County News
Who’s in charge?
Mayor’s office blowup reveals Shire Hall thinking about infrastructure spending
Mayor Steve Ferguson has discouraged a council member from asking questions about how well Shire Hall is functioning—for fear of retribution from developers. Mayor Ferguson worries that an internal organizational review, demanded by Councillor Chris Braney, might prompt senior leadership to quit. He fears this could trigger developer lawsuits “in the hundreds of millions of dollars.” These developers, he suggests, are relying on senior leadership to ensure planned waterworks projects keep moving forward. Mayor Ferguson argues that Secondary Plans in Wellington and Picton imply an obligation by the municipality to provide waterworks infrastructure to landowners and developers. He claims, too, that the Province compels the municipality to accommodate growth for three years—an obligation it can’t currently meet.
“If the municipality fails to supply the necessary infrastructure, it is at risk of lawsuits from the landowners of those properties within the town boundary,” wrote Mayor Ferguson in response to questions posed by the Times.
Mayor Ferguson contends that developers hold all the cards.
In a tense conversation with the Hillier council member in Mayor Ferguson’s office two weeks ago, the mayor linked the threat of developer lawsuits to the continuing tenure of the CAO (Chief Administrative Officer), according to Councillor Chris Braney. Mayor Ferguson worried the CAO might quit in response to an internal review of the “culture of Shire Hall”. Doing so could prompt developers to take action to ensure planned waterworks projects keep moving forward.
In a written response, Mayor Ferguson wrote that waterworks plans are “brought forward to council for consideration to this point are not tied to any one staff member. Council has and will continue to have the final say as the program moves forward.”
However, Mayor Ferguson conceded that its obligations to developers could limit Council’s decision-making authority—not just with project- specific choices, but also with how Council oversees the management of municipal business.
“I did remind Councillor Braney about the risks we face,” said Mayor Ferguson, “which we have also been upfront with the public over the past couple of years.”
It is the clearest indication of the tensions brewing inside the walls of Shire Hall to date, driven by the biggest spending plans this municipality has ever embarked upon.
Shire Hall has spent about $50 million so far in Wellington (water tower, trunklines currently underway, overflow tank and such). On the planning table is an additional $250 million to build a regional water system to bring treated water from Wellington to Picton. A financial plan detailing how the waterworks utility and its 6,000 users will fund it is set to be revealed in April.
But this wasn’t the issue that sparked the exchange in the mayor’s office. Instead, it was a process issue.
Councillor Braney wants a performance evaluation of the management of Shire Hall. He has been hearing many reports of poor communication, broken reporting lines, widespread confusion and generally poor morale among municipal staff and council. The result is a pronounced decline in the organization’s effectiveness, according to the internal reports he and other councillors are receiving.
Councillor Braney says his attempts to put this matter on the council table for discussion—either in closed or open session—were thwarted by Mayor Ferguson. Councillor Braney pressed for a transparent debate among council members. According to the Hillier councillor, Mayor Ferguson said he didn’t believe municipal bylaws would allow for such a meeting, but “he would think about it.”
Unsatisfied, the Hillier councillor pressed the matter. Mayor Ferguson snapped back, saying that such a discussion, even in a closed meeting, would prompt the CAO to leave and that doing so might trigger legal action from developers “in the hundreds of millions of dollars.”
So there it was.
For his part, Mayor Ferguson now says there are no legal or procedural reasons such a motion cannot come to the council table. He wrote that Councillor Braney could have put a notice of motion that evening, but withdrew it prior to the meeting.
“He is still welcome to put forth a motion requesting Council support for a cultural review of the corporate organization,” wrote Mayor Ferguson. “Should that motion come forward, Council would have a thorough discussion about the motion before making a decision.”
Councillor Braney’s notice of motion to do just that was expected at last evening’s council meeting
CAO’s Salary history:
2021 –> $178,274.07 (https://sunshineliststats.com/PersonByName/9/2021?n=countyofprinceedward&name=Marcia%20Wallace )
2022 –> $183,508.71
2023 –> $222,073.08
2024 –> $227,879.71
Plus Benefits.
This reign has cost County full-time residents and taxpayers dearly.
If the CAO were to resign, the day to day business of the County would continue just fine, for the most part. The Treasurer is the Director of Finance, and there recently was an acting Director of Finance when the Director was unavailable.
If issues arise with the day to day running of the County from the CAO resignation, then the Mayor would be solely accountable for these issues. The CAO reports solely to the Mayor. Not Council.
CAO resignation would be a positive step in the County reversing its financial slide further and further into negative Net Worth territory, regardless of what the Mayor may say.
Go Councillor Braney go!
If the CAO might quit, it makes me wonder what is she hiding? Anyone who does their job well should not be afraid of a review. As taxpayers who pay her salary we have the right to know what is happening at Shire Hall. It is concerning that a counselor is being rebuked for asking questions.
Agreed. As for what the CAO is doing – at some point in 2019 [after the 2018 municipal election, and presumably with that new Council’s consent – and the included our present Mayor) she used her Designated Authority to create a contract with the developers of Base31. I think (but am unsure) that this contract is renewed annually, and that it caught the new councillors (who were elected in 2022) by surprise. This contract means the owners of Base31 pay directly for the salaries of two full-time positions and one part-time clerk who, to the best of my knowledge, are all given “house room” within the halls of Shire Hall – which in turn gives them unregulated access to the CAO, the Mayor, all of Council, and all of the various departments within Shire Hall. Who in the hell gives a developer access to that? If not officially, then just walking the corridors, talking, getting a coffee, gossiping with co-workers. I am seriously not impressed.
Just as an aside, Marcia Wallace, the “Chief Administrative Officer for the Corporation of The County of Prince Edward”, was kind enough to inform me (in response to my request for information regarding the presence of the Mayor and the CAO representing PEC residents using their Official Status during the ULI: Toronto to PEC Tour last November, about why this hadn’t been mentioned on Shire Halls News & Notices website) that they are not required to keep the residents informed about any official representation (Mayor, CAO, Council, Staff) where the municipality is “Not Hosting” the Event.
Upcoming – our CAO is a key note speaker in a Toronto university symposium later this month of March, where her official designation as the Prince Edward County’s CAO is being used in its Title. However, it is not mentioned anywhere in our municipal website, nor media. That’s ok. Perhaps she won’t be discussing PEC, or representing the residents at this symposium at all. As she is apparently under no obligation to let the residents know of her official presence in any event “unhosted by the PEC municipality, perhaps we’ll never know. But if not representing the residents in her official capacity, then just use the job title as “CAO of an Ontario Municipality” and leave out the PEC bit.
It appears that the developers run the town. You can’t say no to a developement without getting sued. The Ontario government has overpowered the developers, a literal gun to the head of council. Spend on supporting infrastructure or die.
Everyone will lose. The council is a lame duck.
Blame Ford. Thanks Doug for 20 million dollar cheque for a $60 million repair of CR 49.
We need to declare bankruptcy and let the provincial government fix the situation that they created.
Agree. Council is in way over their heads. Absolutely no transparency ram roding stuff through. Ferguson is beginning to sound like Trump.
Chris Braney, cleary preparing for his 2026 Mayoral Run. No thanks.
Council is in over their heads. All population models show a decline in population and they have approved over 5000 additional units. And we’re building a hospital, 100 million for long term care.
This is the response from a “Public Submission: Action Request” I made at the beginning of March through Shire Hall’s website. The population numbers of taxpayers (ie those who are eligible to actually vote in PEC Municipal Elections) is a far cry from the population numbers being touted by Shire Hall. The missing numbers could be accounted for by those being underage, those not having completed requirements for residency in the Province or in Canada, etc. The next series of questions could be, out of those taxpayer numbers, may perhaps be: how many live in PEC on a full-time basis; how many live in PEC on a part-time basis (and do not rent out their properties, but for family seasonal use only); how many do not live here at all but are running their property as STA’s or part-time/full-time income property; and how many are businesses – again, do they live here (full or part-time) or at all. I’m quite sure I’ve not covered all the permutations. However my Action Request went as follows:
Question: Would you please send me the population numbers of taxpayers for PEC for EACH of the years from 2018 to present.
Response: An approx. count based on the # 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
Response cont’d: If you require me to go back to 2018 and 2019 This will require a bit more work as I would need to retain this information from archives. If this is required please note that there is a fee for this service.
It would be interesting to have 2018 and 2019 numbers and take this back to the 2018 municipal election. Someone else can pursue that.
… Mayor Ferguson worried the CAO might quit in response to an internal review of the “culture of Shire Hall”. In the real world most private sector employees suffer performance reviews on an annual basis and the probability of receiving huge settlements in a constructive dismissal suit is microscopic.
If she is responsible for a toxic culture time she moved on.