Part 1: Accessibility, Health Care, and Why Systems Matter More Than New Buildings - 11/17/2025

The Accessibility Advisory Committee meeting scheduled for November 17, 2025 did not proceed to formal business, but the discussion that took place before adjournment still revealed important insights about accessibility priorities, community advocacy, and the real world constraints that affect committee work.

Photo: PEC Council

View the entire PEC Council Meeting, or continue for speaker comments and councillor votes >

Councillor Kate MacNaughton, chairing the meeting, opened the live stream at 6:30 p.m. despite the committee being short of quorum. Members were advised that the live stream had begun and that, under the County’s procedural bylaw, the committee was required to wait up to 15 minutes for additional members to arrive before determining whether the meeting could proceed.

During the waiting period, committee members used the time informally to reconnect and share updates from related accessibility work happening beyond the committee table. While no agenda items could be advanced without quorum, the conversation underscored the broader scope of accessibility advocacy in the County and beyond.

One committee member shared updates from their involvement with the Quinte Health Accessibility Committee, including a recent tour of the new hospital facility. The discussion highlighted improvements in physical design, including high ceilings, modern engineering, and a more welcoming atmosphere compared to older hospital infrastructure. At the same time, members raised unresolved accessibility concerns, particularly around communication access for Deaf patients, noting that reliance on phones or indirect communication remains inappropriate and undignified.

The group discussed the importance of direct communication options, such as video-based interpretation, especially during overnight or emergency situations. Members emphasized that accessibility is not simply about new buildings or visual improvements, but about systems, staffing, and procedures that allow people to communicate independently and respectfully.

Several participants reflected on how accessibility work often creates ripple effects beyond a single committee or municipality. Experiences gained through provincial, federal, and regional advocacy were described as transferable knowledge that can strengthen local decision making in the County. There was also discussion about the importance of mentorship and encouraging younger advocates to become involved in accessibility work, ensuring continuity and long-term impact.

As the waiting period continued, Councillor MacNaughton confirmed that the committee required six members for quorum and remained two members short, despite outreach efforts by email, phone calls, and text messages. It was confirmed that Councillor Roy Pennell was unavailable, and that other members had not responded in time.

By approximately 6:46 p.m., it became clear that quorum would not be achieved. Councillor MacNaughton formally cited the County’s procedural bylaw, which requires that if quorum is not present within 15 minutes of the scheduled start time, the clerk must record the names of those present and the meeting must be adjourned to the next regular meeting or a specially called meeting.

Before adjourning, members briefly discussed whether any agenda items were time sensitive. It was noted that items such as the Parks and Recreation Master Plan had already been endorsed, and that other updates were informational rather than urgent. Councillor MacNaughton confirmed that no committee business could legally proceed and committed to working with the Clerk’s office to determine next steps, including whether a special meeting might be required or whether matters would be deferred to the January 19 meeting.

The meeting was then adjourned without formal motions or decisions.

While no official actions were taken, the evening reflected the reality that accessibility work often continues outside formal votes and agendas. The conversation highlighted persistent gaps in health care accessibility, the value of lived experience in policy advocacy, and the practical challenges of maintaining quorum for advisory committees made up largely of volunteers and community representatives.

In that sense, the meeting did not fail. It simply shifted the work to other rooms, other tables, and future dates.

---

Disclaimer: This article is based on a meeting with an approximate duration of 24:03. Due to the length of the meeting, our team was not able to independently review the full recording in its entirety. As a result, we relied on software-generated transcription, automated summarization, and automated recognition of speakers and participants, which may not be entirely accurate. All transcriptions, summaries, and related content are prepared by our team in good faith and on a reasonable best-efforts basis. The content is provided for general informational purposes only and is intended to support public understanding of the topics discussed. While reasonable efforts have been made to present the information accurately, automated processes may result in errors, omissions, or unintended misinterpretations. This article does not constitute an official, certified, or verbatim record of the meeting, and it should not be relied upon as such. Readers are encouraged to consult original source materials, official minutes, or recordings where available for confirmation or clarification. Questions, requests for clarification, or suggested corrections may be submitted to hello@pecconnect.ca for review and consideration.