Slow money

Frustrated by delays councillors demand that parkland money be spent—despite lack of policy

Who knew a seemingly innocuous agenda item labelled “cash-inlieu of parkland report” would arouse such fury and heat? Nevertheless, a committee of council erupted into allegations of conspiracy and hoarded funds last week after staff asked for more time to develop a coherent policy to deal with money developers pay the municipality to develop parkland. More precisely, the anger arose from some quarters because staff also wanted a freeze on the use of these funds until a coherent policy had been developed.

But this is election season, and some councillors are eager to sprinkle money in their ward. Jamie Forrester sat quietly during the meeting waiting for the item to be debated.

He is keen to see the $40,000 contributed to the parkland fund by Cottage Advisors spent in Athol, and soon. The developer faced stiff opposition in 2008 and 2009 by some residents and politicians including then-Athol councillor Brian Marisett in 2008. This contribution was offered as a means to mollify some of the concerns.

The intention then, and now, was that the money would be used to enhance parkland facilities in Athol. But there were no rules to govern the use of these funds—so it has languished in a trust account— waiting for policy to catch up with the councillor’s desire to spend it. Forrester and fellow Athol resident Marisett fear the money will be dispersed around the County or fall into general funds.

“I’ve been waiting for this report for more than a year,” said Forrester with rising ire. “My concern then, was that when we got this report we wouldn’t be able to do anything with [the money]. Now you are telling me the money won’t come until next council? This money will be forgotten and will be dumped in a pool,” predicted Forrester.

Councillor Marisett was equally frustrated by delay.

“I’ve been waiting five years for Cottage Advisors’ money to be spent in Athol,” said Marisett. “I try and maintain respect for staff, but for five years this money sits in limbo.”

But other councillors challenged Forrester and Marisett, pointing out that neither had produced recommendations or suggestions indicating how the money should be spent.

“Nothing has come before council,” observed Jim Dunlop, Wellington councillor. “Nobody has come forward to say they want to build x, y or z.”

Rising to the challenge, Forrester suggested a pair of projects—fixing a boat launch and assisting the Lions club with the development of a boardwalk in CherryValley.

“We can come up with projects very quickly,” said Forrester.

Dewing noted a problem. The municipality doesn’t own the land. Nor has any funds been allocated in the current budget.

“I’m concerned about spending money from the 2015 budget, and the legality of spending trust money on property we don’t own,” cautioned Dewing.

This only served to stoke Forrester’s fury.

“I am not concerned about what concerns you,” replied Forrester petulantly to the County manager.

But Dewing’s caution, ineffective on Forrester, was sufficient to persuade most of his colleagues around the horseshoe that it ought to tread carefully—though most upheld the contention that the money extracted from Cottage Advisors should stay in Athol.

It was left to South Marysburgh councillor Barb Proctor to inadvertently brush the veneer off the transaction that saw $40,000 contributed to the community.

“This was an olive branch to the folks who objected to this project,” observed Proctor. “This was a win for them.”

Most councillors saw it as unsporting to continue to deny the objectors their spoils any longer.

They agreed Athol would get the money pending a legal opinion.

This story has been updated to correct Barb Proctor’s ward representation to South Marysburgh.