PEC Buzz Admin – PEC Buzz

Doornekamp Construction Ltd. and Rubicon Strategy Inc.

Introduction

Doornekamp Construction Ltd. owns and operates the Picton Terminals in the County of Prince Edward. For years, Doornekamp has been pursuing its commercial ambitions with scant regard for municipal by-laws or provincial statutes and regulations. For as long, citizens have been protesting Doornekamp’s ways of doing business. Whether on the offence or defence, Doornekamp has skillfully employed lobbyists to promote its self-interests to the Ontario and Canadian governments.
[back to top]

Profiting from Ontario’s Skills Development Fund

Napanee Today (July 11, 2024) reported that “[Ontario] Government invests $1.18 million to help H.R. Doornekamp train workers in landside marine cargo operations.” Doornekamp’s Sandy Berg explained, “The Picton Terminals Bulk Cargo Safe Handling Training Program is a skills training program for marine landside operations of cargo handling: offloading/loading of steel and bulk cargos to and from vessels. Our specialized training program is critical to improving the safety and efficiency of landside operations. The SDF program supports the Doornekamp Team to develop and sustain a talented, flexible workforce with transferable skills in shipyard operations. Our crew has already benefitted from expert Rigging training used to offload steel beams from vessel Barnacle … Ontario’s SDF program is a tremendous asset to our port operations as we work to support Great Lakes marine shipping and Ontario’s economy.” Hastings Lennox and Addington MPP Ric Bresee agreed, “I am so glad to see this much-needed training opportunity being provided to Doornekamp Construction, to grow our province’s shipping sector, especially here in eastern Ontario.”

Quinte News (July 10, 2024) quoted David Piccini, Minister of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development: “Under the leadership of Premier Ford, our government is proud to invest in programs that support training and upskilling. This project will give people the necessary skills needed to land in-demand and well-paying jobs in their communities and help power our province.”

Minister Piccini has earned widespread criticism for his handling of the Skills Development Fund. The Auditor-General of Ontario’s special report “Skills Development Fund – Training Stream” (October 1, 2025) highlighted various irregularities, including:

The Minister’s Office chose to fund poor-, low- and medium-ranked applications 54% of the time instead of high-ranked applications
Sixty-four low- and medium-ranked applications that were selected by the Minister’s office had hired lobbyists to lobby the Ministry and/or Minister on behalf of the applicants before they were selected and funded
Reasons provided by the Minister’s Office conflicted with Ministry staff”s evaluation of the selected applications.

Today, NDP Leader Marit Stiles filed a formal complaint with the Office of the Integrity Commissioner of Ontario: “We believe there are credible allegations of preferential treatment regarding the approval, oversight, and distribution of SDF grants. The disproportionate number of low scoring applicants with close political ties to the government has undermined public confidence.”

The Toronto Star has lead with this fast-breaking story, including:

There has been no reporting about Ministry staff’s evaluation of Doornekamp’s application, or the Minister’s involvement, or the role of Doornekamp’s lobbyists. We have filed a FOIA request for this information with the Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development:

“In 2024, the Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development (Ministry) awarded $1,148,816.00 to Doornekamp Construction Ltd. (Doornekamp) to deliver the ‘Picton Terminals Bulk Cargo Safe Handling Training Program’ under the terms of the Ministry’s Skills Development Fund (SDF). I am requesting all records pertaining to Doornekamp’s application for funding for this *or any other* training program under the SDF (both Training and Capital Streams), including (a) any of Doornekamp’s application(s), (b) Ministry staff’s evaluations of Doornekamp’s application(s), (c) interventions from any Ministry ADMs, DM or Minister, (d) contracts between the Ministry and Doornekamp to design, deliver, monitor, and evaluate the ‘Picton Terminals Bulk Cargo Safe Handling Training Program’, (e) related communications from Doornekamp’s agents at Rubicon Strategy Inc. to the Ministry.”

Besides questions raised by Doornekamp’s profiting from Ontario’s Skills Development Fund, the Picton Gazette (Terminal Lobby, November 12, 2025) has raised concerns about how Doornekamp’s lobbyists are pushing the Ontario and Canadian governments to expand Picton Terminals.

Questions and concerns about Doornekamp’s government lobbyists warrant a closer look. We begin by laying a factual basis for this greater scrutiny.
[back to top]

Lobbying the Ontario Government

On November 24, 2025, our search of the Registry of Lobbyists maintained by the Office of the Integrity Commissioner of Ontario (OICO) identified 5 lobbyists – all associated with Rubicon Strategy Inc. – who had worked for Doornekamp Construction Ltd. (Table 1). Tim Smitheman (Senior VP) became the first Ontario government lobbyist for Doornekamp in January 2013.¹ Smitheman no longer workis on the file; instead, Jan O’Driscoll (Partner), Aaron Gairdner (Senior VP), and Mustapha Khamissa (Account Director) are Doornekamp’s Ontario government lobbyists. As noted below, Tim Smitheman and Aaron Gairdner also lobbied the Canadian government for Doornekamp.

In all their filings with the OICO, Rubicon’s lobbyists describe their client’s business in glowing terms: “Doornekamp Construction Ltd. helps our customers build an efficient and sustainable future. Doornekamp works with clients and utilizes creative engineering, economic strategies and sustainable products to accomplish challenging projects. Our team provides specialized properties commercially and residentially in premier locations, built and maintained to an unparalleled quality.”

Table 1. Goals and Targets of Rubicon’s Ontario Government Lobbyists for Doornekamp
(Jan 2013 – Nov 2025).
Lobbyist / Registration	Goals	Ministers’ Offices to Target	Status / Termination
Tim Smitheman / 2023-01-27	Doornekamp Construction Ltd. is interested in working with the ontario government on the Ontario Marine Strategy to identify opportunities for the Picton Terminals deep water redevelopment.	Economic Development Job Creation and Trade, Infrastructure, Labour Immigration Training and Skills Development, Red Tape Reduction, Environment Conservation and Parks, Transportation, Premier and Cabinet, Indigenous Affairs and First Nations Economic Reconciliation, MPPs.	Inactive / 2025-11-12
Jan O’Driscoll / 2024-11-12	Doornekamp Construction Ltd. is interested in working with the Ontario government on the Ontario Marine Strategy to identify opportunities for the Picton Terminals deep water redevelopment, as well as to assist Picton Terminals in their work with the Municipality of Prince Edward County to secure a Ministerial Zoning Order that would expand their site operations.	Economic Development Job Creation and Trade, Finance, Infrastructure, Labour Immigration Training and Skills Development, Municipal Affairs and Housing, Red Tape Reduction, Environment Conservation and Parks, Transportation, Office of the Premier and Cabinet Office, Office of the President of the Treasury Board, Natural Resources, Associate Minister of Energy Intensive Industries, Agriculture, Food and Agribusiness, Energy and Mines, Associate Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, MPPs, MPP for Bay of Quinte.	Active
Aaron Gairdner / 2023-08-17	Doornekamp Construction Ltd. is interested in working with the Ontario Government on the Ontario Marine Strategy to identify opportunities for the Picton Terminals deep water redevelopment. To assist Doornekamp Construction Ltd. in achieving Skills Development Funding to train workers in specialized marine/port skill sets.	Economic Development Job Creation and Trade, Infrastructure, Labour Immigration Training and Skills Development, Red Tape Reduction, Transportation, Premier and Cabinet, MPPs.	Active
Mustapha Khamissa / 2023-02-01	Doornekamp Construction Ltd. is interested in working with the Ontario government on the Ontario Marine Strategy to identify opportunities for the Picton Terminals deep water redevelopment, as well as to expedite planning processes to support Picton Terminals and expand operations on the site.	Economic Development Job Creation and Trade, Infrastructure, Municipal Affairs and Housing, Red Tape Reduction, Environment Conservation and Parks, Transportation, Premier and Cabinet, Natural Resources, Agriculture, Food and Agribusiness, Energy and Mines, MPPs, MPP for Bay of Quinte.	Active
Patrick Harris / 2023-06-06	Doornekamp Construction Ltd. is interested in working with the Ontario government to identify opportunities for the Picton Terminals deep water redevelopment through the Ontario Marine Strategy.	Energy, Infrastructure, Red Tape Reduction, the Environment Conservation and Parks, Transportation, Premier and Cabinet, Solicitor General, MPPs	Inactive / 2024-06-25

[back to top]

Lobbying the Canadian Government

On November 24, 2025, our advanced search of the Registry of Lobbyists maintained by the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying of Canada (OCLC) identified 7 lobbyists – all associated with Rubicon Strategy Inc. – who had worked for Doornekamp Construction Ltd. Braedan de Bakker (now Account Director at Rubicon) became the first Consultant to register as a Canadian government lobbyist for Doornekamp in January 2013 – around the same time that his colleague, Tim Smitheman, registered to lobby the Ontario government. According to Registrations and Monthly Communication Reports on the OCLC website, de Bakker and Andy Singh (General Counsel, Senior VP – Public Affairs) have been most active and remain engaged in lobbying the federal government on Doornekamp’s behalf (Table 1).² As noted above, Tim Smitheman and Aaron Gairdner also lobbied the Ontario government for Doornekamp.

Table 2. Rubicon’s Canadian Government Lobbyists for Doornekamp
(Jan 2013 – Nov 2025).
Lobbyist / Registration	Targets	Mandate	Status / Reports
Braedan de Bakker 2023-01-13	Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario (FedDev) Transport Canada (TC) Public Safety Canada (PS) House of Commons Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)	Conducting outreach and advocacy on strengthening Canadian supply chains and highlighting the strategic role of Picton Terminals in alleviating supply chain bottlenecks. Conducting outreach on behalf of Picton to gain export/import verification from CBSA. Securing grants and contributions to support terminal expansion projects	Active [13]
Jonathan Moser 2023-01-26	Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario (FedDev) Transport Canada (TC)	Securing grants and contributions to support terminal expansion projects. Conducting outreach and advocacy on strengthening Canadian supply chains and highlighting the strategic role of Picton Terminals in alleviating supply chain bottlenecks. Conducting outreach on behalf of Picton to gain export/import verification from CBSA.	Inactive [2]
Andrew Balfour 2023-01-31	Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario (FedDev) Transport Canada (TC)	Securing grants and contributions to support terminal expansion projects. Conducting outreach and advocacy on strengthening Canadian supply chains and highlighting the strategic role of Picton Terminals in alleviating supply chain bottlenecks. Conducting outreach on behalf of Picton to gain export/import verification from CBSA.	Inactive [7]
Aaron Gairdner 2023-02-01	Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario (FedDev) Transport Canada (TC)	Securing grants and contributions to support terminal expansion projects. Conducting outreach and advocacy on strengthening Canadian supply chains and highlighting the strategic role of Picton Terminals in alleviating supply chain bottlenecks. Conducting outreach on behalf of Picton to gain export/import verification from CBSA.	Inactive [1]
Tim Smitheman 2023-02-01	Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario (FedDev) Transport Canada (TC)	Securing grants and contributions to support terminal expansion projects. Conducting outreach and advocacy on strengthening Canadian supply chains and highlighting the strategic role of Picton Terminals in alleviating supply chain bottlenecks. Conducting outreach on behalf of Picton to gain export/import verification from CBSA.	Active [0]
Jay Denney 2023-02-13	Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario (FedDev) Transport Canada (TC)	Securing grants and contributions to support terminal expansion projects. Conducting outreach and advocacy on strengthening Canadian supply chains and highlighting the strategic role of Picton Terminals in alleviating supply chain bottlenecks. Conducting outreach on behalf of Picton to gain export/import verification from CBSA.	Inactive [0]
Andy Singh 2023-09-25	Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario (FedDev) Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) Global Affairs Canada (GAC) House of Commons Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) Transport Canada (TC)	Conducting outreach and advocacy on strengthening Canadian supply chains and highlighting the strategic role of Picton Terminals in alleviating supply chain bottlenecks. Conducting outreach on behalf of Picton to gain export/import verification from CBSA. Securing grants and contributions to support terminal expansion projects.	Active [14]

The OCLC website includes current and previous versions of registrations filed by Rubicon Strategy’s lobbyists who were engaged by Doornekamp Construction. Our advance search also revealed the topics and federal institutions of greatest interest to Rubicon (Table 3).

Table 3. Topics and Targets of Interest to Rubicon’s Canadian Government Lobbyists for Doornekamp
(Jan 2013 – Nov 2025).
Topics to Discuss	N	Federal Institutions to Target	N
International Trade	21	Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)	21
Transportation	21	Transport Canada (TC)	21
Internal Trade	19	Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA)	21
Agriculture	17	Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario (FedDev)	21
Economic Development	4	House of Commons	11
Government Procurement	2	Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)	8
Infrastructure	2	Public Safety Canada (PS)	4
Regional Development	2	Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO)	2
Climate	2	Global Affairs Canada (GAC)	2
Federal-Provincial Relations	2

Finally, our advance search also revealed the dates of engagement, topics discussed, and federal officials (elected and unelected) targeted by Rubicon (Table 4).

Table 4. Topics Discussed and Officials Targeted by Rubicon’s Canadian Government Lobbyists for Doornekamp
(Jan 2013 – Nov 2025).
Lobbyist	Date	Topics Discussed	Federal Officials Targeted
Andy Singh	2025-10-21	Economic Development, Internal Trade, International Trade, Regional Development, Transportation	James Christie, Director of Policy, Minister’s Office, Transport Canada
Andy Singh	2025-10-21	Economic Development, Internal Trade, International Trade, Regional Development, Transportation	Joshua Mariampillai, Regional Advisor, Ontario, Public Safety Canada Nina Sartor, Senior Policy Advisor, Minister’s Office, Public Safety Canada
Andy Singh	2025-09-24	Economic Development, Internal Trade, Transportation	Mark Gerretsen, MP
Andy Singh	2025-09-16	Economic Development, Internal Trade, International Trade, Regional Development	Vasken Vosguian, Chief of Staff, Transport Canada
Andy Singh	2025-09-10	Economic Development, Internal Trade, International Trade, Regional Development, Transportation	Chris Malette, MP
Andy Singh	2025-08-15	Economic Development, Internal Trade, Transportation	Vasken Vosguian, Chief of Staff, Transport Canada
Andy Singh	2025-08-15	Economic Development, Internal Trade, Transportation	Gianluca Tatone, Special Assistant, Transport Canada
Andy Singh	2025-07-09	Economic Development, Internal Trade, Transportation	James Christie, Director of Policy, Minister’s Office, Transport Canada
Andy Singh	2025-06-27	Economic Development, Internal Trade, Transportation	Vasken Vosguian, Chief of Staff, Transport Canada
Andy Singh	2025-06-26	Climate, Economic Development, Federal-Provincial Relations, Government Procurement, Infrastructure, Internal Trade, International Trade, Regional Development, Transportation	Chris Malette, MP
Andy Singh	2025-06-11	Economic Development, Internal Trade, Transportation	Guy Gallant, Chief of Staff, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Andy Singh	2025-03-26	Economic Development, Internal Trade, Transportation	Lisa Jorgensen, Chief of Staff, Canada Border Services Agency
Braedan de Bakker	2025-01-13	Agriculture, Internal Trade, International Trade, Transportation	Philip Lawrence, MP
Andy Singh	2024-11-06	Economic Development, Internal Trade, Transportation	Francis Drouin, MP
Braedan de Bakker	2024-11-06	Agriculture, Internal Trade, International Trade, Transportation	Philip Lawrence, MP
Braedan de Bakker	2024-11-06	Agriculture, Internal Trade, International Trade, Transportation	Francis Drouin, MP
Braedan de Bakker	2024-04-11	Agriculture, Internal Trade, International Trade, Transportation	Mark Strahl, MP
Braedan de Bakker	2024-04-11	Agriculture, Internal Trade, International Trade, Transportation	Ryan Williams, MP
Braedan de Bakker	2024-04-11	Internal Trade, International Trade, Transportation	Jessica Fullerton, Senior Policy Advisor, Minister’s Office, Public Safety Canada
Braedan de Bakker	2023-11-29	Internal Trade, International Trade, Transportation	Vance Badawey, MP Brian Masse, MP
Andrew Balfour	2023-11-21	Internal Trade, International Trade, Transportation	Vance Badawey, MP
Andrew Balfour	2023-11-21	Agriculture, Internal Trade, International Trade, Transportation	Frank Drouin, MP
Andy Singh	2023-10-20	Internal Trade, Transportation	Patricia Sibal, Senior Policy Advisor, Transport Canada Daniel Kucirek, Regional Advisor – Ontario, Transport Canada
Braedan de Bakker	2023-10-20	Agriculture, Internal Trade, Transportation	Patricia Sibal, Senior Policy Advisor, Transport Canada Daniel Kucirek, Regional Advisor, Transport Canada
Braedan de Bakker	2023-09-26	Internal Trade, International Trade, Transportation	Heather Moriarty, Director, Ports and Seaway Policy, Transport Canada Beniot Giroux, Manger/Senior Policy Advisor, Ports and Seaway Policy, Transport Canada
Andrew Balfour	2023-09-26	Internal Trade, International Trade, Transportation	Heather Moriarty, Director, Ports and Seaway Policy, Transport Canada Benoit Giroux, Manager/Senior Policy Advisor, Ports and Seaway Policy, Transport Canada
Andrew Balfour	2023-06-15	Internal Trade, International Trade, Transportation	James Maloney, MP
Braedan de Bakker	2023-06-15	Internal Trade, International Trade, Transportation	James Maloney, MP
Andrew Balfour	2023-06-14	International Trade, Transportation	Angad Dhillon, Chief of Staff to the Minister, Transport Canada
Andrew Balfour	2023-05-01	Internal Trade, International Trade, Transportation	Patricia Sibal, Senior Policy Advisor, Transport Canada
Braedan de Bakker	2023-05-01	Internal Trade, International Trade, Transportation	Patricia Sibal, Senior Policy Advisor, Transport Canada
Aaron Gairdner	2023-04-28	Agriculture, International Trade, Transportation	Dean Allison, MP Dave Epp, MP Scott Aitchison, MP Ryan Williams, MP Lianne Rood, MP
Braedan de Bakker	2023-04-28	International Trade, Transportation	Dave Epp, MP Lianne Rood, MP Dean Allison, MP Scot Davidson, MP Ryan Williams, MP
Braedan de Bakker	2023-04-11	International Trade, Regional Development, Transportation	Harry Orbach-Miller, Policy advisor, PMO Alan Ning, Regional Advisor, Ontario, Operations, PMO
Andrew Balfour	2023-04-11	International Trade, Regional Development, Transportation	Harry Orbach-Miller, Policy Advisor, PMO Alan Ning, Regional Advisor, Ontario, Operations, PMO
Jonathan Moser	2023-03-15	Transportation	Fred Gaspar , Vice President, Commercial and Trade, Canada Border Services Agency
Jonathan Moser	2023-01-26	Internal Trade, Transportation	Fred Gaspar , Vice President, Commercial and Trade, Canada Border Services Agency

Throughout Rubicon’s filings with the OCLC, Sandy Berg is identified as Doornekamp’s Project Manager; otherwise, there is little information provided about Doornekamp’s business or its operation of Picton Terminals.
[back to top]

Credits

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. If you should use this work, please credit Paul Allen, paul@hartallen.com.

[back to top]

24 November 2025

Prince Edward County and Picton Terminals – Resources

Introduction

I am consolidating a variety of information from primary resources related to the dispute between the Corporation of Prince Edward County and Picton Terminals Ltd. I hope this work helps readers form their opinions based on the facts and to act accordingly.

Local Media Coverage

Primary Sources

Maps and Surveys

Coming.

Municipal Agenda and Minutes

Coming.

Summaries of Proceedings.

2025-01-28 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

2025-01-14 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

9.1 Councillor Hirsch announced a notice of motion, in accordance with s.5.11 of the Procedural By-Law to have staff investigate the legality of Picton Terminals rock removal/quarry operations and report to a future meeting of Council.

…
Motion 2025-107. Moved by Councillor Branderhorst. Seconded by Councillor Prinzen.

- - THAT the following By-Laws be read a first, second and third time and finally passed:
    …
    13.1.2 A By-Law To Rescind By-Law 174-2020, Being A By-Law To Authorize An Agreement Between The Corporation Of The County Of Prince Edward And Tenacity Marina Corporation For The Provision Of Sub Lease/Rental Agreement For The Operation Of A Marina On The Premises, Commonly Known As The Picton Marina. CARRIED

Resources

By-Law To Rescind By-Law 174-2020 is included in the Agenda Package (p. 135). Clean copy.

2025-01-14 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

9.1 Councillor Hirsch announced a notice of motion, in accordance with s.5.11 of the Procedural By-Law to have staff investigate the legality of Picton Terminals rock removal/quarry operations and report to a future meeting of Council.

…
Motion 2025-107. Moved by Councillor Branderhorst. Seconded by Councillor Prinzen.

- - THAT the following By-Laws be read a first, second and third time and finally passed:
    …
    13.1.2 A By-Law To Rescind By-Law 174-2020, Being A By-Law To Authorize An Agreement Between The Corporation Of The County Of Prince Edward And Tenacity Marina Corporation For The Provision Of Sub Lease/Rental Agreement For The Operation Of A Marina On The Premises, Commonly Known As The Picton Marina. CARRIED

Resources

By-Law To Rescind By-Law 174-2020 is included in the Agenda Package (p. 135). Clean copy.

More coming.

16 November 2025

Prince Edward County and Tenacity Marina Corp – Resources

Introduction

I have consolidated a variety of information from primary resources related to the multi-million dollar dispute between the Corporation of Prince Edward County and Tenacity Marina Corp. As local media coverage has been woefully inadequate, I hope this work helps readers form their own opinions based on the facts and to act accordingly.

Media Coverage

back to top

Primary Sources

back to top

Maps and Surveys

back to top

Agenda and Minutes

2025-04-22 – Council (Closed Meeting)
2025-04-22 – Council
2025-02-25 – Council
2025-02-13 – Committee of the Whole
2022-08-10 – Planning Committee
2022-07-06 – Planning Committee (Special Meeting)
2022-03-08 – Council
2022-02-22 – Council
2022-01-11 – Council
2021-10-12 – Council (Closed Meeting)
2021-10-12 – Council
2020-11-24 – Council
2020-11-16 – Community and Economic Development Commission
2020-10-19 – Community and Economic Development Commission
2020-09-22 – Council
2020-09-14 – Community and Economic Development Commission
2020-09-03 – Committee of the Whole
2020-07-21 – Council
2020-05-26 – Council
2019-11-26 – Council

back to top

Summaries of Proceedings

2025-04-22 – Council (Closed Meeting) – Public Report

4.3 Report of the Operational Services Department dated April 22, 2025 regarding Picton Marina Operational Update

A legal opinion from Templeman regarding Picton Marina and Tenacity Marina Corporation Sub-Lease dated April 19, 2025 was provided separately.

It was agreed that the clauses no. 1 and no. 2 of the recommendations would be voted upon separately.

Motion 2025-235. Moved by Councillor Nieman, seconded by Councillor Harrison:

- - THAT Council receive report OPS-07-2025; and
  - THAT Council direct staff to manage the Picton Harbour Marina, with scaled down services, for the 2025 season. CARRIED

Motion 2025-236 provided additional direction to staff regarding the Picton Harbour Marina.

Resources

Legal opinion (2025-04-19) and OPS-07-2025 are unavailable.

Sub-lease between the County and Tenacity (2020-09-23), By-Law 174-2020 (2020-09-22), Beach Management Agreement between the MNR and the County (2012-04-10), and By-Law 3043-2012 (2012-04-10) are included in the Agenda Package for the Meeting of the Committee of the Whole on 2025-02-23 (pp. 26-54).

2025-04-22 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

6. Reports Arising from Closed Meeting

Motion 2025-240. Moved by Councillor Nieman, seconded by Councillor Harrison:

- - THAT Council direct staff to manage the Picton Harbour Marina, with scaled-down services, for the 2025 season. CARRIED

Motion 2025-241. Moved by Councillor Roberts. Seconded by Councillor St-Jean:

- - THAT Council direct staff to engage in discussions with Tenacity Marina Corporation regarding an interim solution for the use of the existing docking system in Water Lots 1 and 2 for the 2025 season and bring forward an implementation by-law at the next feasible Council meeting. CARRIED

2025-02-25 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

13.1 The following By-laws are recommended for adoption:
…
Motion 2025-107. Moved by Councillor Branderhorst. Seconded by Councillor Prinzen.

- - THAT the following By-Laws be read a first, second and third time and finally passed:
    …
    13.1.2 A By-Law To Rescind By-Law 174-2020, Being A By-Law To Authorize An Agreement Between The Corporation Of The County Of Prince Edward And Tenacity Marina Corporation For The Provision Of Sub Lease/Rental Agreement For The Operation Of A Marina On The Premises, Commonly Known As The Picton Marina. CARRIED

Resources

By-Law To Rescind By-Law 174-2020 is included in the Agenda Package (p. 135). Clean copy.

2025-02-13 – Committee of the Whole – Agenda – Minutes

7.2 Report of the Operational Services Department dated February 13, 2025 regarding the Picton Marina – 2025 Operational Plan.

Motion CW-24-2025. Moved by Councillor MacNaughton. Seconded by Councillor Nieman.

- - THAT Council receive report OPS-02-2025;
  - THAT staff be directed to terminate the Picton Marina sublease/rental agreement effective immediately;
  - THAT Council rescind By-Law 174-2020; and
  - THAT staff be directed to issue an Expression of Interest (EOI) to obtain a new marina operator in time for the 2025 season.

Prior to voting on the foregoing motion, the following Amending Motion was put forward:

Amending Motion CW-25-2025. Moved by Councillor Nieman. Seconded by Councillor Roberts.

- - THAT staff be requested to report with all viable options for the operation of the Picton Marina in 2025. CARRIED

Resources

OPS-02-2025 (2025-01-30), the Sub-lease between the County and Tenacity (2020-09-23), By-Law 174-2020 (2020-09-22), the Beach Management Agreement between the MNR and the County (2012-04-10), and By-Law 3043-2012 (2012-04-10) are included in the Agenda Package (pp. 26-54).

2022-08-10 – Planning Committee – Agenda – Minutes

6.1 Temporary Use Rezoning Application, File Nos. Z23-22, 1 Head Street, Ward of Picton.

Motion 2022-357. Moved by Councillor Maynard. Seconded by Councillor MacNaughton.

- - THAT the draft temporary use by-law be amended to include a condition that no trees on the subject lands be removed or damaged. CARRIED

Motion 2022-358. Moved by Councillor Prinzen. Seconded by Councillor MacNaughton.

- - THAT report DS-131-2022 of Development Services dated August 10, 2022 regarding Temporary Use Rezoning File No. Z23-22 be received for information;
  - THAT Temporary Use Zoning By-law Amendment File No. Z23-22 for lands described as Part Lot 1025, 1076 Plan 24 Part 1 47R5921, Part 1 47R2099 except Part 2 47R5921, in the Ward of Picton, be approved; and
  - THAT the draft temporary use by-law be amended to include a condition that no trees on the subject lands be removed or damaged. CARRIED AS AMENDED

Resources

DS-131-2022 (2022-08-10), Key Map, Proposed Location of Mobile Restaurant, and Draft By-law are included in the Agenda Package (pp. 328-336). Clean copy of By-Law 154-2022 (2022-08-16).

2022-07-06 – Planning Committee (Special Meeting) – Agenda – Minutes

4.2 Rezoning Application, File Nos. Z19-22, The Corporation of the County of Prince Edward, 1 Head Street, Ward of South Marysburgh.

- - James Griffin, Intermediate Planner clarified that the rezoning application is to permit a marina.
  - Michael Jowett, resident voiced their concern regarding boat launch facilities, parking, traffic and adequate infrastructure of the marina.
  - Gordon Roberts, resident also voiced their concerns regarding inadequate infrastructure, traffic, and historical concerns related to noise, food trucks and late night activity.

Motion 2022-341. Moved by Councillor Harper. Seconded by Councillor Roberts.

- - THAT report DS-114-2022 of Development Services dated July 6, 2022 regarding Rezoning File No. Z19-22 be received for information; and
  - THAT Zoning By-law Amendment File No. Z19-22 for lands described as Part Lot 1025, 1076 Plan 24 Part 1 47R5921, Part 1 47R2099 except Part 2 47R5921, in the Ward of Picton, be approved. CARRIED

Resources

DS-114-2022 (2022-07-06), Key Map, and Draft By-Law are included in the Agenda Package (pp. 49-58).

2022-03-08 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

8.3 Paul Allen to address Council regarding Development Charge Credits – “Tip of the Bay” Property, Picton Harbour

- - THAT the deputation by Paul Allen regarding Development Charge Credits – “Tip of the Bay” Property, Picton Harbour be received. CARRIED

12.1 The following By-laws are recommended for adoption:

Motion 2022-166. Moved by Councillor St-Jean. Seconded by Councillor Harper:

- - THAT the following By-laws be read a first, second and third time and finally passed: …
    - 12.1.3 A By-Law [to rescind By-Law 2890-2011] and to Authorize the Mayor and Clerk to Execute A Memorandum of Understanding between the Corporation of the County of Prince Edward and Tenacity Capital PEC Inc. CARRIED

Resources

Deputation by Paul Allen and the By-Law 32-2022 (2022-03-08) are included in the Agenda Package (pp. 38-40, 175-184); Clean Copy of By-Law-32-2022. By-Law 2890-2011 (2011-06-14) and related documents are included in the Agenda Package for the Meeting of Council on 2022-01-11 (pp. 219-232).

[[[Easement; $250K]]]

2022-02-22 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

11.5 Reconsideration request from Councillor St-Jean regarding Development Charge Credits – “Tip of the Bay” Property, Picton Harbour.

Motion 2022-136. Moved by Councillor St-Jean, seconded by Councillor Margetson:

- - THAT Motion 2022-10 regarding Development Charge Credits – “Tip of the Bay” Property, Picton Harbour be reconsidered.

Mayor Ferguson requested a Recorded Vote. CARRIED

The main Motion was then put on the floor for discussion.Councillor Margetson brought forward an amending motion to the main motion regarding maintenance standards and an annual report.

Motion 2022-138. Moved by Councillor Margetson, seconded by Councillor Prinzen:

- - THAT the Agreement between Prince Edward County and Tenacity Capital PEC Inc. regarding Picton Harbour boardwalk, include the requirement for an annual inspection report to be to be submitted by the Owner to the municipality, including provisions for Engineer review, and that Schedule C “Maintenance Schedule” be updated to reflect inspection requirements and the final construction method and materials.

Mayor Ferguson requested a Recorded Vote. CARRIED

The main motion was then voted on, as amended.

Motion 2022-139. Moved by Councillor St-Jean, seconded by Councillor Margetson:

- - THAT Council receive report CSP-01-2022;
  - THAT staff return to Council with the final draft of the agreement, and direct the Mayor and Clerk to sign the Memorandum of Understanding (Attachment 1) between the Municipality and Tenacity Capital PEC Inc. regarding the Picton Harbour Boardwalk; and
  - THAT Council direct staff to issue a payment of up to $250,000 to Tenacity Capital upon completion of the Picton Harbour boardwalk, to the satisfaction of the municipality;
  - THAT the Agreement between Prince Edward County and Tenacity Capital PEC Inc. regarding Picton Harbour boardwalk, include the requirement for an annual inspection report to be to be submitted by the Owner to the municipality, including provisions for Engineer review, and that Schedule C “Maintenance Schedule” be updated to reflect inspection requirements and the final construction method and materials.

Councillor St-Jean requested a Recorded Vote. CARRIED AS AMENDED

Resources

Excerpt from the Minutes of the Meeting of Council on 2022-01-11 and CSP-01-2022 (2022-01-11) are included in the Agenda Package (pp. 53-58).

2022-01-11 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

Motion 2021-10. Moved by Councillor St-Jean, seconded by Councillor Bailey:

- - THAT Council receive report CSP-01-2022;
  - THAT Council direct the Mayor and Clerk to sign the Memorandum of Understanding (Attachment 1) between the Municipality and Tenacity Capital PEC Inc. regarding the Picton Harbour Boardwalk; and
  - THAT Council direct staff to issue a payment of up to $250,000 to Tenacity Capital upon completion of the Picton Harbour boardwalk, to the satisfaction of the municipality.

Councillor Roberts requested a Recorded Vote. LOST

Resources

CSP-01-2022 (2022-01-11), TOB Boardwalk MOU_Draft (n.d.), By-Law 2890-2011 (2011-06-14) Tip of the Bay Boardwalk MOU, and Original TOB MOU are included in the Agenda Package (pp. 207-232).

2021-10-12 – Council (Closed Meeting) – Public Report

Closed Report of the Community Services, Programs, and Initiatives Departmentdated October 12, 2021 regarding Development Charges Credit – “Tip of the Bay”Property, Picton Harbour.

Motion 2021-689. Moved by Councillor Margetson, seconded by Councillor St-Jean:

- - THAT Council receive report CSP-56/2021; and
  - THAT Council direct Staff to negotiate an agreement with Tenaciy Capital that honours the intent of the 2011 MOU regarding the installation of a publicly accessible boardwalk, with the potential of a payment up to $250,000 to Tenacity Capital upon completion of the Picton Harbour Boardwalk to the satisfaction of the municipality and return to Council. CARRIED

Resources

Motion 2021-689 arose in Closed Session, so CSP-56/2011 (2021-10-12) and the 2011 MOU were not included in the Public Report of the Closed Meeting.

2021-10-12 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

6. Motions Arising from Closed Session

Motion 2021-691. Moved by Councillor Margetson, seconded by Councillor St-Jean:

- - THAT Council receive report CSP-56/2021; and
  - THAT Council direct Staff to negotiate an agreement with Tenacity Capital that honours the intent of the 2011 MOU regarding the installation of a publicly accessible boardwalk, with the potential of a payment up to $250,000 to Tenacity Capital upon completion of the Picton Harbour Boardwalk to the satisfaction of the municipality and return to Council.

Councillor Forrester requested a recorded vote. CARRIED

Resources

Motion 2021-691 arose from Closed Session, so CSP-56/2011 (2021-10-12) and the 2011 MOU are not included in the Agenda Package.

2020-11-24 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

12.7 Report of the Community and Economic Development Commission held October 19, 2020.

Motion 2020-712. Moved by Councillor St-Jean. Seconded by Councillor Prinzen:

- - THAT Council receive the CEDC report for information;
  - THAT a Task Team be created for the Picton Harbour Marina/boardwalk project, in accordance with terms outlined in the presentation of Todd Davis, Director of Community Services, Programs & Initiatives;
  - THAT membership on the task team include 2 members of the CEDC, 1 member of the Accessibility Advisory Committee, 1 member of the Heritage Advisory Committee; and
  - THAT the following property stakeholders be included on Task Team – Prince Edward County Yacht Club, Picton Harbour Inn, Tenacity Capital, Port Picton Homes, Mortimer Street Condos Phase 1 and Phase 2, Mortimer Street Condos Phase; and
  - THAT the Picton Ward Councillors be included in circulation of any information with regards to the Task Team, and dates of meetings. CARRIED

12.9 CEDC Picton Boardwalk Task Team.

Motion 2020-714. Moved by Councillor MacNaughton:

- - THAT the Council ratify the Picton Boardwalk Task Team Terms of Reference;
  - THAT Gord Fox and Michael Miller be appointed to the Picton Board Walk Task Team; and
  - THAT following Council approval, the Picton Boardwalk Task Team Terms of Reference be shared with the Accessibility Advisory Committee & Heritage Advisory Committee for member appointment.

Resources

Presentation of Todd Davis (2020-10-19) and Picton Boardwalk Task Team Terms of Reference are included in the Agenda Package (pp. 280-316).

CSP 46-2020 (2020-10-19), and extensive related documents are included in the Agenda Package for the Meeting of the Community and Economic Development Commission on 2020-10-19 (pp. 23-109).

2020-11-16 – Community and Economic Development Commission – Agenda – Minutes

8.8 Appointment to Picton Boardwalk Task Team.

Motion CEDC-49-2020. Moved by Jefferson Gilbert, seconded by Councillor Maynard:

- - THAT the Community and Economic Development Commission approve the Picton Boardwalk Task Team Terms of Reference and refers them for Council ratification;
  - THAT Gord Fox and Michael Miller be appointed to the Picton Board Walk Task Team; and
  - THAT following Council approval, the Picton Boardwalk Task Team Terms of Reference be shared with the Accessibility Advisory Committee & Heritage Advisory Committee for member appointment. CARRIED

2020-10-19 – Community and Economic Development Commission – Agenda – Minutes

9.1 Items for Consideration

Verbal report by Todd Davis, Director of Community Services, Programs & Initiatives and Adam Goheen, Director of Operations on the Wellington Beach Master Plan and Picton Harbour Marina/boardwalk project.

Motion CEDC-36-2020. Moved by Jefferson Gilbert, seconded by Sarah Johnson:

- - THAT a Task Team be created for the Picton Harbour Marina/boardwalk project, in accordance with terms outlined in the presentation of Todd Davis, Director of Community Services, Programs & Initiatives;
  - THAT membership on the task team include 2 members of the CEDC, 1 person from Quinte Conservation, 1 member of the Accessibility Advisor Committee, 1 member of the Heritage Advisory Committee; and
  - THAT the following property stakeholders be included on Task Team – Prince Edward County Yacht Club, Picton Harbour Inn, Tenacity Capital, Port Picton Homes, Mortimer Street Condos Phase 1, Mortimer Street Condos Phase 2. CARRIED

Resources

CSP 46-2020 (2020-09-03), Picton Harbour Development Vision (January 2017), and Picton Harbour Boardwalk (2020-10-19) are included in the Agenda Package (pp. 23-109).

2020-09-22 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

7.2 CJ Thompson, Founder & Chief Executive Officer of Tenacity Capital, to address Council regarding the supplemental report to Council regarding updates to Picton Marina draft sublease with Tenacity Capital.

Motion 2020-505. Moved by Councillor St-Jean, seconded by Councillor Prinzen:

- - THAT the deputation by CJ Thompson, Founder & Chief Executive Officer of Tenacity Capital, regarding the supplemental report to Council regarding updates to Picton Marina draft sublease with Tenacity Capital be received. CARRIED
  - 9.1 Report of the Community Services, Programs & Initiatives Department dated September 22, 2020 regarding Supplemental report to Council regarding updates to Picton Marina draft sublease with Tenacity Capital.

Referral Motion:

- - THAT report CSP 50/2020 be referred back to staff to further clarify some aspects of the agreement, including repair and maintenance clauses, sewer billing, projected costs of municipally running the marina for the last 10 years including transfers from reserves, public access and to address environmental concerns.

Councillor Bolik and Councillor Nieman requested a recorded vote on the referral motion. LOST

Motion 2020-507. Moved by Councillor Bailey, seconded by Councillor McMahon:

- - THAT Council receive report CSP 50/2020 for information;
  - THAT Council approve the draft sub-lease allowing Tenacity Capital to operate the Picton Marina; and
  - THAT Council permit staff to enter into conversations with Tenacity Capital should Wellington Marina become available to sublet to a third party.

Councillor St-Jean requested a Recorded Vote. CARRIED

Resources

CSP-50/2020 (2020-09-20), the deputation of CJ Thompson, the County’s draft sub-lease with Tenacity, and related historical documents, including By-Law 2890-2011 (2011-06-14) and the Beach Management Agreement between the MNR and the County (2012-04-10), are included in the Agenda Package (pp. 58-91).

[[[$]]]

2020-09-14 – Community and Economic Development Commission – Agenda – Minutes

9.6 Introduction to the Wellington Beach Master Plan project and Picton Harbour Marina/boardwalk project.

Resources

CSP 46-2020 (2020-09-03) is included in the Agenda Package (pp. 103-109).

2020-09-03 – Committee of the Whole – Agenda – Minutes

6.1 Report of the Community Services, Programs and Initiatives Department dated September 3, 2020 regarding Picton Marina Sub-Lease with considerations for Wellington Marina.

Motion CW-367-2020. Moved by Councillor St-Jean, seconded by Councillor Prinzen:

- - THAT Council receive report CSP-46/2020 for information; and
  - THAT Council approve the draft sub-lease allowing Tenacity Capital to operate the Picton Marina and including the right of first refusal to operate the Wellington Marina should it become available during the initial 5-year term of the sub-lease. CARRIED

Resources

CSP-46/2020 (2020-09-03), the draft sub-lease, and related historical documents are included in the Agenda Package (pp. 4-35).

[[[$]]]

2020-07-21 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

Motion 2020-334. Moved by Councillor Margetson, seconded by Councillor Prinzen:
…
6. THAT Council direct CEDC to prioritize and provide their expertise on the Wellington Beach Master Plan project and Picton Harbour Marina/boardwalk projects for the balance of 2020.

[[[Video@39:07]]]

2020-05-26 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

10.5 Report of the Community Services, Programs and Initiatives Department dated May 26, 2020 regarding Private Operation of Marina and Harbours Expression of Interest response.

Motion 2020-238. Moved by Councillor St-Jean, seconded by Councillor MacNaughton:

- - THAT Council receive report CSP 26/2020 for information; and
  - THAT Council enter into negotiations with Tenacity Capital for the operation of the Picton and Wellington Marinas for an initial 5 -year lease as per the tenants of the proposal. CARRIED

Resources

CSP 26/2020 (2020-05-26), Picton and Wellington Harbour Marinas EOI (2020-04-28), and EOI Signed Tenacity Capital (2020-05-15) are included in the Agenda Package (pp. 276-307).

2019-11-26 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

7.3 CJ Thompson addressed Council regarding a proposal for a public-private partnership with the Picton Marina property/operations.

The following amending motion was brought forward by Councillor St-Jean:

Motion 2019-790. Moved by Councillor St-Jean, seconded by Councillor Roberts:

- - THAT the request be referred to staff for a report regarding options for operations at County owned marina properties.
    Councillor Nieman requested a Recorded Vote. CARRIED

Motion 2019-791. Moved by Councillor St-Jean, seconded by Councillor Roberts:

- - THAT the deputation by CJ Thompson regarding the proposal for a public-private partnership with the Picton Marina property/operations be received; and
  - THAT the request be referred to staff for a report regarding options for operations at County owned marina properties. CARRIED AS AMENDED

Resources

Deputation by CJ Thompson and related materials are included in the Agenda Package (pp. 71-83).

back to top

5 November 2025

The Corporation of the County of Prince Edward v. Tenacity Marina Corporation

Legal documents

5 September 2025

Integrity Commissioner Gives Untimely Advice to Council

On September 24, 2024, I am making a deputation to Council regarding Integrity Commission Robert Swayze’s report of his investigation of Code of Conduct complaints from four members of Council. I will be summarizing the Commissioner’s findings – and sharing my concern that his advice to Council can only serve to discourage members even more from communicating openly with residents of the County, especially about contentious issues. I will also be addressing the Commissioner’s apparent attempts to influence the political reporting of The Picton Gazette.

Good evening Mayor Ferguson and members of Council.

On September 10, 2024, Council received a report from Integrity Commissioner, Robert Swayze, regarding his investigation of Code of Conduct complaints from four members of Council. Mr. Swayze also made a brief presentation and answered questions that evening.

The County’s website lists only one other investigation by the Commissioner, from nearly six years ago. So, it’s been a rare occurrence – to Council’s credit.

Under the Code of Conduct, the Commissioner may grant a complainant’s request for anonymity. [County of Prince Edward, Code of Conduct for Members of Council, section 15.7.] In preparing my deputation, I asked every member of Council whether they were a complainant or respondent or neither in this investigation. All the complainants have chosen to remain anonymous.

Tonight, I want to share a concern that the Commissioner’s advice to Council might discourage members from communicating openly with residents of the County, especially about contentious issues. I urge Council to revisit the Commissioner’s advice, and to seek additional input from others (e.g. the Local Authority Services branch of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario) who have experience balancing the needs for transparency in open government and confidentiality in closed meetings.

Under Ontario’s Municipal Act, an Integrity Commissioner’s powers of inquiry are expansive and formidable. In the present case, the Commissioner asked every member of Council – including obviously the four complainants – for any information in their possession that might reveal an offender – “without receiving any relevant information.” He asked the CAO to ask senior staff the same question. He reported that “She also did not receive any useful information.” [Report of Robert Swayze, Integrity Commissioner, Code of Conduct Complaints re: Picton Terminals Litigation, September 4, 2024, p. 4]

After pursuing these and other lines of inquiry, the Commissioner reached two conclusions:

“The detail of the comments from the residents in deputation to Council and the reports in the media, are sufficiently close to many things discussed in the meetings that I believe the Code has been contravened.”
“I have insufficient evidence to identify any attendee [as an offender].” [Report of Robert Swayze, Integrity Commissioner, Code of Conduct Complaints re: Picton Terminals Litigation, September 4, 2024, p. 4]

In his report, the Commissioner’s failed to cite a single example – even a heavily redacted example – of a resident’s comment to Council or a report in the media to substantiate his first conclusion. It’s difficult, therefore, to assess the reasonableness of his conclusion, when his standard is “sufficiently close to.” The Commissioner also offered no examples of this concern when he appeared before Council. Indeed, it was unclear how he thought any confidential information had been disclosed by anyone.

“I wasn’t able to come up with any evidence that any member of Council, or member of staff for that matter, disclosed any confidential information. Now, I tried in my report to give Council a strong message. My advice is not that, you know, the strict [inaudible] something that is unknown was said as members [inaudible] my finding that something that was unknown to anybody except the attendees at closed session. I didn’t find any of that. … Obviously, because there was no specific information given, I didn’t recommend any sanction against any member of Council.” [Videorecording, Council Meeting of September 10, 2024 (starting at 2:57:35). Transcription mine.]

Beyond recounting his methods and conclusions, the Commissioner also wanted to send “a strong message” or “a strong recommendation and advice” to Council. [Videorecording, Council Meeting of September 10, 2024 (starting at 2:58:02)]

One version of his message was: “[I] advise every member of Council not to discuss publicly any litigation matters, whether such comments may be confidential information or not.” [Report of Robert Swayze, Integrity Commissioner, Code of Conduct Complaints re: Picton Terminals Litigation, September 4, 2024, p. 4] Another version was: “… if you’re dealing with litigation in closed session, don’t say anything; in other words, whether it’s known or not.” [Videorecording, Council Meeting of September 10, 2024 (starting at 2:58:50). Transcription mine.]

To illustrate his concern, the Commissioner’s report singled out a statement from Councillor Hirsch that appeared in The Picton Gazette of June 19, 2024: “I am solidly in favour of continuing to pursue the court case. The costs involved are nothing compared to the damage that will be caused to the County if Picton Terminals succeeds in getting what it wants. Picton Terminals has been very explicit about what it plans to do.”

The Commissioner dismissed several complaints from members of Council that their colleague’s statement to the Gazette disclosed confidential information from a closed meeting. The Commissioner’s analysis included:

The facts Councillor Hirsch disclosed were public knowledge
He did not disclose any legal advice that the closed meeting received about the municipality’s litigation with Picton Terminals
He expressed his disagreement with the resolution passed by Council
He did not misrepresent Council’s decision
He was entitled to disagree publicly with Council
He did not contravene the municipality’s Code of Conduct, Procedural By-law, or the Media Relations Policy

Nonetheless, immediately alongside this analysis, the Commissioner advised that “Councillor Hirsch should not have given this interview to the Gazette on Picton Terminals.” [Report of Robert Swayze, Integrity Commissioner, Code of Conduct Complaints re: Picton Terminals Litigation, September 4, 2024, p. 4]

On September 10^th, Councillor Hirsch asked the Commissioner about this:

Councillor Hirsch: “You cited in the report an example of a statement that I happened to give to The Picton Gazette, and while you concluded, at the end, and I’ll just read from the report, ‘In my opinion he’s entitled to disagree publicly and did not contravene the Code, the procedural by-law, or the media relations policy.’ Nevertheless, you make the statement that I should not have given this interview to the Gazette. So, I’m just curious, what the reason for that would be? I was very careful, I’m always very careful, if I choose to speak with the media.”

Commissioner Swayze: “I referred to the strong message I try to send in my report. I didn’t impose sanctions against you for what you said, but I disagree with your decision to make that interview with the Gazette. It’s litigation. You’re benefiting – possibly – the other side of the litigation, and you’ve got to keep absolutely everything confidential, as far as I’m concerned. But I’m not going to recommend sanctions against somebody who discusses common knowledge, even though that person declares that they’re opposed to the decision of Council. I don’t need the other side to the litigation learning that. It doesn’t help the County at all, by that statement that you made. That’s my reason.” [Videorecording, Council Meeting of September 10, 2024 (starting at 3:09:09). Transcription mine.]

The Commissioner’s admonishment of Councillor Hirsch specifically is gratuitous. The member’s reported opposition to Council’s decision was already a matter of public record and readily available to Picton Terminals. [Videorecording of live broadcast (starting at 4:18:36) and Minutes of Council Meeting, June 11, 2024.] Councillor Hirsch’s statement to the Gazette would seem to be of no possible benefit to Picton Terminals. The members of Council who complained about Councillor Hirsch’s statement to the Gazette were wrong and should have done their homework. How much more collegial – and less costly – would it have been if these members had been more forthright and brought their concerns to Councillor Hirsch directly?

The Commissioner’s advice to Council generally is overreach. Council needs to hold closed meetings in exceptional circumstances – and the need to discuss litigation affecting the municipality is one of the clearest examples. Discussions during a closed meeting should be restricted to matters that fit within the exception. Attendees need to refrain from discussing matters that fit within the exception. Attendees should *not* be restricted – as the Commissioner has strongly advised – from discussing other matters, and certainly *not* matters of public knowledge.

Finally, I want to share a concern about an aspect of the Commissioner’s work that exceeded his mandate.

I learned of Mr. Swayze’s return to the County from an editorial in The Picton Gazette of August 14, 2024. The Gazette’s publisher, Karen Valihora, wrote:

“Last week, I was accused of bias in my reporting on this subject by the County’s Integrity Commissioner, Robert Swayze. I have no idea why. It is not his job to supervise the local newspapers. Mr. Swayze confronted me with an email I had sent to Chief Maracle in June, right after Council voted to settle, asking for an interview. In my note, I suggested that the well-known opposition of the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte to Picton Terminals’ expansion plans would be a strong counter-force in the conversation around a settlement. Mr. Swayze asked me to agree that a ‘professional journalist’ should not send requests that demonstrate an obvious bias in favour of one side of a debate over another. Journalists need to work hard to get all sides of a story, and particularly the facts of the matter at hand. That is hard to do when everything happens in secret, behind closed doors.”

The Commissioner has offered no explanation of his exchange with the Gazette – either in his report or in his appearance before Council – and none of you asked him for one.

I’ll say again, an Integrity Commissioner’s powers of inquiry are expansive and formidable. I worry that Mr. Swayze has sent “a strong message” to Council not to discuss certain matters that are public knowledge. And I especially worry that Mr. Swayze has apparently tried to tell a local newspaper publisher how to do her job – and wonder who put him up to it.

I hope that no member feels excused by Mr. Swayze’s message from explaining themselves to the public. And I sincerely hope that no member feels emboldened by Mr. Swayze’s message to try to silence colleagues with whom they strongly disagree.

The Integrity Commissioner’s findings and conclusions are what they are. His “strong message” however provides no remedy for anything like Council’s handling of litigation with Picton Terminals.

More – not less – communication and accountability from members of Council, especially around contentious issues, needs to be the order of the day.

Thank you.

22 September 2024

Articles on the Calls to Action

City of Ottawa Reconciliation Plan

How many of the TRC Calls to Action are complete? Don’t ask the federal government.

New council to monitor government progress on meeting TRC’s calls to action

An Act to provide for the establishment of a national council for reconciliation

Delivering on Truth and Reconciliation Commission Calls to Action

Beyond 94 is a CBC project dedicated to tracking the implementation of the TRC’s recommendations for reconciliation. According to their research, only 11 of the 94 calls to action have been completed, and less than half have projects underway. Meanwhile, a study by the Yellowhead Institute argues that only a dismal 8 have been fully implemented.

Calls to Action Accountability: A 2022 Status Update on Reconciliation

How Do You Like Your Reconciliation?

Calls to Action Accountability: A 2021 Status Update on Reconciliation

Calls to Action Accountability: A 2020 Status Update on Reconciliation

Calls to Action Accountability: A 2019 Status Update on Reconciliation

19 April 2023

Federation of Canadian Municipalities

Website: https://fcm.ca

Picton BESS public meeting 2022-12-06

On December 6, 2022, Picton BESS held a public meeting to discuss its proposal to install a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) in Prince Edward County.

The Picton Gazette and The Times have reported on the meeting.

We now have Picton BESS’s presentation and minutes of the meeting.

We hope to have their videorecording of the meeting, too.

17 December 2022

Strategic voting in Picton, Bloomfield-Hallowell & Ameliasburgh

Voting Day in Prince Edward County’s municipal election is less than one week away.

As in the 2018 municipal election, voters in Picton, Bloomfield/Hallowell, and Ameliasburgh elect more than one Councilor to office – being eligible to cast a number of votes equal to the number of elected Councilors in their Ward:

Table 1. Offices and candidates for Councilor in Picton, Bloomfield/Hallowell and Ameliasburgh in the 2022 municipal election.
Ward	Offices	Candidates
Picton	2	5
Bloomfield/Hallowell	2	3
Ameliasburgh	3	5

Some voters may cast fewer votes than they’re eligible to cast – perhaps deciding to vote strategically for just their preferred candidate(s).

Take this year’s election in Bloomfield/Hallowell, for example. There are three candidates (we’ll call them A, B & C) running for two offices – giving voters several choices when it comes to voting. Voters may vote for two candidates (A&B, A&C, or B&C) or they may vote strategically for just one (A, B or C).

Strategic Voting in 2018

Official results of the 2018 municipal election allow us to estimate the extent of strategic voting in Picton, Bloomfield/Hallowell, and Ameliasburgh recently.

Table 2 presents the total number of actual vs total possible votes for candidates, given the number of ballots cast in these Wards.

Table 2. Actual and possible votes for candidates in Picton, Bloomfield/Hallowell and Ameliasburgh in the 2018 municipal election.
	Ballots Cast	Actual Votes for Candidates	Total Possible Votes
Picton	1,552	2,666	3,104
Bloomfield/Hallowell	1,739	2,914	3,478
Ameliasburgh	1,964	4,933	5,892

We see that the actual votes for candidates fell significantly short of the total possible votes in these Wards.

It’s pretty straightfoward to determine the number of strategic voters in Picton and Bloomfield/Hallowell from the number of ballots cast and the total number of votes for candidates: Nearly one-third of voters in these Wards voted strategically for just one candidate in the 2018 municipal election (see Table 3 & Figure 1).

Table 3. Strategic voting in Picton and Bloomfield/Hallowell in the 2018 municipal election.
Picton	Vote for 1 Candidate	Vote for 2 Candidates	Total
Ballots cast (N)	438	1,114	1,552
Ballots cast (%)	28.2%	71.8%	100.0%
Votes (N)	438	2,228	2,666
Votes (%)	16.4%	83.6%	100.0%

Bloomfield/Hallowell	Vote for 1 Candidate	Vote for 2 Candidates	Total
Ballots cast (N)	564	1,175	1,739
Ballots cast (%)	32.4%	67.6%	100.0%
Votes (N)	564	2,350	2,914
Votes (%)	19.3%	80.7%	100.0%

Figure 1. Strategic voting in Picton and Bloomfield/Hallowell in the 2018 municipal election.

It’s a bit more complicated in Ameliasburgh; in fact, there’s many models that might account for voting there. Table 4 & Figure 2 present 3 models – two models at either the end of the solution space and one intermediate model.

Model 1 represents the smallest number of voters (n=1,005, or 51.2%) who could have voted for three candidates; Model 3 represents the largest number of voters (n=1.484, or 75.6%) who could have voted for three candidates; and Model 2 represents an intermediate situation.

These models suggest that one-quarter to one-half of voters (24.4% to 49.8%) in Ameliasburgh voted strategically for just one or two candidates in the 2018 municipal election.

Table 4. Possible models of strategic voting in Ameliasburgh in the 2018 municipal election.
Model 1
	Vote for 1 Candidate	Vote for 2 Candidates	Vote for 3 Candidates	Total
Ballots cast (n)	0	959	1,005	1,964
Ballots cast (%)	0.0%	48.8%	51.2%	100.0%
Votes (n)	0	1,918	3,015	4,933
Votes (%)	0.0%	38.9%	61.1%	100.0%
Model 2
	Vote for 1 Candidate	Vote for 2 Candidates	Vote for 3 Candidates	Total
Ballots cast (n)	239	481	1,244	1,964
Ballots cast (%)	12.2%	24.5%	63.3%	100.0%
Votes (n)	239	962	3,732	4,933
Votes (%)	4.8%	19.5%	75.7%	100.0%
Model 3
	Vote for 1 Candidate	Vote for 2 Candidates	Vote for 3 Candidates	Total
Ballots cast (n)	479	1	1,484	1,964
Ballots cast (%)	24.4%	0.1%	75.6%	100.0%
Votes (n)	479	2	4,452	4,933
Votes (%)	9.7%	0.0%	90.2%	100.0%

Figure 2. Models of strategic voting in Ameliasburgh in the 2018 municipal election.

Conclusion

Voters in Picton, Bloomfield/Hallowell, and Ameliasburgh are about to elect more than one Councilor in each of their respective Wards.

In the 2018 municipal election, a significant number (our modeling suggests about one-third of voters) cast fewer votes than they were entitled to cast – apparently voting strategically for just their preferred candidate(s).

The impact of strategic voting in these Wards in the 2022 municipal election depends on several factors, including how nearly similar candidates are in popularity (obviously) and overall voter turnout.

Nonetheless, voters with a strong preference for one candidate in these Wards might consider strategic voting to maximize their candidate’s chances of winning.

18 October 2022

Voter turnout in the County

According to County figures, fewer than half of eligible voters turned out in the previous three municipal elections:

Table 1. Voter turnout in previous municipal elections in the County.
Election	Eligible voters	Votes cast	Voter turnout
October 2010	22,403	10,614	47.4%
October 2014	22,006	9,637	43.8%
October 2018	23,164	10,032	43.3%

In the October 2018 municipal election, voter turnout ranged from 37.6% (Ward 4 – Ameliasburgh) to 60.3% (Ward 3 – Wellington).

Table 2. Voter turnout in the 2018 municipal elections by County Ward.
Ward	Councilors	Eligible voters	Votes cast	Voter turnout
Ward 1 – Picton	2	3,258	1,552	47.6%
Ward 2 – Bloomfied/Hallowell	2	3,960	1,739	43.9%
Ward 3 – Wellington	1	1,998	1,204	60.3%
Ward 4 – Ameliasburgh	3	5,229	1,964	37.6%
Ward 5 – Athol	1	1,653	689	41.7%
Ward 6 – Sophiasburgh	1	2,270	Acclaimed	Acclaimed
Ward 7 – Hillier	1	1,975	830	42.0%
Ward 8 – North Marysburgh	1	1,639	751	45.8%
Ward 9 – South Marysburgh	1	1,182	559	47.3%

1 September 2022

Author: PEC Buzz Admin

On this page

Introduction

Profiting from Ontario’s Skills Development Fund

Lobbying the Ontario Government

Lobbying the Canadian Government

Credits

On this page

Introduction

Websites and Social Media

Local Media Coverage

Primary Sources

Maps and Surveys

Municipal Agenda and Minutes

Summaries of Proceedings.

2025-01-28 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

2025-01-14 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

2025-01-14 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

On this page

Introduction

Media Coverage

Primary Sources

Maps and Surveys

Agenda and Minutes

Summaries of Proceedings

2025-04-22 – Council (Closed Meeting) – Public Report

2025-04-22 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

2025-02-25 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

2025-02-13 – Committee of the Whole – Agenda – Minutes

2022-08-10 – Planning Committee – Agenda – Minutes

2022-07-06 – Planning Committee (Special Meeting) – Agenda – Minutes

2022-03-08 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

2022-02-22 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

2022-01-11 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

2021-10-12 – Council (Closed Meeting) – Public Report

2021-10-12 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

2020-11-24 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

2020-11-16 – Community and Economic Development Commission – Agenda – Minutes

2020-10-19 – Community and Economic Development Commission – Agenda – Minutes

2020-09-22 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

2020-09-14 – Community and Economic Development Commission – Agenda – Minutes

2020-09-03 – Committee of the Whole – Agenda – Minutes

2020-07-21 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

2020-05-26 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

2019-11-26 – Council – Agenda – Minutes

Legal documents

News

Guides

Resources

Case studies

Strategic Voting in 2018

Conclusion