Skip to content

2021 capital budget deferred as motion over water bills sinks

Pelham council voted to defer a final decision on the 2021 capital budget at its Dec. 7 meeting, in hopes that Santa Claus—in the form of the provincial and federal governments —will drop more cash down the Town’s chimney this holiday season.

Pelham council voted to defer a final decision on the 2021 capital budget at its Dec. 7 meeting, in hopes that Santa Claus—in the form of the provincial and federal governments —will drop more cash down the Town’s chimney this holiday season.

Pelham, like countless other of Ontario’s 444 municipalities, is awaiting approval on Phase 2 of COVID-19 relief funding. Treasurer Teresa Quinlin told council that she expects to hear one way or another about the money by Dec. 31.

[Editor's note: The province announced on Wednesday, Dec. 16, that Pelham would receive some $1.2 million in COVID-related funding, though it was not immediately clear how the funds were to be divided between the municipality and the Pelham Public Library.]

While council unanimously voted to defer the capital budget until January, some confusion arose over the matter of water and wastewater rate increases. The budget has proposed a substantial increase to these in 2021, in part to catch up with the neglect of previous administrations.

RELATED: ANALYSIS | Council Dogmatics may cost us cash

“I would submit to you that the water and rate budget has nothing to do whatsoever with tax increases,” CAO David Cribbs told councillors. “It’s user-supported.”

Rate increases are proposed at 7.4 percent for water and 9.5 percent for wastewater — a price hike, however, that will still leave Pelham with some of the cheapest water and wastewater service in Niagara.

“It’s quite a jump for one year, especially with difficulties families are facing,” Councillor Lisa Haun argued.

Councillor Marianne Stewart then made a motion to spread the increase over two budgets, but immediately ran into the problem of details.

“Could we have some specificity?” Cribbs said, asking for hard numbers.

Quinlin then reminded council that the projected water rate increases were approved in 2018, and any deviation from that schedule would require a total reset. There was also the matter of not knowing what the Region will charge the Town for 2022, which in turn affects Pelham’s rates.

Councillor John Wink agreed. “We’ve made a plan, why aren’t we sticking to the plan?” he said.

“When we made our plan, I don’t think anyone expected we’d be in a worldwide pandemic,” Haun replied.

Councillor Wayne Olson, who had been critical of the rate increase at council’s last meeting, conceded that “we have to catch up with this.”

We’ve made a plan, why aren’t we sticking to the plan?

Ward 3’s Bob Hildebrandt agreed, and with most of council suddenly against doing the math and changing the schedule, the idea to spread out the rate increase died on the table.

“I guess the option here is to withdraw the motion as it doesn’t have support,” Stewart said.

Haun was the only no-vote on the matter, meaning the average Pelham household will see a $73 increase in water and wastewater rates next year.

Report idea shot down

A motion by Hildebrandt to force Town staff to provide detailed reports on the hiring of all consultants and lawyers related to development was defeated. Hildebrandt appeared put off by the frequent overlap of the same third-party outfits being involved in planning, engineering, and legal counsel.

“We’re always seeing the same companies,” he said.

Cribbs explained the reason for this was the size and insular nature of the development industry in the Niagara Region.

“There are a finite number of players in the area,” the CAO said. “That’s why you see the same names popping up. It would be somewhat arbitrary for us to force third parties to contract with other third parties simply because we don’t like the fact they work for the same companies.”

Cribbs didn’t appear to object to the possibility of added staff workload due to Hildebrandt’s motion, saying that, “Staff are supposed to be neutral like Switzerland” and would abide by it if they had to.

In the end, the motion was lost, 3-3, with the familiar bloc of Hildebrandt, Haun and Stewart in favour, with Olson, Wink and Mayor Marvin Junkin against.

Absent a deciding vote (which would have been provided by Councillor Ron Kore, who remained on a leave of absence), under parliamentary rules motions which end in a tie are defeated.

Drive-thru debate

Crowngrove Estates Inc. gave a presentation on their proposed “Shops on 20” development, covering the area immediately east of Wellspring Way and north of the community centre, alongside Hwy. 20. Much like the existing commercial development to the west—the Food Basics plaza—the plan calls for a strip-like layout of three, single-story buildings, including two standalone restaurants —a McDonalds and a Starbucks.

Hildebrandt raised concerns with the developers about the planned drive-thru corridors, citing a danger to pedestrians.

Site plan presented to Pelham Town Council during its Dec. 7 meeting, showing proposed parking and drive-thru patterns for the new strip mall currently planned for the site at Wellspring Way and Highway 20, Fonthill. TOWN OF PELHAM

“I consider [the existing Tim Hortons drive-thru to the west] layout to be quite unsafe,” the Ward 3 councillor said. “In my view that needs to be addressed before we approve this.”

Crowngrove representative Aly Hamdy stressed that pedestrian crossings and signage are industry-standard in those designs.

“We have approved hundreds of these across the country,” Hamdy said. “And, knock on wood, there haven’t been any lawsuits at this point. We have every confidence that there is no hazard.”

Still, when the matter came up for vote later, Hildebrandt again voiced concern, citing a 2019 case where a 90-year-old pedestrian was killed at a Toronto drive-thru.

Wink pushed Hildebrandt for more information.

“So, this is one incident you’ve been able to find in all of Canada—do we know that that design was exactly as this design?” he asked.

“No, I do not care to answer that question,” Hildebrandt replied.

The plan bylaw to authorize construction will be presented at the next meeting.

COVID-19 vaccine

During his COVID-19 update, Fire Chief Bob Lymburner told council that two locations in Pelham meet criteria for vaccine distribution—the community centre, and Fire Station No. 1. Lymburner said Niagara Health will evaluate and make the location decision, but expects there only to be one vaccination site given Pelham’s size.

Council also voted to extend the Town’s mask bylaw until Aug. 31. While that date is far in the future, it was clarified that it can be revoked sooner.

Odds and ends

A request from the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority to push back against proposed regulatory changes from the provincial government was shot down by council. In another tied-vote defeat, Junkin led the way in supporting redefining the role of the NPCA.

Council also unanimously received a letter in support of moving forward with increasing high-speed Wi-Fi service in Pelham’s rural areas.

   


Reader Feedback

John Chick

About the Author: John Chick

John Chick has worked in and out of media for some 20 years, including stints with The Score, CBC, and the Toronto Sun. He covers Pelham Town Council and occasional other items for PelhamToday, and splits his time between Fonthill and Toronto
Read more