A lost year

There was a day, not too long ago, when council, and the public, heard regular updates about the County’s waterworks, nursing home and roads issue—and not just when there were big problems or expenditures to be approved. Council heard, a couple times each year or more, about the challenges of Picton’s leaky underground water pipes, the bridge that was failing or how H.J. McFarland Nursing Home had performed in its latest evaluation.

That doesn’t happen anymore. I suspect the pipes are still leaking are the bridges are still decaying. And we know the County’s nursing home has had its share of challenges. So why is this not part of the dialogue around the council table? Why is council’s agenda stacked every other week by small-ball issues?

Currently, we only learn what is happening inside County business when in crisis or they need more money. We are allowed to see inside when missed forecasts compel us to break into capital reserves to pay the County waterworks’ operating bill, or when a bridge has to be closed or when nursing home administrators are escorted from the property.

It is now a full year since this council was elected. It is hard to spot an achievement or accomplishment in that year. It has passed a budget. It has fired its chief manager. It has rebuilt Union Road. Aside from that, council has largely been adrift. A year has passed. Council is sleepwalking through its term—distracted too easily by near-meaningless issues. To be sure, it wrestled tirelessly over its decision to commit $100 to a Syrian refugee fund.

Worse, the work to restructure the County’s business has been abandoned. Old habits are returning. And costs are rising again.

Prospects for action or debate on issues outside Shire Hall are no better.

The County Community Foundation’s Vital Signs report identified key challenges directly impacting County families around food security, transportation and learning. Those challenges have remained unexamined by this council, now a quarter-way through its term. Worse, there is seemingly little ambition to even talk about these issues.

The County’s waterworks has serious issues that will have a profound impact on the pocketbooks of municipal water consumers, as well as those looking to build in the serviced areas of the County. Picton’s water plant was said to be on its last legs a decade ago. Moving the town’s water intake pipe has been in the works for at least that long. The underground infrastructure is leaking and much of it due for replacement. Why aren’t we talking about this?

Meanwhile, Wellington’s waterworks system is modern, well equipped, with a Great Lake of water—except we’ve allocated all the available capacity, even though we use only half of it. Arbitrary, yet addressable, limits pose a real choke on growth and development. This needn’t be the case.

Five years ago, the municipality undertook an extensive review of its waterworks. Among the many good things we learned was that Wellington’s capacity could be expanded if we kept good records and demonstrated to the province that we operated within a predictable band over several years. The province could then reduce the massive buffer it imposes on waterworks systems that don’t have a clue about what their peak volumes look like. I suspect we are not in this category. But I suspect, too, that we’ve likely not taken the next step toward freeing up capacity in the system. Why not? Five years has passed. What is the timetable to free up the development potential in this community?

The fact is that we don’t know. And no one is asking. We, and council, learn very little about the County’s waterworks until a cheque needs to be written.

Similarly, on County roads, we know that the very best we can do is manage the decay. We simply do not have the money, nor the borrowing capacity, to fund the half-billion dollars of repairs they need. We know we cannot spend our meagre fast enough stop the decay—all we can do is slow it down a bit—and pray a senior government steps in to save us. That is the precarious state of County roads—indeed most of our infrastructure. This is surely a crisis. So why isn’t our council talking about it? Why isn’t this a public discussion? And why on earth did we put the better part of a million dollars into a few hundred metres of Union Road? It seems, at times, as though children are in charge.

The County’s costs are rising, but council isn’t asking the questions about the choices that it can and should make before these costs threaten the viability of County services or facilities—while they still have choices.

Meanwhile, revenue opportunities in the form of residential development largely lie dormant. Residential properties pay more than 90 per cent of the amount the County raises from taxpayers each year. It is really all they have. Furthermore, the County’s investments in waterworks and other infrastructure are based on assumptions of residential development that have failed to materialize over the past five years. So this is a big deal. Or at least it should be.

Building numbers are improving modestly, but development and waterworks charges in the County remain the highest in the region—even after figuring that development charges have been discounted by half for past few years in waterworks-serviced areas. That discount is scheduled to be removed in March, putting the cost of building in the County back into the stratosphere. Why aren’t we talking about this? Will we wait until building grinds to a complete halt? More importantly, why aren’t we spending time every month courting developers and builders to understand what they need to invest in the County

Recently, I spoke with a developer in Cobourg who was salivating over the press Prince Edward County gets in the Toronto media. He would dearly love this backwind supporting his development. Are we doing enough to lever this important advantage into residential development? Why aren’t we talking about this?

I suspect council has been shielded from the inner workings of County business because of its tendency to second guess or micro-manage rather than govern. I get that. But governance requires insight into the business. Accountibility demands it.

If, after this week. council once again abandons efforts to reduce its size, it is strongly urged take another look at standing committees—smaller groups of council members assigned to examine various aspect of the County’s business such as finance, public works, development and planning and community services.

This term of council has three years left—council members will soon have to ask some serious questions. Or voters will.

rick@wellingtontimes.ca