Heat and fury

Council unsure it wants tool to stimulate the local economy

Acommittee of council has moved a step closer toward giving itself the power to lure business investment to the County with cash incentives. It is a tool other communities possess and wield as a means to attract and encourage business to spend money—with the goal of creating jobs and contributing to the tax base.

But before a municipality is permitted to dole out taxpayer cash, the province insists it have a plan in place, identifying goals and targeting specific segments. Community Improvement Plans are designed to ensure that if money is to be used as an inducement, it is done fairly, to address unsatisfactory market circumstances, and not simply as a bribe. The province is seeking to avoid municipalities lavishing cash upon investors, each attempting to outbid the other for jobs.

A YEAR IN THE MAKING
County council began the process a year ago. As one of its last acts, the outgoing council hired hired Dillion Consulting to prepare a Community Improvement Plan (CIP). The $50,000 price tag for the plan was to be funded half by the County and half by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. The CIP is described as an ongoing project in the County’s planning and economic development budgets.

In March of this year Dillon Consulting’s Rory Baksh presented a draft Community Improvement Plan to council for consideration. Only a handful of councillors turned out for the meeting. Nevertheless the consultants collected the available feedback. They continued to meet with staff and other stakeholders in the community during the summer. They delivered their final plan last Wednesday night.

The plan focuses on the County’s widely recognized competitive advantage in the creative rural economy—suggesting targetted incentives toward, but not limited to, activities in creative industries, gastronomy, health care and wellness as well as green business opportunities.

But Baksh stressed that “creative” is meant to go well beyond artists and boutiques. “The Creative Rural Economy in this sense means the entrepreneurial spirit,” said Baksh. “And the original entrepreneurs are of course our farmers.”

Baksh explained that the Community Improvement Plan is a tool to “empower the municipality to employ financial incentives” but also a means to provide focus for the municipality’s economic development efforts.

ALARM BELLS RING
This last bit, for some, raises a red flag. Some believe the County is on the wrong track pursuing the creative rural economy and instead should either attract high-paying industrial jobs or get out of the business of economic development altogether.

They made life untenable for the former economic development officer and cut the legs out of the department’s budget. Since then council has bickered regularly about how, indeed if, the municipality should go about the business of developing the County’s economy.

Many of these councillors paid little attention to the year-long CIP process. That is until last week. Several, including Ameliasburgh councillor Janice Maynard, complained that “it is a lot of information to digest in a short amount of time.”

John Thompson, speaking on behalf of the County’s Federation of Agriculture, argued that the broad sweep of the plan, as proposed, would have likely have an impact on the County’s budget and as such needed more public scrutiny.

“You are being asked to make a major and final decision before the public has had a chance for input,” cautioned Thompson.

Athol representative Jamie Forrester said it wasn’t just some councillors who weren’t up to speed on the CIP.

“I’ve talked to the Chamber (Prince Edward County Chamber of Tourism and Commerce),” said Forrester. “They have never heard about this—nobody knows anything about this.”

TEMPERS FLARE
But that isn’t what caused tempers to boil over.

That happened when the County’s new Chief Administrative Officer Merlin Dewing advised the committee of council that if didn’t approve the CIP and adopt enacting bylaws by the end of the year it would lose the provincial portion of the funding. Council would be on the hook for the full $50,000 cost of the plan.

Forrester unloaded his frustration upon planning chief Gerry Murphy.

“This is driving me crazy,” fumed Forrester. “I don’t recall this coming up. I was never told we would be on the hook for $25,000.Why does this keep happening over and over again?”

Hillier Councillor Alec Lunn, serving as chair during Wednesday’s meeting, noted that it was Forrester’s job and that of other councillors to stay apprised of the work being done on their behalf by staff and their consultants—particularly a process that had been underway for nearly a year.

“We were all invited to a meeting in March,” noted Lunn. “It was clear to me what this document was. If you don’t go to meetings and don’t read the paper I guess some things will come as news to you.”

PUSH TO DEFER
The councillor from Consecon joined in the fray.

“I am feeling railroaded by this,” said Maynard. “It’s like having a gun put to my head.”

Brian Marisett, councillor for Picton, piled on.

“I have never been aware of this conditional funding,” said Marisett.

CAO Dewing pointed out to Marisett and others that every grant the municipality applies for and receives contains conditions—whether they are financial, time sensitive or action dependent.

“If you don’t do the work, you don’t get the money,” explained Dewing. “No funding agency provides grants without conditions.”

He also noted that it was wrong for council to get so far down the path with an Official Plan Amendment (required to enact the CIP) if it wasn’t planning to approve it. He suggested that if some on council had had reservations these should have been expressed at the beginning or middle of the process—not the end—noting that at the very least council had committed $25,000 and possibly $50,000 to the project.

He conceded that perhaps more could have been done to keep councillors apprised of the process and funding details but that this was mostly beside the point.

“All this angst is irrelevant,” observed Dewing. “This plan only gives authority to empower council to act. Broader consultation won’t give you a better decision in this situation.”

This is because, Dewing argued, the CIP only gives council a tool—it doesn’t compel council to use it.

HOW IT PLAYED OUT
Still, after the heat and fury about creative rural economy and deadlines subsided, questions lingered about how the fine print might bind council decision making.

Maynard worried that, by her reading of the Official Plan Amendment, the County would be compelled pursue objectives contained in the plan. These include projects to promote awareness of the plan and develop a cycling route, shoulder season partnerships as well as small business incubator projects. She worried the municipality would be obligated to provide incentives once the plan was in place.

Mayor Peter Mertens repeated that the CIP doesn’t commit the council to do anything.

“It is just a tool,” said Mertens. “It remains entirely council’s decision what to do with the tool—if anything at all. In no way does it bind council to any course of action. It is not an economic development blueprint.

“Instead it is an opportunity to offer incentives to stimulate job creation and growth. How council decides to use this tool and how much they intend to fund it, if at all, the decision remains entirely with council.”

The dissenters lost their motion to defer a decision until December. The committee of council then approved the plan—but lacking a two-thirds majority the matter will be debated one more time at a council meeting in December. In a roundabout way, the dissenters got their way.