Springwater Nixes Use of Facilitator in Barrie Boundary Talks
By: Wayne Doyle, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, BarrieToday.com
Springwater Mayor Jennifer Coughlin lashed out at Deputy Mayor George Cabral last night, calling a motion without notice he introduced late into the meeting “irresponsible.”
“This information you’re bringing forward today is, in my opinion, irresponsible,” Coughlin said Wednesday after Cabral introduced a motion that resolved “no contact or engagement with the provincial facilitator or any other similar agent or agency shall take place until such time as staff have reported their findings to council and the council has then directed such contact or engagement to be made.”
“I was elected as head of council to be at the table to get information and to make decisions for Springwater Township,” Coughlin added.
Despite her desire, this is one table Coughlin isn’t allowed to sit at as council passed Cabral’s motion by a 4-3 vote, with Cabral and Couns. Phil Fisher, Anita Moore and Danielle Alexander voting to support.
Coughlin and Couns. Brad Thompson and Matt Garwood didn’t support the motion.
According to Cabral, engaging the services of a provincial facilitator to assist them with the City of Barrie’s boundary expansion plans would be “completely premature and irresponsible” prior to staff presenting their findings.
“I think it’s imperative that we do get the report from staff so that we can actually formulate a position and look at the options and see exactly where we stand with respect to the items and topics that we asked staff to do research on and provide us a fulsome report on,” Cabral said.
Cabral said a neighbouring Municipality (Oro-Medonte) went through a clear process to get to the stage where they decided that it was the proper time to reach out to a facilitator. He thinks Springwater should be doing pretty much the same thing.
“When we’ve got our report from staff and we’ve had an opportunity to digest it and review it and talk about it and see where we’re going to go, that if a provincial facilitator is needed at that point in time, then that’s the point in time where this council should determine that we reach out to the provincial facilitator,” he said.
According to Jeff Schmidt, Springwater’s chief administrative officer, council should receive the staff report in time for the township’s May 15 meeting.
Schmidt said the report will address the four items council requested additional information on, identified during its March 6 meeting:
Review and analyze existing township planning policies alongside provincial direction through Bill 23, More Homes Built Faster Act, to identify potential areas suitable for increased residential and/or industrial development beyond existing predefined settlement areas that can be reasonably serviced.
Explore the possibility of establishing “special economic zone(s)” through collaborative partnerships with neighbouring municipalities that aim to address potential employment opportunities.
Assess and evaluate current cross border servicing arrangements/agreements in other municipalities in Ontario to determine their effectiveness, efficiency, and overall viability.
Consider the potential for collaborating with the County of Simcoe to establish water and wastewater infrastructure that would support further development of employment land in and around Springwater Township.
Coughlin, who hasn’t had any conversation with the province regarding the facilitator, asked Schmidt, who’s had two interactions with the province’s facilitator, to provide council with an update on those conversations.
“The details of the conversation would have to be discussed in a closed session based on the discussion with the facilitator,” Schmidt said.
“But you’re correct,” he added. “The provincial facilitator did reach out recently to myself, which I advised members of council that they had done so, and subsequent to that, there was an informal meeting with the provincial facilitator, a virtual meeting, which I believe also my colleagues, the CAO for Barrie and Oro-Medonte, went through that same process.”
That essentially gauges whether or not the township would be interested in participating in a facilitation process, Schmidt said, “and that they have not been, at that time and still today, they have not been appointed by the minister.
“They have to be appointed by the minister in order for them to proceed, and to my knowledge that has not happened,” the CAO added.
“If the province appoints a facilitator, I think we take our marching orders from the province,” said Thompson.
Thompson asked Schmidt whether he could say council has directed him not to talk.
“My apologies,” Schmidt responded. “The provincial facilitator is optional. The municipalities are not required to participate should they not wish to. I was very clear with the facilitator that I do not have that direction at this time from council.”
This is the second time Springwater has decided to remove itself from conversations regarding the Barrie’s boundary expansion plans.
On Nov. 15, 2023, council voted to terminate discussions with Barrie regarding boundary expansion.
On March 6, Springwater council voted to reverse that decision somewhat, as council voted to hold talks with the Barrie officials, but only regarding cross-border servicing.
Council demanded there be no discussion with Barrie about boundary expansion.
At the March 20 meeting, Coughlin told council that township officials had a meeting with Barrie Mayor Alex Nuttall to discuss the possibility of a partnership and were rebuffed.
“It was made very clear that we have nothing to offer if not land,” Coughlin said at the time. “They are not looking for a fee-for-service or ‘a la carte’ service to their pipes, their treatment facility and their water.
“If we’re not talking about boundary adjustment, the conversation with Barrie no longer exists,” she added.
Springwater Council Gets Early Glimpse at Ward Boundary Review
By: Wayne Doyle, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, BarrieToday.com
Regardless of how much or how little individual Springwater Township councillors knew about ward boundary reviews going in, an introductory primer provided all of them with the fundamentals they’ll need to move the process forward.
At a special session of council Wednesday, Watson and Associates Economists provided council with an overview of what ward boundary reviews are and why they’re important.
“We need to understand how growth is occurring, where it’s occurring in your township, from ward-to-ward, and also where it’s going to occur,” Jack Ammendolia, managing partner at Watson and Associates, said during his introduction to council.
“Because we also don’t want to do a ward boundary that lasts for one election,” he added. “Ideally, the intention is to last for at least a couple of elections, trying to recognize again, how the municipality is going to grow and where it’s going to grow.”
Ammendolia was joined by Dr. Robert Williams, a public affairs consultant and municipal electoral systems expert who has conducted or advised on ward boundary and electoral system reviews in 30 Ontario municipalities.
Ammendolia started by asking members of council to consider this question: How does the present electoral arrangement for the Township of Springwater measure up?
“Big question, right? But that‘s ultimately what we’re trying to understand in this first phase,” he said. “How does the system currently work?”
Ammendolia also wants councillors to consider if the current boundaries deliver fair representation, in terms of accessibility (ie. how easily can residents communicate with elected officials) and workload (ie. are councillors spread thin attending to too many priorities).
He also wants them to put some thought into what they want to see as an outcome.
“This is entirely a council decision,” Ammendolia said. “Consider what type of things you need, or want, to see to make those decisions.”
The ward boundary review, which cost $50,000, was approved in the 2024 budget.
Springwater’s current ward boundaries have been in place since 2014, but with the growth in Ward 4 and the projected growth in Ward 5, a ward boundary review was required prior to the 2026 municipal election.
The justification report that accompanied the budget request said the review should take place in 2024 to ensure there is adequate public consultation and ample time to meet legislative requirements.
The review should take about a year to complete, which would ensure the project, council’s decision and any appeals are dealt with prior to the Dec. 31, 2025 legislative deadline.
According to Williams, municipal councils don’t have many legislative requirements to meet.
“The Municipal Act authorizes a lower-tier municipality, like Springwater, to do basically three things,” he said. “It can change the size of its council as long as there are a minimum of five members. One of those members has to be the head of council.”
Williams said that decision cannot be appealed.
“Second is how the council is elected, except for the head of council, who must be elected by general vote or an at-large system,” he added.
Other members can be elected by an at-large system or by wards, or by some combination of the two.
That decision cannot be appealed, either.
The last thing council can do is divide or re-divide the municipality into wards or dissolve the existing wards.
“A bylaw under that revision is open to appeal,” Williams said. “Any member of the community, r council also I suppose, could appeal that bylaw and the Ontario Land Tribunal would be required to examine the bylaw to see if it can stand.
“Our goal is to make sure no appeal is needed,” he added.
Any appeals must be fully resolved by the Dec. 31, 2025 deadline in order for the ward boundary changes to take affect for the 2026 municipal election, if that’s the direction council wishes to go.
According to Ammendolia, wards should have relatively equal populations. It’s generally accepted that variations of up to 25 per cent above or below the average size are considered reasonable and are consistent with legislated federal distribution provisions, precedents and past decisions and best practices in municipalities.
In Springwater, there are currently 17,506 eligible voters in the township, including 2,973 in Ward 1, 3,204 in Ward 2, 3,674 in Ward 3, 4,357 in Ward 4, and 3,298 in Ward 5.
Those numbers are anticipated to change dramatically over the next 20 years as the township’s population is expected to grow to almost 50,000, according to another Watson and Associates report called Long-Term Fiscal Impact Assessment of Growth, 2021-2041.
An updated version of the township’s transportation master plan, which was presented at the March 6 council meeting, says about 60 per cent of those 50,000 — upward of 30,000 people — will be living in Midhurst, which will be the township’s growth centre and home to the majority of the township’s residents.
The report said Elmvale is projected to grow to about 6,000 residents. Hillsdale and Centre Vespra will have about 4,000 residents each, Snow Valley will max out around 3,500, Anten Mills and Minesing will reach about 1,000 residents each, and Phelpston will grow to about 500 residents.
Over the next couple of months, Watson and Associates will interview members of council, collect ‘core review themes’ and key considerations, and prepare background documents.
Over the summer, the consultants will take a closer look at the collected information, evaluate existing ward boundaries and explore alternatives.
In the fall or winter, they will engage community and stakeholders, present alternative options and deliver recommendations to council.