South Frontenac Council - Apr. 13/10

Wilma Kenny | Apr 15, 2010

South Frontenac Sets 2% Increase

CAO Orr presented a summary of budget discussions to date, reflecting Council’s directions to staff. The bottom line came out at a decrease of 1.74% from the amount raised by taxation in 2009. There was general agreement that a decrease in taxation, particularly at the expense of the reserves, was not a good idea. Councillor Stowe noted that salaries and fuel costs are higher every year, and reminded Council of Public Works Manager Segsworth’s warning that after this year of large road grants, it may be difficult in the next few years to finance adequate road maintenance. Vandewal agreed that it was a bad idea to “rob the reserves”. Robinson noted that his constituents seemed to see a 2% raise as acceptable. Mayor Davison concluded that the consensus was to take less from the reserves, and bring the budget proposal in at just under 2%.

Orr drew Council’s attention to the fact that a position for a second full-time building inspector was included in the budget proposal. The March 24 COW discussion had shown support for the second building inspector (building inspection is self-funding, from building permit fees). Rather than hiring a separate facilities coordinator, it was hoped this position could also be used and charged back for any facilities coordination, during periods when construction was slow. Councillor Fillion was adamantly opposed to hiring a second building inspector, but others on Council pointed out that building starts during this first quarter are the highest they have been for the past three years.

A public meeting is scheduled for April 20 to present the budget and receive public comment. If at that time, there are no further directions from Council, the budget bylaw including the tax rates will be tabled for approval later that evening.

Perth Road Study

Works Manager Segsworth presented a detailed operational assessment of the Perth Road, undertaken because of the perceived high incidence of accidents. It highlighted four main trouble spots. Although the boat ramps were not on that list, Segsworth said they were of concern, (particularly Buck Lake boat ramp). He encouraged Council to review the report.

Planning to meet Development Pressures

In February, Council had asked for a staff report exploring how issues related to growth and development pressures might be addressed to minimize future friction between residents and developers. Township Planner Lindsay Mills brought a detailed report listing issues around the hamlets, particularly Sydenham. He recommended a planning committee of Council, which could lead to a planning study. Several councillors reacted against this, arguing that there had been too many studies already, this sort of planning was the County’s job, and that an election year was a poor time to start such a long-range project. Eventually, several councillors offered tentative support to the idea of a committee to look at the matter, but asked Lindsay Mills if he could first bring more information on how townships in neighbouring counties were addressing development pressures.