As I have written a time or two over the years, few things make me happier than seeing residents engage in the process of municipal governance, and that is exactly what we saw at Monday’s council meeting, as residents attended council to make presentations and to participate in the public question portion of the meeting. The focus of concern for those residents who attended council was maintaining public access to Centreville Beach.
Attending a council meeting and engaging in the process is far more effective than simply complaining within a silo on Facebook. You can make much more progress by coming face to face with members of council, respectfully stating your concerns, and suggesting a course of action for council to consider.
For most council meetings the public gallery is empty, but every now and then, typically due to a hot button issue, the council chamber gallery fills with residents, and some of those take the time to participate in the meetings through deputations, presentations, or by asking questions of council.
And that is what we saw on Monday. Residents concerned about maintaining public access to Centreville Beach came to council, and they arrived organized with a 24-slide presentation, followed by questions posed to council during the public question period. The residents were respectful (aside from one brief outburst), and they did a fine job of making their case that the municipality should, in whatever way possible, assume ownership of that property in order to make it a public beach once again.
Centreville Beach is a tranquil spot, with a lovely patch of beach that has been enjoyed by residents for decades, and though the rightful ownership of the property is unclear at this point, I agree with the residents who attended council on Monday, that we deserve a definitive answer regarding the ownership status of the property. And I also agree that, if possible, the municipality should gain control of the property in order to maintain it as a public beach into the future.
For council, however, the issue isn’t cut and dried. With the absence of a clear and undisputed land owner, there is work to be done, mostly by lawyers, in order to determine the actual ownership of the property, and once Deputy Mayor Keaveney brings her motion to council at the next meeting, as she pledged to do on Monday, the wheels will be set in motion for a full investigation by staff and lawyers that will result in a report to council with the findings, along with recommendations for council to consider.
Governance at all levels, including municipal, can feel painfully slow at times for those who are not immersed in the system. Having sat in council chambers for more than 35 years, I am very familiar with the process, with the provincial legislation which governs what municipal councils can and can’t do, and with the time it takes to move the needle on an issue, any issue. I fully appreciate, however, that the process can be frustrating for the uninitiated, but it is the process we have, and as I often advise, if you are going to engage in the process, it is best to do some homework to understand what your local council can do, what it can’t, and why.
In this situation, the frustrations are compounded by the fact that when the issue first arose we had a newly minted CAO who had met with residents to discuss the issue, and who had issued media releases outlining the municipal position on the issue, though residents have suggested that those media releases were misleading and contained false information. Shortly after the issue found its way onto the radar of council and municipal staff, the CAO departed after just six months at the helm of this municipality, essentially scrapping any work that had been initiated on the issue, and bringing us back to the beginning to start from scratch.
I applaud the residents who attended council on Monday to make council and staff aware of their concerns, to share their view about the rightful ownership of the property, and to plead with council to investigate how the municipality can assume ownership of the property in order for it to once again be a public beach area for all to enjoy.
Waterfront property is high-value property, and much of it is understandably in private hands, but any municipality is wise to secure as much waterfront property as it can in order to maintain it for public use, and that is much easier to do if the rightful ownership of a given property is known, which in this case it apparently is not. So while there will be a cost to investigate and to obtain legal advice, I think it is a cost that most are willing to bear to preserve a small but valued property in order for it to be enjoyed by anyone and everyone.
As I wrote in July of last year, no council should operate within a vacuum. Every council can benefit from hearing from those they are elected to represent, and I always commend anyone who takes the time and makes the effort to get in front of council to share their views and ideas on an issue, whether I agree with them or not, whether I share their concerns or not. It is important for the process, it is crucial for our collective faith in government, and sometimes such engagement can change minds. Or it can help to change the direction of the community at large.
As I mentioned, it is important for those planning to engage in the process to learn the process, to understand council’s actual role as defined by the provincial Municipal Act, as some seem to misunderstand how the process works, and what a council can actually do.
So, much respect to the residents who attended council and respectfully stated their case, face to face with those we elect to do the hard part – to make decisions that are in the best interest of the municipality, knowing that any decisions they make, no matter the issue, are just as likely to be applauded as they are to be criticized.
Stay engaged, Meaford residents, as engaged residents make for better communities.
