Transparency
There appears to be an attitude in this township to keep the citizens on a need-to-know basis.
This mayor and council have held virtually no open public town hall meetings for the purpose of general discussions about what is happening in the township. These meetings serve to inform both parties about issues and concerns and develop a better understanding within the Township. As Mayor I will commit to a minimum of 2 town hall meetings per year. Also, I will encourage the councillors to engage in similar meetings but with the added condition that non ward councillors or the Mayor can attend by invitation of the ward councillor.
Government transparency is not that difficult to obtain. With modern technology and widespread use of email it has become easy to reach a large number of people very inexpensively. An email list could easily be compiled and Agendas of public meetings could be sent out informing people of what is happening in the community. On the Council agenda page there should be no difference between the HTML and the PDF version as currently exists
The information posted by the municipality is incomplete and, in some cases, out of date and inaccurate. Some bylaws don’t show up on the Bylaw page of the website. Why? This should be up to date so all can see.
Lastly, it must be impressed on Township staff that they must become more open to providing information to the public. The freedom of information act should only be used when there are questions about the appropriateness of the release. Otherwise the information should be freely handed over. The only exception is information that is truly confidential.
The Petersburg Water System is a prime example. The original communication discussed the importance of having a looped system as it is more efficient in water delivery and less disruptive if the system needed upgrades or repair. Designs were shown in 2024 as a looped system serving 62 residences and possibly another 26 properties.
There were no new drawings posted until May 2026. The designed system is no longer looped and has dead end legs on Notre Dame Dr. and Snyder’s Rd. from Deerfield Ave. The drawings showed that the system would only service the 62 properties and not the other 26. Why were the other 26 properties not shown as optional. It was only when the Notice of Intent to pass a Bylaw did the 26 become aware of their obligation. Notice was given by regular mail to some and registered mail to others. Why the difference? Some did not even receive the notice.
There have been no meetings to explain the design changes. The Ward 2 Councillor described the situation as complicated. I guess that means that we are not capable of understanding the issue or more likely the redesign is to facilitate connection to the regional system at which point the extension is not a local improvement.