Sparks fly

Heated exchanges underline the simmering tension of year four

Last week, this newspaper observed that councils tend to become fractious and short-tempered in the fourth year of a term—that it is neither a new nor an unusual phenomenon. As if to underscore the point, County council delivered a particularly irritable performance last week.

It began at a council meeting on Tuesday, with a heated tirade from Picton councillor Phil St- Jean stemming from recent comments and stories, in these pages, on the County’s Affordable Housing Corporation board woes, upon which he serves as chair. Other outlets have covered his outburst and accusations as well as the rebuttal from the Times publisher and Wellington councillor Corey Engelsdorfer, so we will not commit more ink to that episode for now.

The hard feelings carried over to a council committee meeting on Thursday, where one of the items up for debate was council pay—always dry tinder ready to combust. Coming just months before an election, it was bound to ignite a conflagration. And it did.

A Shire Hall-commissioned study found that councillor compensation was roughly comparable to that of 13 other municipalities the consultant surveyed. As such, it recommended maintaining the existing pay structure.

That didn’t sit well with some council members.

The primary concern centred on the array of comparable jurisdictions used in the survey. Of the 13 municipalities, two had populations greater than 100,000—several times the size, scale and responsibilities of Prince Edward.

Just three of the survey group were singletier municipalities. (Prince Edward County is a single-tier governed municipality, which means it encompasses an array of services and responsibilities often managed elsewhere by two levels of municipal government—typically bifurcated as regional and local governments.)

As such, several councillors argued the survey was fatally narrow and that the analysis was flawed as a result.

But it wasn’t the quality of the consultant’s report that lit the match on Thursday.

Councillor Kate MacNaughton chaired the committee meeting. When it was her turn to address the report, she complained that the consultants had overlooked the concept of equity of access—that councillor compensation creates a barrier for some in the community from serving on council.

“Knowing who is shut out is important to know,” said Coun. MacNaughton. “I took a pay cut to do this job. I made my household poorer. People pound the table to say they would do it for free—well, I can’t afford to do it for free.”

Ameliasburgh councillor Roy Pennell pushed back, suggesting that council compensation isn’t his reason for serving on council.

“I want to serve my community,” said Pennell, noting that his personal pension takes a hit each year due to his council remuneration. “I am not here for the money. What happened to the idea that you do this job for your community?”

Councillor MacNaughton took sharp offence at the Ameliasburgh councillor’s comments.

“You just said I sit here because I am greedy,” responded MacNaughton with frustration building in her voice. “That is not the case.”

(For the record, Councillor Pennell had not, at least in this meeting, described his colleagues, collectively or individually, as ‘greedy’.)

Councillor MacNaughton said she was forced to give up a part-time job to do the “all-encompassing job of council member.”

“I’m still not reliably able to make a commitment to an employer as a wage slave. I am not trying to steal from my community and take more money. I’m just trying to live my life.

“So when you say it is just me being greedy, [my response is that] we need people who don’t have other sources of income. It is not greed.”

Councillor Pennell apologized, saying his comments were not directed at the Picton councillor personally, but rather a generalized concern about how folks are motivated to serve on council.

Councillor MacNaughton wasn’t satisfied, insisting that the Ameliasburgh councillor extend his apology to other members of Council. By this time, North Marsyburgh councillor David Harrison had heard enough of the back-and-forth.

“The chair should not be advocating against a difference of opinion [between council members],” started Councillor Harrison.

Chair MacNaughton cut him off.

“This is not a difference of opinion,” said MacNaughton, speaking over the councillor. “He was making a claim that was insulting.”

The debate was fully engulfed.

“If you are so easily insulted, perhaps you should find another job,” suggested the North Marysburgh councillor.

Councillor Brad Nieman scanned the room, looking for someone—anyone—to restore calm.

CAO Adam Goheen recommended a 10- minute recess.

When Council returned, the heat had dissipated. The committee turned back to the consultant’s report, which many felt needed to be revised or discarded altogether.

“More work needs to be done,” said Mayor Steve Ferguson.

With that, the committee agreed to send the report back to staff for more information. The flames were all but out.

Bill Roberts said he had been disappointed to have missed the fireworks on Tuesday evening, and was thankful to his colleagues for a reprise.