County News

Perfect storm

Posted: Apr 1, 2026 at 10:39 am   /   by   /   comments (5)

Structural issues, job evaluations and retro-pay drive County staff earnings higher

A combination of one-time factors and long-standing structural issues led to a sharp increase in the number of County employees on Ontario’s Sunshine List, according to a new report presented to Council.

The 2025 Public Sector Salary Disclosure shows 92 Prince Edward County employees earned more than $100,000, up from 64 in 2023—a 43 per cent increase.

Director of Finance Arryn Mc- Nichol told Council the spike was largely the result of a “perfect storm” of circumstances.

“This year was certainly atypical in that we had a number of things happen that increased the number of employees that ended up on the list,” McNichol said. “We had joint job evaluations that came into play and the retro-pay associated with that. And then we had some collective agreements that were negotiated that Council’s aware of where there was also retro payments. We thought it was important to outline the context around some of these increases.”

His report notes the Sunshine List also reflects gross taxable earnings, not base salary, meaning figures can include overtime, retroactive pay, and lump-sum payments. It also captures earnings paid within a calendar year, regardless of when they were earned.

Despite those explanations, several councillors raised concerns about the scale of the increase and its financial implications.

Councillor Braney called the growth “deeply concerning,” noting the number of employees on the list has risen significantly without a comparable increase in population. The total compensation for those 92 employees now exceeds $12 million.

“At a time when our municipality is facing a significant infrastructure gap, rising water rates, and increasing financial pressures, this figure becomes a lightning rod for taxpayers,” said Braney.

He questioned how the increase occurred without noticeable improvements in service delivery.

“Residents are asking valid questions about priorities and fiscal responsibility,” he added.

CAO Adam Goheen said the municipality is already taking steps to address concerns through a series of reviews approved in the 2026 budget. Those include a service delivery review, an organizational review, and a non-union compensation review.

The service delivery and organizational review is about halfway complete, with an interim update expected in April and final results later this year.

“That’s part of making sure we’re the right size for the services we provide and have the right people in the right places,” said Goheen.

The compensation review will compare County salaries to similar municipalities to determine whether pay levels are appropriate.

“We need to be accountable to taxpayers and ensure that compensation is in line,” he added.

Councillor Phil St. Jean said it is important to ensure the County is neither overpaying nor underpaying staff, noting past challenges with employee retention.

“We’ve seen higher voluntary exits because we were not paying what the market bears,” he said.

Goheen confirmed the compensation review will include benchmarking against comparable roles and municipalities.

Some councillors questioned whether the Sunshine List remains a useful measure.

Councillor John Hirsch said the outdated $100,000 threshold limits its value.

“$100,000 in 1995 is roughly equivalent to $200,000 today,” he said. “On that basis, we only have four people on a properly revised sunshine list. So it’s become something that everyone likes to focus on and it’s not a real thing anymore in my view,” he said.

Councillor Nieman added that compensation is not typically the primary reason employees leave jobs.

“People do not leave their job because of money — it’s their manager,” he said.

Councillor Roy Pennell expressed frustration with past council decisions and transparency, saying wage growth had accelerated in recent years.

“In the last four years, I just saw things skyrocket,” he said. “We’re now trying to correct it.”

Pennell also alleged Council had previously been misled about reasons for staff departures, calling that unacceptable.

“If you were running a business and handled wages the way this County has in the past, you’d be broke,” he said. “There’s only one taxpayer at the end of the day.”

Results from the ongoing service delivery and compensation reviews are expected later this year and will help inform future staffing and budget decisions.

Comments (5)

write a reply to Teena Cancel reply

Comment
Name E-mail Website

  • Apr 28, 2026 at 9:31 am Teena

    EXCERPT:
    Councillor Roy Pennell expressed frustration with past council decisions and transparency, saying wage growth had accelerated in recent years.

    “In the last four years, I just saw things skyrocket,” he said. “We’re now trying to correct it.”

    Pennell also alleged Council had previously been misled about reasons for staff departures, calling that unacceptable.

    “If you were running a business and handled wages the way this County has in the past, you’d be broke,” he said. “There’s only one taxpayer at the end of the day.”

    XXXXX

    Sad to say that Councillor Pennell has something wrong here. And it’s not just wage growth, but staff growth as well. Mayor Ferguson and many of the existing members of Council have been passively watching this bloat of staffing increases and their attendant wages since the 2018 and subsequent 2022 elections. They hired a highly qualified Chief Executive Officer in 2019, and then let her loose to build a staffing empire with what appears to be no restraint. The CAO did the job she had hired on for, was exceptionally well qualified to do so, and did it well. But. NOW some in our Council finds this unacceptable? Of concern? Where have they been?

    Even Base31 has downsized their staff by ten:
    See Link: https://pictongazette.ca/post/a-streamlined-operation

    As things have “slowed down” around PEC, how about dissolving the lovely “Costing Ageement” our previous CAO made with the Base31 Developers to work inside our municipal offices, with their staff being paid by Base31?

    xxxxxxxxxxxx
    CAO Update: Second Quarter Report
    August 16, 2022
    Report CAO 04-2022
    See 1st paragraph on pg. 10
    LINK: https://princeedwardcounty.civicweb.net/document/273538/

    EXCERPT:
    “Given the size and impact of this site, infrastructure demands for this project will be
    evaluated as part of the Master Servicing Plan and funded by the new growth
    anticipated. A costing agreement with the Base 31 developers was also negotiated
    this quarter which will support a “concierge” service approach on this project given its
    magnitude and complexity and the number of departments involved over the next
    several years, in exchange for the salary dollars to support municipal staff positions
    dedicated to this work. This approach is unique for the municipality, but is expected
    to avoid time delays, and keep the interests of the County at the forefront, and not
    take much needed staff attention away from other proposed projects of a smaller
    scale across the County.”

    xxxxxxxxxxxx

    It began (although I would have to check my records) with a part-time clerk, an engineer and a planner, and I believe there is now a fourth position as well. A developer has no business having their staff inside Shire Hall, which is bursting at the seams with staff as it is. How long before other developers think this is a good idea, and OUR elected officials, who allowed the previous CAO to set this up as a precedent, to streamline and expedite doing business with them? Make no mistake. This is the fault of Council.

    QUOTE: “Pennell also alleged Council had previously been misled about reasons for staff departures, calling that unacceptable.”

    I want to know who the Hell on Staff had been misleading our Council – and, if they’re still on staff, WHY? In the real world, they’d have been shown the door.

    For the past two terms of office, many of the same members of Council have sat back and let ALL of this happen. Through the better part of the last eight years of quarterly reports and annual budgets. And done nothing to reign it in? And NOW they’re worried?

    We should ALL be worried.

    Reply
  • Apr 18, 2026 at 7:40 pm Teena

    I have a question and no, I am not financially astute by any stretch.

    However, could someone please explain what justifies a 23.4% salary increase over a two year period, for one Sunshine Staff employee [hired 2023, first increase of 8.9% in 2024, second increase of 14.5% in 2025]? Who in staff authorized this [the Mayor, all of Council, our previous CAO or a head of a dept.?], and was Council consulted or just given final figures for wages for all staff for final approval?

    I think that in 2024 the cost of living increase was 3.4%; and in 2025 the cost of living increase was 5.3%.

    Now, I could take the time and go through the entire sunshine list that our 25,000+/- taxpayers are paying for [and I really hope someone out there who understands the math does just that], but I think you get the idea. In my world salary increases should be based on the annual cost of living index, with perhaps a bit extra for a job well done, if and when we [the taxpayers of PEC] have the excess funds to accommodate. This seems completely out of line to me.

    If I have this wrong, what am I missing? I’d really like to know!

    Reply
    • Apr 18, 2026 at 8:13 pm Teena

      EXCERPT:
      “The service delivery and organizational review is about halfway complete, with an interim update expected in April and final results later this year.”
      We’re past the mid-April mark – which meeting will the interim update appear?

      Reply
      • Apr 20, 2026 at 9:17 am Times

        Hi Teena,
        This item is on the April 23 Committee of the Whole Agenda
        -Corey

        Reply
        • Apr 20, 2026 at 9:29 am Teena

          Thank you very much, Corey. I will be watching, and I hope everyone in PEC will do so as well. This is important!
          Teena

          Reply