less about the needs and wants of the people THAT ARE ALREADY HERE.
They exist for profit, and profit in the development business comes from: a) Building and selling homes, and b) realizing property value appreciation of their lands by transforming them from bare land to serviced land.
The first item above, in today’s world, is unlikely to produce anywhere near the wild projections of various developers, consultants and Staff. People will move to the County for retirement reasons, perhaps, but there are no massive job generation projects here, and “working from home” is no longer an option for most people, as employers demand that employees spend at least 3 days a week in their offices.
The second item is where the real money seems to be for the Developers currently advocating their various projects. If they can hoodwink the County government into spending massive sums to turn their land from bare land into serviced lots, they win, even if they never build a single structure. They then have an inventory of serviced lots that they can sell off over time, and the County finances will not receive a dime for years, decades, and maybe ever.
There is lots of speculation about why that is, but it does not matter why it is.
What matters, is that Council must take the posture, that their job is to deal with the needs and wants of the people THAT ARE ALREADY HERE. And any request by Staff, or Developers, or Consultants should be scrutinized carefully to identify the reasons why the request would benefit the residents and taxpayers who are here today.
Any new development proposed, should be forced to submit a Business Case on why the new development will benefit the residents and taxpayers THAT ARE ALREADY HERE. This is not presently done at all, and actually the Development Staff seem to be the ones spending massive time and money convincing Council that these projects need to be done.
f you agree with this premise, then please tell this to your Councillors. The complete list of Councillors and their email and phone contact information is here –> https://www.thecounty.ca/government/council/
By my reckoning Shire Hall employs 256 members of Staff (give or take) – as follows – which includes the Chief Administrative Officer. This total does not include our elected part-time members of Council and full-time Mayor.
The Corporation of the County of Prince Edward
Organization Chart
Date last revised: February 9, 2024
Elected Members of Council
1 – Mayor
13 – Councillors
Chief Administrative Office
1 – Chief Administrative Officer
1 – Executive Assistant to CAO – Staff
1 – Executive Assistant to Mayor – Staff
10 – Directors
Finance and Information Technology
1 – Director
2 – Managers
2 – Supervisors
18 – Staff
Operational Services Department
1 – Director
1 – Manager
4 – Supervisors
63 – Staff
Development Services
1 – Director
3 – Managers
1 – Supervisor
26 – Staff
Community Programs, Services and Initiatives
1 – Director
0 – Manager
2 – Supervisors
12 – Staff
H.J. McFarland Memorial Home
1 – Director
1 – Manager
4 – Supervisors
10 – Staff
Recreation and Community Facilities
1 – Director
0 – Manager
3 – Supervisors
27 – Staff
Corporate and Legislative Services
1 – Director
2 – Managers
2 – Supervisors
16 – Staff
Water and Waste Water Services
1 – Director
2 – Managers
2 – Supervisors
16 – Staff
Fire Department
1 – Director
1 – Manager
0 – Supervisors
10 – Staff
Housing Department [update is undated]
1 – Director
0 – Manager
1 – Supervisor
2 – Staff
Last, but far from least, are the three Shire Hall Staff having their salaries being paid for entirely by Base31, courtesy of a contract authorized using her Designated Authority before our present council were elected in 2022 (and I really must wonder if the newer council members were even aware of this), by Marcia Wallace, our Chief Administrative Officer. I believe these three staffing positions are included within the numbers above. This includes:
1 Full Time Staff Position – Application and Logistic Coordinator – Base 31, who reports to the Manager of Planning
1 Full Time Staff Position – Lead Engineer – Base 31, who reports to the Manager of Engineering
1 Part Time Staff Position – Clerk for Base 31 – unable to find this position within the Organizational Chart