What was said

Council hears from developers and residents

Selected comments from deputants, developers and residents, as well as relevant interactions with council members, are documented below in the order presented in the council meeting on August 27. The full meeting may be watched at here.

A link will be provided in the online version of this partial transcript.

DEVON DANIELL – KAITLIN CORP, DEVELOPER OF THE CORK AND VINE PROJECT IN WELLINGTON
“We are ready to go,” stated Daniell. “Our engineering designs are approved and complete. The job has been tendered. Our service contractors have been lined up. Pending a yes tonight, work will start in September. Shovels will be in the ground in a matter of weeks.”

Wellington councillor Corey Engelsdorfer was hoping the developer had brought a cheque with him.

“I believe this is the fourth time you are asking for your date to be pushed back for your DC prepayment,” said Engelsdorfer. “Council has shown good faith in building some infrastructure for you to start building your homes. My question is, why would we consider granting an extension?”

Daniell noted that the prepayment payable under the upfront development charges agreement would be $12.6 million, but he and County staff needed more time.

“Until we know we can connect the toilets and turn on the taps this project doesn’t exist yet,” said Daniell. “We just need a few months to pull the paperwork together.”

Councillor Chris Braney said the delays and excuses were “delivering our biggest fears, that these payments aren’t going to be made.”

Daniell explained that “Everything is delayed right now. This cheque will be coming—it’s a matter of paperwork. We’re saying before the end of the year.”

Councillor Phil St-Jean jumped in to assist the developer.

“Thank you for coming and reassuring us that your commitment hasn’t wavered,” said St-Jean to the vocal bemusement of the crowd. “Blaming you for the delay is absolutely unfair.”

JOANNA GREEN, CHAIR, WELLINGTON COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
“Our association supports responsible, reasonable and sustainable development, and we recognize the need to expand infrastructure to match and keep pace with such growth,” said Green. She explained, however, that subject matter experts are sounding the alarm about “questionable assumptions and growth projections, the costs involved, the funding formula and the financial backup plan in case the anticipated development and funding fails to materialize.

“To date our concerns have not been addressed,” said Green.

Late last year, having run out of alternatives, the Wellington Community Association (WCA) sought legal advice. After reviewing the agreements, Andrew Biggart, a partner at Ritchie, Ketcheson Hart and Biggart, came to the same conclusion: the current funding formula is fundamentally flawed, with no guarantee that that payment would ever be made.

Then Green put aside her role as WCA chair and addressed Council personally.

“I am not an adversarial person. I prefer to work toward collaborative solutions. Hiring a lawyer was something I’ve never done before, and we are only doing it now because we felt we had no other choice.

“I am bitterly resentful for being put into a position of spending not only my own pension money but also the hard-earned dollars of others to pad the pockets of an expensive Toronto lawyer. I am saddened that these funds are being diverted away from valuable and worthwhile efforts like the Foodbank, County Kids Reads, Back the Build, the County Foundation etc,.

“Instead, this money is being used to ensure the financial stability of County residents is protected and safeguarded, which is actually your job as council members.

“We can do this the easy way or the hard way,” said Green. “The choice is yours.”

HELEN PROLAS – CHAIR, WELLINGTON ON THE LAKE CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE GROWTH
Prolas presented the meeting with a petition bearing 883 signatures from across the County.

She pointed to the primary County document guiding development and growth. Quoting the County’s Official Plan, she observed that “infrastructure will only be provided where the municipality can financially sustain and maintain adequate services and that new infrastructure for development shall not impose a financial burden on existing ratepayers.”

Prolas said the plan was based on too many ‘ifs.’

“We can’t work on a promise. Banks don’t approve mortgages based on ‘ifs.’ So why should we?

ANGELO PUGLISI – QUINTE HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION
“We respectfully request that the County continue to support the growth that was intended in your Official Plan and your strategy to attract growth,” said Puglisi. “Perhaps we should shift the focus from slowing down development to working with industry to lobby federal and provincial governments to provide more infrastructure funding.”

FRED HELLER – PICTON HEIGHTS LTD
“We own a 31-acre property at the corner of Nery and Inkerman in Picton. We are planning a vibrant new community consisting 372 townhomes and 60 apartments. Our mission is to provide moderately priced housing solutions. We are in the final stages of agreeing all subdivision conditions.”

JOHN AMBROSE
John Ambrose cautioned that the municipality’s finances aren’t strong enough to take on more debt. He urged Council to defer tendering the design of a new water plant, at least until the municipality dug itself out of a net debt financial position.

DAVE CLEAVE, PRINCIPAL, PORT PICTON HOMES
Dave Cleave grew up in Wellington. He employs 300 full-time employees year-round, building about 100 homes annually. He urged council to be brave. He recounted how the Wellington village council, decades ago, invested $15 million into the wastewater pipes and plants.

“Imagine had Wellington council not made that investment,” said Cleave. “No Wellington on the Lake, no Westwind subdivision, no Ashgill subdivision. No growth. Declining population. Maybe Home Hardware or Foodland doesn’t make it. Certainly no Drake effect or fine dining and services. Probably no new arena. Certainly, no Tims. I ask you to be brave. Be brave and approve these tenders for the benefit of the entire County.”

TIM JONES, CEO OF BASE31
“I’m here to explain how growth can be a force for good in the community,” said Jones. “The role of community builders should not be about stopping growth, but shaping growth.

“The County has a whopping 14,500 applications for units in your planning approval pipeline. Our group has invested $50 million before we have built a single home. Our work can help elevate Prince Edward County as a global destination.

“Simply put, more people, residents and visitors, will mean more jobs and prosperity for everyone.”

ALEXANDRA DEGASPERIS VP DECO COMMUNITIES, PARTNER IN BASE31
“The decision before you will lay the groundwork for the future resilience of the County. Major infrastructure projects have always required a bold vision for a better tomorrow along with the courage of Council to champion that vision.”

“You have two choices: move forward and let growth fund the necessary investments for safe, clean water, or halt progress. Your system will fail, growth will have been turned away, and fears that ratepayers will be left holding the bag for costs, will most certainly come true.

“Growth is here. Infrastructure is needed. We will help pay for it, if you let us.”

JACK WINBERG CEO ROCKPORT GROUP, PARTNER IN BASE31
“You know you need water,” Winberg told Council. “Spend the $2.5 million to figure it out and bring back to this community within the next year the actual tenders and numbers so that you know—before you make a decision. You are not being asked to push ‘go’ on all this. You are being asked to research and get drawings.”

Winberg suggested that pausing wouldn’t provide the certainty residents are seeking. He added there was no way to know “precisely how much growth, and how quickly growth is going to come and how quickly we are going to pick up our permits and pay our development charges. There is no crystal ball that can deliver the precise answers to that question.”

He said that the only certainty was that if Council paused, that growth would stop.

“The community is not charged with shaping the future of this County; you are,” said Winberg. Authorizing the engineering work is going to get you the facts. You are not making the final decision. We will come back to deal with that another time,” assured Winberg.

Councillor Dave Harrison said he was worried about the County carrying the risk—that he wasn’t prepared to have ratepayers bridging the infrastructure costs until developers paid development charges.

Alexandra De Gasperis said the infrastructure must come first.

“It’s impossible for us to put money on the table prior to a decision about infrastructure. The upfronting agreements and cost-sharing agreements happen after the decision for infrastructure has been made.

Winberg added, “In the next year your staff are going to bring back a package with a detailed plan and how it is going to be paid for. I have confidence your staff will bring back a proper financing plan.”

PHYO KYI – RESIDENT
“We need a clearly laid out plan to pay for the infrastructure. Appropriate components, proper sequencing, timing, interrelations, and integrated management. That’s a program plan.”

He said much more work needs to be done before designing a new water plant.

“We also need to complete the regional development charges study—Picton and Wellington together. It is the foundation for a fair and committed arrangement for cost recovery through front-end financing agreements with each of the identified developers.

“It means a commitment from developers to pay for the infrastructure as it is built, not when they eventually decide to build homes,” said Kyi.

CLAUDETTE MARR – RESIDENT
A living wage in the County is $42,848,” said Marr. “Who can afford these homes?

WENDY MATTHEWS – RESIDENT
“We are not opposed to growth,” said Matthews. “We understand that growth is good, if it is managed right “We [this municipality] have never done anything on this scale. We have to follow the guidelines Phyo recommends.

“We need time to put together the visible road map for the whole project—encompassing program management, cost recovery and communications management.

“The ratepayers in PEC have invested $43 million in waterworks infrastructure upgrades without knowing how or when we are going to get that money back.”

ELAINE JACKSON – RESIDENT
“Most people aren’t opposed to development; we just want fiscally responsible development. You must increase transparency and accountability,” Jackon urged council.

JENNIFER ARMSTRONG
“I recognize the need for development, and I want it done in a responsible way,” said Armstrong. “[But] I have been asking questions for over a year now, with no solid answers. I am told I am wrong, but not why I’m wrong. I would love to be wrong. But when a project such as this so greatly threatens my ability to stay in the community I love and grew up in, I can’t ignore it.

“I am the generation that will carry this project. Don’t put this burden on me and my peers when it is already hard enough to live here.”

KEN ROBERTSON
Robertson wanted to know who was going to fund the million square feet of commercial development upon which the infrastructure financing relies.

“Who is going to pay this $30 million that isn’t coming?” asked Robertson. “How is that $30 million hole going to be filled?

BEN DAVERN
“You work for us,” said Davern. “You don’t work for developers. When you vote, you have to vote in our interests. We put you there, not developers.”

FELIX LIEBREGTS
“My son and I operate an electrical business,” said Liebregts. He explained that when they complete a job, they get paid. “We don’t say pay us depending on how your business goes.”

He says council shouldn’t be getting itself into such a risky arrangement.

“You are saying, [we’ll fund all the infrastructure, and you, the developers, can] pay us back based upon how your sales go. You need concrete payment when the work is done.”