Tiny is marching down a perilous path
Op-ed: A researched request for Tiny Council to "Pause the Palace"
David Wulff
4/13/20248 min read
Our current Tiny Mayor and most of Council seem driven to proceed with a huge, isolated Town Hall structure in spite of significant pushback from taxpayers. It’s made clear in their attempt to slam through a project that will cost all Tiny citizens tens of millions of dollars. In addition to the many issues that require the serious attention of our current council, one thing was made very clear in the April 3rd council meeting. While almost no mention was made of the urgent need to replace the current facility at 130 Balm Beach Rd by any of them during their recent campaigns seeking elected office, most of our elected officials are anxious to get this largely unnecessary project under way. A brand new, fully loaded, shiny Town Hall, in the middle of nowhere. I say most because one, Councillor Brunelle is trying to get the others to pause. Unsuccessfully, so far. There doesn’t seem to be any area of general or widespread support for the project as put forward, other than from the committee that’s made up of senior staff, Mayor Evans, Councillor Walma and surprisingly, a paid representative of the consulting firm that has been granted the design/build coordination contract.
As an aside, that consulting firm, Lett, now doing business as Unity, provided the glossy Roadmap to Project Completion, we were introduced to at the disastrous public information meetings held on December 11, last year.
Among other guidance Unity provided was the importance of early public engagement to ensure taxpayer acceptance and citizen input. Which appears to have been completely ignored by the internal committee and Council. Those meetings were held on short notice, on a Monday night, over the supper hour, in mid-December, when cottagers were certain not to be there According to Mayor Evans 40% of the 6000 or so Tiny households are seasonal. The direct feedback from those meetings, which were included in the 300+ page report we just got, clearly indicated a high degree of dissatisfaction with the need to proceed with a massive New Town Hall. No pricing was provided at the time, not even a ballpark estimate. That was explained by the presenters’ inability to know how much it might cost until we told them what wondrous features we’d like to enjoy. A library, snack bar, perhaps a museum?
Most felt that something should be done to ease the overcrowding and ensure staff are safe and comfortable but I didn’t see any comment left on the boards at the meeting I attended that said "give us a Palace". That sentiment still exists. When it was evident that there was considerable dissatisfaction with the prospect of us assuming the largest undisclosed debt in our history, Tiny promptly launched a new email portal called newtownhall@tiny.ca to appear to want to hear from us. Those like me that sent messages of objection received a prompt autoreply thanking us for our input. And nothing else. No summaries of numbers of messages, issues raised, consideration given further questions, etc. Crickets. Is there a detailed account of the messages somewhere? We may never know. Now, 4 months later, just prior to the April 3 council meeting, we’re provided with estimates of costs that seem to be based on questionable assumptions. Details of how the costs were arrived at have now formally been
asked for. Using the options the internal committee indicated they gave serious consideration to, the preliminary price will be between $21M and $27M. I’m still looking for a similar undertaking that didn’t exceed budget by 40-50%. Perhaps Unity could provide examples of projects they been involved in and what the actual end costs were. Financing costs are expected to double the build costs, whatever they swell to. A deputation at the meeting asked how we were expected to absorb and comprehend a 300+ page document in less than a week and the response was “well that’s when we got it too”. But two of those present were part of the committee that issued it. So they knew exactly what it contained. They helped prepare it. The other 3 councillors appear to have no input, other than to go along. Or not. Other deputations by concerned citizens addressed many important issues surrounding this massive investment. Including one from a President of the largest ratepayer group in Tiny. During my short deputation to council that night there were no questions about the many concerns citizens had other than “have you asked for a meeting with any of us to discuss these issues?”, posed by Councillor Walma. We immediately set a date, later that week. What happened in the second half of the meeting, after many had gone home was quite interesting. The committee and 4 of the 5 who presided, chose the most expensive option with the most public space, huge lobby area (bigger than many Tiny homes) and multiple meeting room provisions. We were informed at that time that the recommendations of this almost entirely secret committee which has existed in one form or another since 2016, would be voted on, by the same group, in three weeks’ time, April 24th, (now less than two weeks). While no consideration of price or cost was to be included, we were told, the immediate discussion turned to CAO Lamb, who was asked for possible details on financing that might be available. What could we get for finance rates, can you shop the loan out, etc.? Rates of 4.7% were mentioned, as if it was a steal. Details were provided that revealed that it would cost pennies a day to build their dream. Just $6 per month for a homeowner whose home was valued at $350K. That would be almost no one. That amount would be in addition to our current taxes, which are estimated to rise by another 20% over the next three years after having increased that much in the last two. Just pennies. Nonsense. The discussion then moved to possible government funding available through Green Initiatives that could provide up to $2M, making this project worth urgently pursuing. That’s like buying a huge truck with a massive engine when a compact SUV will do - because there’s a free set of mud flaps thrown in – but only if you act fast. When those citizens present loudly expressed dissatisfaction with the decision to proceed, based largely on the lack of transparency and a sense that it was too much, right now, we were quickly reminded that our direct input in the chamber was unacceptable. The expression “You have no standing here” was used repeatedly to quiet the crowd. It was evident that was the case. Threats to clear the chamber were made repeatedly. Shortly afterwards, Councillor Brunelle put forward a motion to put the project on hold until an asset study, due in July, was presented that would reveal, in short, what really needed to be taken care of. He was the sole voice of reason on that dais. He was voted down 4 to 1. He pointed out that the sequence of events as presented was all wrong - Vote to ratify, pay consultants to begin to apply for Govt funding, get further details and then hold public meetings to explain it. Somehow hoping that even more detail would get the public on-side?
In the alternative, councillor Brunelle suggested council should meet first, listen to taxpayers and then decide what the next steps should be. He was completely onside with this and those present, made it clear we were in favour of that approach. When calls to Pause the Palace were made, councillor Walma told all present “Folks, we’re not voting on this for another three weeks. Call us. Meet with us. Convince us we’re wrong”. Watch the archived Tiny Council Meeting YouTube video and you’ll hear him say exactly that. Incredible. We’ve pushed back for months asking them to listen to us and now, you can talk us down from the ledge?
One of the councillors when asked who actually was in support of it, responded "the silent majority are in favour of us doing this". Based on what evidence, poll, surveys, feedback from who? Is it that because only several hundred have shown up at hastily called meetings or protested in the cold or sent messages to the new portal or worse, didn’t add “likes” to Facebook messages from local residents? What about the petition to stop the project signed by 2300 residents? So if you didn’t do one or more of those things you must be in favour of it? That absurd belief might be marginally acceptable for a minor project or undertaking. But not the largest single expenditure in the history of Tiny. What happened next was even more astounding. I don’t know why but the council, perhaps reading the room for once or listening to their conscience, agreed that perhaps a public meeting to present the case to the Tiny citizenry might be a good idea after all. Talk went to where, when, how it might occur. It seemed that a hybrid meeting combining public and social media interaction would be most appropriate. But Tiny doesn’t have a room large enough to handle what would very likely be several hundred people combined with sufficient bandwidth to support a “zoom” call. CAO Lamb was asked to investigate a hall, perhaps in Midland that could accommodate us. He said he would do that. No assurance was offered however that the committee or council or the consultant would pay even the slightest attention to what they know will be a Tsunami of protest over getting us into such a massive debt situation. One week later, no announcements on any meeting. Critically, no commitment was made to defer a vote until after that or any meeting. All of which leads me to this point. Because councillor Walma had already accepted to meet with a small delegation of citizens, the meeting proceeded last Friday and to our surprise, included Mayor Evans.
The meeting started with an informal, 15 minute, “lets get to know each other” discussion wherein we learned mostly about Mayor Evans, his family links to the area and among other things the products he sells for a living. That seemed unnecessary until later on when it became evident it was a stall tactic, designed to avoid the hard discussions that followed. Mayor Evans told us that as people have moved to Tiny they have asked for additional services. How many? How often? Did they include a new Town Hall? Are the requests documented?
We asked for details on how the estimated costs were reached, asked what consideration was given to the very direct feedback from the December public information meeting, among many other topics. 40 minutes into the meeting we were told suddenly that they both had another meeting that they agreed to earlier, I guess, and that our meeting would have to end, now. “ But we‘ll gladly book another meeting”, we were told. Prior to being ushered out, another direct request to delay the vote to accept the recommendation went unanswered. Now, a week later repeated requests, written and verbal through voicemail, from all in attendance, to meet with Councillor Walma or Mayor Evans have gone unanswered. So who’s fooling who here? Make a big gesture, "we’re listening", then block all efforts to meet and listen. Stall, ignore and move forward? Was this what the consultant advised? Send an email to your Mayor and Councillors and demand a meeting to voice your opinion.
mayorevans@tiny.ca councillorwalma@tiny.ca councillorhelowka@tiny.ca councillorbrunelle@tiny.ca deputymayormiskimins@tiny.ca
In closing, if you want to see how this will likely turn out, Google “Renfrew Recreation Complex cost overruns” and see how their $18M budget for a municipal building project has now almost tripled to $53M and the fallout it’s creating. Here’s a link to the sad story
We can expect nothing less. So join me and so many others in demanding that Council and the Mayor, Pause the Palace.
