Comment
Baseline
How do we know? Is the County economy healthy? Sickly? Or just stumbling along? How would we know? More to the point, how do we know the resources the municipality spends on nurturing/stimulating/promoting economic development are working? Helpful? Worthwhile?
Road needs are generally apparent. Leaking pipes signal a waterworks issue. But an ailing economy is largely invisible. Unless, and until, it is measured. Monitored. Tracked. Shouldn’t we be doing this?
In recent weeks, a variety of news items have highlighted the conundrum.
When the mushroom plant advised it was closing at the end of the year, Mayor Steve Ferguson announced he was directing municipal staff to explore ways to respond, “drawing on recommendations and insights outlined in our Economic Development Action Plan (EDAP)”.
It sounded good. But what does it mean? The mushroom plant will close in December. The building will crumble over time. The jobs will be distant memories.
Meanwhile, the EDAP strike force will be doing what exactly? And how will we know? How will we measure success?
Last week, something called the Fresh Water Coast Corridor, an amalgam of 350 communities, announced a plan, comprising 76 actions, to attract 100 new businesses, according to its 10-year blueprint. Once again, it sounds good—but is meaningless.
How many businesses exist currently in the Corridor? Are they growing? Shrinking? Employing more? Or fewer? Will they tell us when the 100 businesses arrive? Or don’t? We have learned to gloss over such announcements as the product of agencies with little relevance in our daily lives. Yet, they consume vast public dollars.
One more, also from last week: a consortium of four local agencies and the municipality announced it had requested $100,000 from the province for a Four-Season Economy Strategy. Shire Hall would match any provincial funding. It was accompanied by buoyant quotes from the Chamber of Commerce, Visit the County, the Picton BIA and County Arts.
The strategy will outline ‘actionable tactics’ such as market readiness training, marketing campaigns, programs to promote bundled experiences and “a monitoring framework to track progress”. It all sounds good. But. Aren’t we doing these things already? If not, why not?
Before we commit fresh municipal dollars, shouldn’t we insist on knowing what these folks do now? And propose to improve upon? Shouldn’t we know the baseline? Shouldn’t we know more about the market? Shouldn’t we have the hard data that would reveal the gaps?
The truth is, we don’t know what is happening under the hood of the County economy. We never did. We don’t know how many folks visited this place this year compared to last year. How much did they spend? Was it up? Was it different? Did the patterns change?
Anecdotally, I can report that Donald Trump managed to persuade a significant number of Quebecois to visit the County this year rather than New Jersey beaches. If the County knew this as hard data, perhaps it could take meaningful action in response. Had we been measuring this visitor cohort over the past decade, it may have helped us allocate our scant resources more effectively.
In past years, our collective blind spot might be explained by the size of the place, lack of priority and a scarcity of funds. It’s not true now. Today, the County commits $2.3 million annually to a department called Community Services, Programs and Initiatives. Among the panoply of activities it offers is economic development.
The County also subcontracts marketing.
Visit the County is the primary beneficiary of Municipal Accommodation Tax (MAT) dollars. Its website cites AirDNA, a subscription-based data aggregator that measures a narrow section of the County’s tourism economy. What other benchmarks does Visit the County rely upon to make decisions about spending MAT dollars? How does it know if it is succeeding or failing? How do we hold it accountable?
Or on an industry level: How are the wineries, cideries and beermakers faring? Sales compared to a decade ago? Visitors? Employment? Is the sector shrinking? Or consolidating? Winery owners appear to be aging out, while a new generation doesn’t seem to be rushing in to pick up the pruning shears. Does this paint an accurate picture? Or does it just feel that way? Is there something else afoot? Does it need more attention?
However, the lack of data extends far beyond the tourism economy. How about employment in Prince Edward County? Did it rise? Or fall? How did wages perform? Where did employees live? In the County? Or elsewhere?
A new strategy, plan or set of tactics won’t give us these answers. Another survey won’t provide the hard data upon which investors make decisions.
The primary purpose of economic development spending in Prince Edward County ought to serve as a catalyst for data gathering in support of the economic engines of the County. It must maintain, collate and present its performance. It is only in this way that we can understand the challenges, highlight the opportunities and point the way to investment and growth.
The County needs data. Indeed, until it can provide a solid baseline picture of basic metrics that underpin this economy, it should do nothing else.
Taxpayers: Maybe you were wondering where that $5,877 AVERAGE PER TAXPAYER that our Mayor and Council directed Staff to spend came from in the year ended Dec 31, 2024. (per previous Comment on this article)
From Page 6 of the Audited Financial Statements at https://www.thecounty.ca/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/Consolidated-Financial-Statements-2024.pdf (the County Web site):
“REVENUE” (Intended to cover the EXPENSES of over $96.1 million)
Net taxes available for municipal purposes – $53,992,285 ($3,301 per taxpayer) – 58.60% of the total
User fees and sale of goods and services – $20,388,963 – 22.13% of the total
Government grants – $13,823,371 – 15.00% of the total
Investment income – $1,811,213
Fines and penalties – $1,735,651
Donations – $392,643
TOTAL REVENUE: $92,144,126
So, what are we to make of this?
1) Given that the total spend (per previous comment) was $96,131,750, that left a shortfall of $3,987,624. How was this covered? By borrowing and raiding the Reserves.
2) The top 3 sources of “Revenue” represent 95.72% of what the County classifies as “Revenue”.
3) The Property Taxes are 58.6%. “User fees and sale of goods and services” line item has no Notes to explain where that money came from. But no doubt at least some portion of this came from County residents. In any event, it was just over 22% of the total.
3) The Government grants were 15% of the total. So, that’s how much (or how little, depending on how you look at it), the “upper levels” of government (Provincial and Federal) “helped” the County.
MORE TAXPAYER QUESTIONS:
1) How much do you think the “upper levels” of government (Provincial and Federal) will continue to “help” the county as the spending continues out of control as it is? Even if they wanted to (which is questionable, at best), how can they, when we are in a war with a former ally that has turned into far from that?
2) In any event, your part as a property taxpayer in attempting to cover that 2024 shortfall was $9.02 PER DAY PER AVERAGE TAXPAYER for every one of the 366 days in 2024. How does it feel to take the best part of a tenner out of your wallet every single day and let go of it ,to see where the wind will take it?
Stop the spend.
End the bloat.
Say “NO” to more urbanization of the County, and the transfer of your tax dollars to developers, consultants, the Provincial Government and other outside interests.
Only you have the power to reverse the trend.
Will it be exercised, or just more of the same?
Stand for office next October and stand up for the County.
There is strong data to show the County’s employee numbers have increased significantly in the last 6 years and with a huge increase with those making over $100,000. An Independent staffing review is required to bring us back to essential services.
Using the Action Request form on Shire Hall’s website, I received the following information. According to Staff, this is an approximate count of TAXPAYERS for PEC, based on the number of bills printed in each of the following years.
2025- 16,467
2024- 16,357
2023- 16,050
2022- 16,712
2021- 15,107
2020- 14,843
Remember – these are the people who pay to keep the lights on in Shire Hall. 16,467 taxpaying residents. How are we affording the salaries, “Sunshine List” at $100,000 plus, along with the usual accompaniment of Staff at their disposal? Never mind all the other things we pay for. A reset is definitely in order here.
Thanks Teena for amazing data. I daresay that it took you considerably more effort to obtain the data than it took Staff to provide it.
Now for some simple analysis, which took me 45 minutes this morning over a coffee, using your figures, and publicly available data from the County’s Audited Financial Statements as posted at https://www.thecounty.ca/residents/services/finance/
If anyone wishes to look for themselves, and certainly “check our work”, that would be welcome.
The following are the amounts your County Staff spent, at the direction of your Mayor and Council, for the year ended Dec 31, 2024.
Have a look:
TOTALS:
Salaries, wages and employee benefits $34,734,661
Interest on long-term debt $2,705,696
Materials and supplies $20,576,560
Contracted services and general services $20,079,154
Rents and financial services $1,030,643
External transfers $5,362,901
Amortization of tangible capital assets $11,642,135
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES $96,131,750
AMOUNTS PER TAXPAYER:
Salaries, wages and employee benefits $2,123.53
Interest on long-term debt $165.42
Materials and supplies $1,257.97
Contracted services and general services $1,227.56
Rents and financial services $63.01
External transfers $327.87
Amortization of tangible capital assets $711.75
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES PER TAXPAYER $5,877.10
That’s $490 per month, or $16.06 PER DAY FOR EVERY ONE OF THE 366 DAYS IN 2024 FOR EVERY SINGLE TAXPAYER.
QUESTIONS FOR ALL YOU TAXPAYERS:
1) Do you feel that these amounts are sensible for a County of approximately 25,000 souls?
2) Do you feel that you are getting your money’s worth in return for your tax dollars? (Remember, even if Property Taxes were not the only source of revenue, the money comes largely from Property Taxes, and Provincial and Federal grants, which also come from taxpayers.)
3) How will you like it when the figures are released for the year ended Dec 31, 2025 (expected to be delayed until at least August 2026, per the County’s traditional practice), when the likelihood is that the numbers will increase by double-digit percentages?
After you answer these questions honestly, then ask yourself if you will do anything different in the next election in Oct 2026. Will you stand for office? Will you vote? Or, ______? (That’s a write-in space).
Shire Hall is out of control. Nobody controls them. This is self generating, spontaneous empire building. Council can’t be doing its job.
And to answer your question “Or, ______? (That’s a write-in space)” I’ll work, canvass, go door to door anywhere in the county to get the old guard out of office (By old guard I mean Ferguy and those 6 council members who voted to grant him him Ford’s “strong mayor” powers.
So many questions — al of which are excellent ones.
Bad (or no) data leads to bad decisions (or no decisions).
Council and Staff have a long history (not just in PEC) of making decisions without proper data, that prove to be bad decisions indeed.
This Mayor, Council and Staff have proven time and again that they do not respect data, or seek it, or use critical thinking to analyze it. They make decisions based on opinions and fantasy projections underpinned by nothing except wishes and hopes.
In a year’s time, there is a chance to reverse this trend, when the Oct 2026 election is held. If we can have common sense people stand for election to the Mayor and Council roles, and if the electorate decides to support such people rather than continue with the incumbents, then there will exist an opportunity to perhaps change the status quo.
Right-size the County government, right-size the spending back to what it should be for a county of 25,000 population, and stop the decisions that do not benefit County residents and taxpayers.
A great deal of damage can be accomplished in one year.